Should First World Nations give away their comfort of living to Third Worlds (78)
TheRedSquirrel87: Now the modern nomad will often consider himself, if at all, to be some kind of humanist as this grants psychological license to the locust existence. It enables him to never give his proper loyalty and affection to any people of a place. He is what I call the inhuman humanist who never actually commits to any aspect of humanity.
And maybe online marries up well with the inhuman humanist for more than the rootlessness of the internet. I mean the CS forums could be not be any less human. This isn't a human, it's not a personable way of relating to each other and it strikes me as extremely odd when people who didn't grow up with the internet now spend so much time writing on it.
Young people didn't choose the internet and we evolved along side. It is involuntarily woven into our way of being. But if you're old then you've chosen to write spend so much time online where many of your age don't, and I think there has to be something wrong with you to do that. You'd have to be the least amongst your generation.
TheRedSquirrel87: And maybe online marries up well with the inhuman humanist for more than the rootlessness of the internet. I mean the CS forums could be not be any less human. This isn't a human, it's not a personable way of relating to each other and it strikes me as extremely odd when people who didn't grow up with the internet now spend so much time writing on it.
Young people didn't choose the internet and we evolved along side. It is involuntarily woven into our way of being. But if you're old then you've chosen to write spend so much time online where many of your age don't, and I think there has to be something wrong with you to do that. You'd have to be the least amongst your generation.
Young people didn't choose the internet and we evolved along side. It is involuntarily woven into our way of being. But if you're old then you've chosen to write spend so much time online where many of your age don't, and I think there has to be something wrong with you to do that. You'd have to be the least amongst your generation.
CS is even less human than political correctness and the stunted, censored and unrelatably narrow language you find in a corporate liberal HQ or a BBC diversity meeting. The worst of both worlds is when you get someone who uses the inhuman language of political correctness through the inhuman medium of online.
TheRedSquirrel87: Our foreign friends are a little different. Many of them are cynically pee-cee, they indulge in spastic gay talk as they directly profit from political correctness, but it doesn't mean that they actually are a spastic gay talker.
I know that the most politically incorrect people I've known were not white. Cantankerous old Jews, Blacks who aren't an Uncle Tom, and Muzzies have all said things less politically correct than I hear from White British people. Political correctness is a white middle class formal language of business. Goodspeak is whitespeak and that's the irony behind pee-cee.
TheRedSquirrel87: I know that the most politically incorrect people I've known were not white. Cantankerous old Jews, Blacks who aren't an Uncle Tom, and Muzzies have all said things less politically correct than I hear from White British people. Political correctness is a white middle class formal language of business. Goodspeak is whitespeak and that's the irony behind pee-cee.
Second only to the disastrous effects on the nation I hate pee-cee because it interferes with getting to know people. Oftentimes instead of having an earthy conversation with the blood and soil person before you you get the sense that you're talking to a multi-lingual receptionist in a very large and very busy 3* hotel. What you get is a script and not a real talk.
TheRedSquirrel87: Second only to the disastrous effects on the nation I hate pee-cee because it interferes with getting to know people. Oftentimes instead of having an earthy conversation with the blood and soil person before you you get the sense that you're talking to a multi-lingual receptionist in a very large and very busy 3* hotel. What you get is a script and not a real talk.
Perhaps that's part of the reason why cosmopolitan/pee-cee populations are the most divided along the lines of race and ethnicity. New York is a diverse city. However, if you're a white new yorker this means that you are less likely to have black friends, and vice-versa.
The other reason is the no clear majority. Once a place no longer has the clear majority of one race it breaks down into clans and enclaves. The more cosmopolitan the city the less the city-dweller has anything to do with anyone not like him. Diversity actually makes people narrow-minded and diversity in the west is as true to its literal meaning as "People's Republic" is in North Korea.
TheRedSquirrel87: before you get the sense that you're talking to a multi-lingual receptionist in a very large and very busy 3* hotel.
That must be the same Hotel where you buy the cocaine you snort before writting all this crap.
