This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
News Articles
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
MyTie
Ok, I'm willing to move on then. Just as long as you don't call me "
sweetheart
" again.
Post by
MyTie
For a lot of people, it was. There were some leaders, there were some participators, and the rest was crowd mentality. You cannot honestly think that suddenly a nation spontaneously grew up.
I don't want to get caught between Chelsea and MyTie, because for some reason you really don't get along, but come one, MyTie, there were years and years of build up to the Civil Rights movement. Spontaneously? Pick up a book, dude.
There were years and years and years of opposition, and then people started buying it. I think in all these movements, there are your core fighters, core believers, and then the great swell of public who generally cannot be bothered by anything other than their football games and corn chips. Then, when a movement is hard fought for decades and decades, with blood and sweat, it finally garners enough momentum to pick up the people who for years didn't care a lick about the cause. These people all of a sudden become advocates, as if they were suddenly woken to the great plights of the world around them. Then, when the movement accomplishes it's goals, they go back to sleep. These mindless followers, who cannot see injustice around them, or refuse to stand up for it unless others are, and who will gladly take up the causes of the people around them, sicken me.
Another example, one that might be easier to relate to for the people here because they disagree with the movement, is Christianity. The numbers are dwindling. For ages, it was the in thing to do, to go to Church, and believe in Christ. Then, in the last 20 years or so, it isn't, and people have started disappearing. If it ever becomes vogue again to be a Christian, and people start coming back, I'm not sure how I'm going to feel about that. I kind of like having people around me that I know are genuine, and not there because the crowd is.
That's not to say that the movements themselves are sudden, but the popularity is.
Post by
Skreeran
Another example, one that might be easier to relate to for the people here because they disagree with the movement, is Christianity. The numbers are dwindling. For ages, it was the in thing to do, to go to Church, and believe in Christ. Then, in the last 20 years or so, it isn't, and people have started disappearing. If it ever becomes vogue again to be a Christian, and people start coming back, I'm not sure how I'm going to feel about that. I kind of like having people around me that I know are genuine, and not there because the crowd is.I can agree with that. As an atheist, it seems like there are some atheists out there who really gave thought to their beliefs, and then others who are just agreeing with the top Youtube comments.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Sagramor
That's not to say that the movements themselves are sudden, but the popularity is.
Oh, sure, yeah. That I agree with.
Which is not to say that a "nationality" wasn't there before, its just that to belong to one doesn't entail social and political action.
But the North Korean administration is more worried with legitimizing the new government inside than actually attacking anyone.
Post by
Gone
Another example, one that might be easier to relate to for the people here because they disagree with the movement, is Christianity. The numbers are dwindling. For ages, it was the in thing to do, to go to Church, and believe in Christ. Then, in the last 20 years or so, it isn't, and people have started disappearing. If it ever becomes vogue again to be a Christian, and people start coming back, I'm not sure how I'm going to feel about that. I kind of like having people around me that I know are genuine, and not there because the crowd is.I can agree with that. As an atheist, it seems like there are some atheists out there who really gave thought to their beliefs, and then others who are just agreeing with the top Youtube comments.
You can't compare a real atheist, who actually gives thought to his beliefs, to your average youtube atheist that amounts to little more than an anti religious troll. Remember this guy?
Also, bear in mind that the asshat atheist is the guy who posted this to a rape victim on reddit:
“I will make you a rape victim if you don’t %^&* off.”
“Yeah. Well, you deserved it. So, %^&* you. I hope it happens again soon. I’m tired of being treated like #$%^ by you mean little #$%^s and then you using your rape as an excuse. @#$% you. I think we should give the guy who raped you a medal. I hope you #$%^ing drown in rape semen, you ugly, mean-spirited cow. Actually, I don’t believe you were ever raped! What man would be tasteless enough to stick his ^&*! into a human cesspool like you? Nice gif of a turd going into my mouth. Is that kind of like the way that rapists $%^& went in your pussy? Or did he use your #$%^&*! Or was it both? Maybe you should think about it really hard for the next few hours. Relive it as much as possible. You know? Try to recall: was it my pussy or my ass?”
“I’m going to rape you with my fist.”
“BTW, you have to admit, when I told you that I hope you drown in rape semen, you got a little wet, didn’t you? It’s okay. We’re friends now. You can share.”