TheRedSquirrel87: For all the money spent on media and journalism degrees it's remarkable to reflect on the fact of how little is known about the people around you. And they're so interested in Syria when they can't even fathom their own backyard. How has this happened?
Society has become like an upper middle class white street where your neighbours are kept very much at arms length and the greatest knowledge you have of them is the pleasant appearance of their garden, what car they've got, and which cruise they're going on next so you can attempt to one-up them. All of which is daubed in a formal language and politesse where no one reveals anything sincere to anyone. That's what political correctness is.
Society has become like an upper middle class white street where your neighbours are kept very much at arms length and the greatest knowledge you have of them is the pleasant appearance of their garden, what car they've got, and which cruise they're going on next so you can attempt to one-up them. All of which is daubed in a formal language and politesse where no one reveals anything sincere to anyone. That's what political correctness is.
People complain that it's the political class which are out of touch. And maybe they are. But the people are out of touch with the people and politicians are drawn from the people. They're not grown in a lab. And if you're on CS for social reasons then what better example could there be of being out of touch with real life and real people? Tenuous at best must be the bonds between you and the people of your community.
If you had local bonds then you wouldn't need so much online connection with strangers. Or, you would use online for long-winded therapeutic rants which you would only subject your mates to 10% of. You use it for the 90% of your thoughts you filter out of real life so you can still have friends.
MintyFeet: That must be the same Hotel where you buy the cocaine you snort before writting all this crap.
There's no need to be nasty. And if it was really, really crap you'd gang up and bully like CS normally does to people who aren't very smart and put forth an opinion.
TheRedSquirrel87: People complain that it's the political class which are out of touch. And maybe they are. But the people are out of touch with the people and politicians are drawn from the people. They're not grown in a lab. And if you're on CS for social reasons then what better example could there be of being out of touch with real life and real people? Tenuous at best must be the bonds between you and the people of your community.
If you had local bonds then you wouldn't need so much online connection with strangers. Or, you would use online for long-winded therapeutic rants which you would only subject your mates to 10% of. You use it for the 90% of your thoughts you filter out of real life so you can still have friends.
If you had local bonds then you wouldn't need so much online connection with strangers. Or, you would use online for long-winded therapeutic rants which you would only subject your mates to 10% of. You use it for the 90% of your thoughts you filter out of real life so you can still have friends.
you're projecting onto others how you choose to use cs.
TheRedSquirrel87: If you had local bonds then you wouldn't need so much online connection with strangers. Or, you would use online for long-winded therapeutic rants which you would only subject your mates to 10% of. You use it for the 90% of your thoughts you filter out of real life so you can still have friends.
No matter where we go
we take ourselves, and
our damage with us.
So is home the place we
run to or the place
we run from?
Only to hide out
in places where we're
accepted inconditionally.
Places that feel more
like home to us.
Because we can finally be
who we are.
MintyFeet: No matter where we go
we take ourselves, and
our damage with us.
So is home the place we
run to or the place
we run from?
Only to hide out
in places where we're
accepted inconditionally.
Places that feel more
like home to us.
Because we can finally be
who we are.
we take ourselves, and
our damage with us.
So is home the place we
run to or the place
we run from?
Only to hide out
in places where we're
accepted inconditionally.
Places that feel more
like home to us.
Because we can finally be
who we are.
In the CS case home is the place you ran from so you can sit amongst the turds and be on your own.
If CS didn't exist I wonder how many men on here would have joined the French foreign legion instead.
Ya know what Rumples...jes forget we ever asked for a handout 
Jes when did we ask anyway..?
TheRedSquirrel87: 
TheRedSquirrel87:
TheRedSquirrel87:
TheRedSquirrel87: Second only to the disastrous effects on the nation I hate pee-cee because it interferes with getting to know people. Oftentimes instead of having an earthy conversation with the blood and soil person before you you get the sense that you're talking to a multi-lingual receptionist in a very large and very busy 3* hotel. What you get is a script and not a real talk.
Ah Red is having one of his moments bringing many good points.