“!@#$ you, liar. All night you !@#$%^s have tried to @#$% on me and tear me down. Then when I do the same it’s like, “Whoa man! That’s too far. Calm down.” No. %^&* you. Go get raped in whatever orifice you have to get @#$%ing raped in. I am sick of your $%^&. I regret nothing.”
Youtube + my crowd in high school is a big part of why I had such a negative opinion on atheists up until a few years ago.
Post by
MyTie
Again I have a hard time seeing anyone who genuinly believes in christ suddenly denying it just to be cool.
Even Peter denied Christ due to social pressures.
Post by
Gone
Again I have a hard time seeing anyone who genuinly believes in christ suddenly denying it just to be cool.
Even Peter denied Christ due to social pressures.
Different circumstances. Peter's was scared for his life as well, it wasn't about being one of the cool kids.
Post by
MyTie
Again I have a hard time seeing anyone who genuinly believes in christ suddenly denying it just to be cool.
Even Peter denied Christ due to social pressures.
Different circumstances. Peter's was scared for his life as well, it wasn't about being one of the cool kids.
Both are about standing up for what you believe to be right despite what others say/thing/do.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
One is about being a martyr or not (I am assuming from what Ryja says, I have no idea who this peter fella is), one is about being zomg soooo cool.
If being a christian became dangerous in (western) society, I could see a lot of denying it happen, but not over something so silly.
Besides being an atheist isn't cool, you hear the word and the first thing you think about are disgusting redditors.
sarcasm
You're right. No one risked anything by standing up against racism. No one abandoned that cause because it was dangerous, like Peter abandoned Jesus. And no one took up Christianity when it cost them nothing, just like no one jumped on the anti-racism bandwagon when it cost them nothing. There are no parallels here whatsoever.
/sarcasm
In all seriousness, whatever cause you want to name, whether I agree with it or not, I'm sicked by the people who sat idly by when the right thing to do was simply too inconvenient for them, then when it becomes popular, they are one of the crowd demanding what is right. pffft. Those insincere people. Those people would scatter at the first sign of resistance. If it were even perceived to be unpopular, there would be people who would peel off. Gutless. Spineless. Convenient. Self serving moral convenience. I spite it. Think whatever you want.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I would just assume, that no matter what's cool, dropping jesus (if you truly believe in him) isn't something you simply do. Or maybe I just misunderstood christianity and how many people actually care about being a christian.
There are a lot of "churches" that are nothing more than social clubs. "churches" that make up their own rules, contradict the Bible, and know they are, and don't care. I once invited someone to come to Church with me, and they refused because their "church" had a yearly trip to Mexico it gave it its members. Seriously? An annual trip to Mexico was what she wanted, not to study the Bible for meaning and truth. I find that most people who attend "churches" follow some denomination of the Bible. Sad, really. I've had so many people, when I demonstrate from the Bible where their "church" is inaccurate, they simply shrug it off. I'll never understand it. They have different priorities. Some people, truth is a priority. Others, a trip to Mexico once a year. So, no, don't be surprised when people dump their "christianity". It wasn't truth they sought in the first place.And again, those people might be dishonest and bad people at heart, but if they're doing a good thing then I'm not going to stop them. Once they do join a bad crowd, I'll try my best to. Pick your battles as you'd put it.
I think that crowd mentality has been a point of fascination for me for years. The pinnacle of it is when a crowd will riot and kill people over a soccer game. lol. I laugh, but it isn't funny. Crowd mentality stifles competent thought. That can't be good, ever. Sure, the fire might serve a good purpose at the moment, but it just takes a different wind for that fire to turn on you. That's what the world has been, for the most part. It has had leaders and workers steering it for what they felt were righteous and moral causes, and the other vast lions share of people have been the lemmings. Those mindless millions who simply march to the drumbeat. Those millions have trampled, maimed, produced genocide, fought for civil rights, tried to conquer world hunger, and vast other causes of varying degrees of morality. The cause that that crowd fights for might be moral today, but tomorrow that same crowd will turn and devour their own young. There doesn't seem to be any alternative, though. There is no way to get people to ponder what is right when they have no desire to think about such things. There is no way to make philosophers out of a horde of black Friday shoppers, which is what the masses are. So, no, I can't appreciate the good that the horde of thoughtless lemmings do today, because I am too dubious about what it will do tomorrow. Call me a cynic.