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
To answer the OP's question: definitely NOT! I think, Red said he would agree with writing off the debts of the 3rd world countries, I would too but not every 5, 10 years! Just think about the billions and billions that were given by the West to ME and African countries in aid - did that money change anything? No, it only made the corrupt elite there richer. Giving money or anything for that matter on a platter without asking for concrete results is throwing the money into a bottomless pit. This constant giving only creates the expectation that someone else (the West) is obliged to help. Many examples of how migrants demand this or that, they do that because they know that the West will give in.
The 47 Syrian asylum seeker in Denmark from the link has 17 children with 3 wives. There is a similar case of a Somali man in Norway with 22 children and I bet there are many more among the migrants (of course they expect the state to support them) and among the people who stayed in their countries - these people are lazy and irresponsible bringing so many children into the world. High time that part of the world took the responsibility for themselves.
Be arrogant with arrogant people, this is the only language they respect, as they confound kindness with weakness. (Paulo Coelho)
Dedovix: nice voice...
I second that...
Minty
It's funny how most people prefer to remain blind and deaf for the reality...
Dedovix: nice voice...
yes very niceCapricorn143: Ah Red is having one of his moments bringing many good points.
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
)
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
)
I can't help but agree with that but now he's insulted the whole of CS. OFF WITH HIS HEAD................
tomcatwarne: I can't help but agree with that but now he's insulted the whole of CS. OFF WITH HIS HEAD................
If someone feels offended or insulted then he/she recognises him/herself in what Red is saying...
tomcatwarne: I can't help but agree with that but now he's insulted the whole of CS. OFF WITH HIS HEAD................
Naaah, let's show the young man that we are cooler than him
TheRedSquirrel87: Nothing to do with education. In fact education is more of a barrier if anything as, generally speaking, academic intelligence correlates negatively with social intelligence(scientific fact).
Why aren't people very good at reading into the motives of others? Why don't they get the basics right? Why does a 14 year old street urchin have a better grasp of social reality than a 44 year old social science professor(or a lawyer or a doctor)? I blame some of it on the internet and places like CS(as well as pee-cee and diversity)hollowing out one person's ability to understand the next. That's why I said what I said, I don't say it to upset people.
Outside of the proles society seems to have lost all connection with itself. The proles may have a lot of problems but they're less wrong about race and culture than anybody else. Why are they less wrong? Because of face to face contact, spending more time outdoors, and having a close to home mentality.
Why aren't people very good at reading into the motives of others? Why don't they get the basics right? Why does a 14 year old street urchin have a better grasp of social reality than a 44 year old social science professor(or a lawyer or a doctor)? I blame some of it on the internet and places like CS(as well as pee-cee and diversity)hollowing out one person's ability to understand the next. That's why I said what I said, I don't say it to upset people.
Outside of the proles society seems to have lost all connection with itself. The proles may have a lot of problems but they're less wrong about race and culture than anybody else. Why are they less wrong? Because of face to face contact, spending more time outdoors, and having a close to home mentality.
Oh and nice voice
TheRedSquirrel87: For all the money spent on media and journalism degrees it's remarkable to reflect on the fact of how little is known about the people around you. And they're so interested in Syria when they can't even fathom their own backyard. How has this happened?
Society has become like an upper middle class white street where your neighbours are kept very much at arms length and the greatest knowledge you have of them is the pleasant appearance of their garden, what car they've got, and which cruise they're going on next so you can attempt to one-up them. All of which is daubed in a formal language and politesse where no one reveals anything sincere to anyone. That's what political correctness is.
Society has become like an upper middle class white street where your neighbours are kept very much at arms length and the greatest knowledge you have of them is the pleasant appearance of their garden, what car they've got, and which cruise they're going on next so you can attempt to one-up them. All of which is daubed in a formal language and politesse where no one reveals anything sincere to anyone. That's what political correctness is.
Ha! so FU**ing True! It's nice to see it in print...
Kattte: Ha! so FU**ing True! It's nice to see it in print...
He (Red) does it all the time, but the fellow CS-ers seem to be very touchy about that...
Capricorn143: Ah Red is having one of his moments bringing many good points.
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
To answer the OP's question: definitely NOT! I think, Red said he would agree with writing off the debts of the 3rd world countries, I would too but not every 5, 10 years! Just think about the billions and billions that were given by the West to ME and African countries in aid - did that money change anything? No, it only made the corrupt elite there richer. Giving money or anything for that matter on a platter without asking for concrete results is throwing the money into a bottomless pit. This constant giving only creates the expectation that someone else (the West) is obliged to help. Many examples of how migrants demand this or that, they do that because they know that the West will give in.
The 47 Syrian asylum seeker in Denmark from the link has 17 children with 3 wives. There is a similar case of a Somali man in Norway with 22 children and I bet there are many more among the migrants (of course they expect the state to support them) and among the people who stayed in their countries - these people are lazy and irresponsible bringing so many children into the world. High time that part of the world took the responsibility for themselves.
Be arrogant with arrogant people, this is the only language they respect, as they confound kindness with weakness. (Paulo Coelho)
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
To answer the OP's question: definitely NOT! I think, Red said he would agree with writing off the debts of the 3rd world countries, I would too but not every 5, 10 years! Just think about the billions and billions that were given by the West to ME and African countries in aid - did that money change anything? No, it only made the corrupt elite there richer. Giving money or anything for that matter on a platter without asking for concrete results is throwing the money into a bottomless pit. This constant giving only creates the expectation that someone else (the West) is obliged to help. Many examples of how migrants demand this or that, they do that because they know that the West will give in.
The 47 Syrian asylum seeker in Denmark from the link has 17 children with 3 wives. There is a similar case of a Somali man in Norway with 22 children and I bet there are many more among the migrants (of course they expect the state to support them) and among the people who stayed in their countries - these people are lazy and irresponsible bringing so many children into the world. High time that part of the world took the responsibility for themselves.
Be arrogant with arrogant people, this is the only language they respect, as they confound kindness with weakness. (Paulo Coelho)
purr4mance: you're projecting onto others how you choose to use cs.
Interesting point.
purr4mance: you're projecting onto others how you choose to use cs.
Projecting is something you do without realising. I know I'm talking about me you silly sod.
Capricorn143: Ah Red is having one of his moments bringing many good points.
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
To answer the OP's question: definitely NOT! I think, Red said he would agree with writing off the debts of the 3rd world countries, I would too but not every 5, 10 years! Just think about the billions and billions that were given by the West to ME and African countries in aid - did that money change anything? No, it only made the corrupt elite there richer. Giving money or anything for that matter on a platter without asking for concrete results is throwing the money into a bottomless pit. This constant giving only creates the expectation that someone else (the West) is obliged to help. Many examples of how migrants demand this or that, they do that because they know that the West will give in.
The 47 Syrian asylum seeker in Denmark from the link has 17 children with 3 wives. There is a similar case of a Somali man in Norway with 22 children and I bet there are many more among the migrants (of course they expect the state to support them) and among the people who stayed in their countries - these people are lazy and irresponsible bringing so many children into the world. High time that part of the world took the responsibility for themselves.
Be arrogant with arrogant people, this is the only language they respect, as they confound kindness with weakness. (Paulo Coelho)
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
To answer the OP's question: definitely NOT! I think, Red said he would agree with writing off the debts of the 3rd world countries, I would too but not every 5, 10 years! Just think about the billions and billions that were given by the West to ME and African countries in aid - did that money change anything? No, it only made the corrupt elite there richer. Giving money or anything for that matter on a platter without asking for concrete results is throwing the money into a bottomless pit. This constant giving only creates the expectation that someone else (the West) is obliged to help. Many examples of how migrants demand this or that, they do that because they know that the West will give in.