Post by
Rankkor
So apparently women in new york are now allowed to go topless as its no longer considered indecent exposure. That's right folks, breast exposure is not considered public lewdness, indecent exposure, or disorderly conduct in the state of new york.
More info here:
***********WARNING*********** THE FOLLOWING LINK CONTAINS PARTIAL NUDITY, AND THEREFORE IT IS
NOT
SAFE FOR WORK ***********WARNING***********
http://www.policymic.com/articles/42359/topless-women-in-public-not-breaking-the-law-says-nypd
***********WARNING*********** THE FOLLOWING LINK CONTAINS PARTIAL NUDITY, AND THEREFORE IT IS
NOT
SAFE FOR WORK ***********WARNING***********
(as a side note to my fellow moderators: If you feel this is inappropriate then I'll delete the link. I just saw this and thought it might be an interesting discussion topic. )
Venezuela is running out of toilet paper
that's ok, we can always use our bills as a replacement, as they're pretty much useful only as toilet paper anyways given how useless our currency is.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
Go go Top Freedom...no, really I mean it. We've had that here in Ontario for a long while now; nice to see more places adopting it.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Sagramor
" The cause that that crowd fights for might be moral today, but tomorrow that same crowd will turn and devour their own young. There doesn't seem to be any alternative, though. There is no way to get people to ponder what is right when they have no desire to think about such things. There is no way to make philosophers out of a horde of black Friday shoppers, which is what the masses are. So, no, I can't appreciate the good that the horde of thoughtless lemmings do today, because I am too dubious about what it will do tomorrow. Call me a cynic."
Nope, you're drifting dangerously close to thinking like a fascist. Yours sincerely, Tom Joad.
Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war, neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. (...) Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
Hermann Goering, Hitler's Reich-Marshall (
The Nuremberg Diaries
)
Fascism is an anachronism - it applies only to a fistful of governments in a
determined space and time.
I think you mean totalitarian. But I do see the similarities.
Also, MyTie, a cynic, as Diogenes would have thought it, would never think that much about civilization. I think you mean nihilist, or a skeptic.
Also, MyTie, I see what you mean, but you can't say there is no prospect to turn all people into active thinkers - most people aren't because they have been conditioned since birth to be something else; an idiot, if you will. But every person has the potential to become a valid, critical thinker, wouldn't you say?
Post by
MyTie
Also, MyTie, I see what you mean, but you can't say there is no prospect to turn all people into active thinkers - most people aren't because they have been conditioned since birth to be something else; an idiot, if you will. But every person has the potential to become a valid, critical thinker, wouldn't you say?
I would say that everyone had the potential, at some point. It is hard to teach an old dog new tricks, though. I've just met too many people that actively try to not be critical thinkers, or alienate anyone who does think critically.fascistJust because I think "group think" is a bad thing doesn't mean I subscribe to a military dictatorship over social freedoms. In fact, I don't see where that parallel is.
totalitarian, nihilist, or a skeptic.
totaltarian-
I don't believe that just because i don't like group think, that government think is a responsible alternative. You should know me better than that.
nihilist-
I firmly hold beliefs about a variety of things.
skeptic-
About what exactly?
This is one of the concepts that this forum has resisted out of me most adamantly. The other two are my opposition to homosexuality, and my opposition to abortion. I don't get this one. Why is it so unacceptable of me to be critical of the crowd? Is there some sort of personal tie that the people here have with the crowd? Why defend it? Why so venomous toward me? This will take some deeper thought.
Post by
Sagramor
I think you misunderstood me, I was just arguing semantics there, I never meant to call you totalitarian or fascist, or skeptic, or nihilist. I simply thought that those were the words you meant to use, instead of "cynic" or "fascist!". To be "critical to the crowd" is to be skeptic, not cynic. And "fascist" is a specific historical attribution.
As to this:
I would say that everyone had the potential, at some point. It is hard to teach an old dog new tricks, though. I've just met too many people that actively try to not be critical thinkers, or alienate anyone who does think critically.
Wouldn't that be based on personal,, subjective opinion, then (that is, based on personal experience)?
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.