The 47 Syrian asylum seeker in Denmark from the link has 17 children with 3 wives. There is a similar case of a Somali man in Norway with 22 children and I bet there are many more among the migrants (of course they expect the state to support them) and among the people who stayed in their countries - these people are lazy and irresponsible bringing so many children into the world. High time that part of the world took the responsibility for themselves.
Be arrogant with arrogant people, this is the only language they respect, as they confound kindness with weakness. (Paulo Coelho)
Agree with you wholeheartedly my dear D.He comes up with brilliant points almost all the time even when he disagrees vehemently, yet he can justify why.
TheRedSquirrel87: Projecting is something you do without realising. I know I'm talking about me you silly sod.
It is true for me, too Obs.
Capricorn143: Ah Red is having one of his moments bringing many good points.
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
To answer the OP's question: definitely NOT! I think, Red said he would agree with writing off the debts of the 3rd world countries, I would too but not every 5, 10 years! Just think about the billions and billions that were given by the West to ME and African countries in aid - did that money change anything? No, it only made the corrupt elite there richer. Giving money or anything for that matter on a platter without asking for concrete results is throwing the money into a bottomless pit. This constant giving only creates the expectation that someone else (the West) is obliged to help. Many examples of how migrants demand this or that, they do that because they know that the West will give in.
The 47 Syrian asylum seeker in Denmark from the link has 17 children with 3 wives. There is a similar case of a Somali man in Norway with 22 children and I bet there are many more among the migrants (of course they expect the state to support them) and among the people who stayed in their countries - these people are lazy and irresponsible bringing so many children into the world. High time that part of the world took the responsibility for themselves.
Be arrogant with arrogant people, this is the only language they respect, as they confound kindness with weakness. (Paulo Coelho)
A times I get annoyed with his constant bashing of the "elders" but he is right - we will survive in a relative comfort and it is the young ones that wil not have any life - how many children will our children have when the taxes go skyhigh because the likes of him and his 17 children have to be supported?
To answer the OP's question: definitely NOT! I think, Red said he would agree with writing off the debts of the 3rd world countries, I would too but not every 5, 10 years! Just think about the billions and billions that were given by the West to ME and African countries in aid - did that money change anything? No, it only made the corrupt elite there richer. Giving money or anything for that matter on a platter without asking for concrete results is throwing the money into a bottomless pit. This constant giving only creates the expectation that someone else (the West) is obliged to help. Many examples of how migrants demand this or that, they do that because they know that the West will give in.
The 47 Syrian asylum seeker in Denmark from the link has 17 children with 3 wives. There is a similar case of a Somali man in Norway with 22 children and I bet there are many more among the migrants (of course they expect the state to support them) and among the people who stayed in their countries - these people are lazy and irresponsible bringing so many children into the world. High time that part of the world took the responsibility for themselves.
Be arrogant with arrogant people, this is the only language they respect, as they confound kindness with weakness. (Paulo Coelho)
It's not writing off the debt which is important it's tackling the causes of debt. The primary cause is producing more in value than we pay in wages with credit filling the gap to absorb the surplus production.
Credit should not be used in this way and the idea is lend some money to people with bright ideas and brilliant plans to make more money. It's borrow money to make money.
More Threads
Kultur-multur
Are the ads on here as phony as some of the profiles?
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
makeover
What happened to CS while i was away.. (Long time)
The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
Unions support Democrats!
More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
beauty of the heart
Ladies
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
Related Forums
- Kultur-multur
- Are the ads on here as phony as some of the profiles?
- Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
- makeover
- What happened to CS while i was away.. (Long time)
- The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
- Unions support Democrats!
- More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
- beauty of the heart
- Ladies
It's a locust or gypsy mentality. A nomadic parasitic existence where once a place has been consumed of its worth it moves on and sink its teeth into the next spot. The immigrant(like a gypsy)oftentimes treats a place with all the respect of a drunken tourist because it's never home.
Now the modern nomad will often consider himself, if at all, to be some kind of humanist as this grants psychological license to the locust existence. It enables him to never give his proper loyalty and affection to any people of a place. He is what I call the inhuman humanist who never actually commits to any aspect of humanity.