User talk:The Ungovernable Force

• Talk archives for January 4 to August 9, 2006
• Talk archives for August 10 to December 30, 2006

[edit] images

hey, could you help me figure out a legal/wiki compatible way to put images of someone's art in the article? i did a page for Richard Mock, and it would definitely be better if at least one of his prints could be in there. cheers! Murderbike 05:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

that's super funny/ridiculous about the FNB thing. but thanks for the advice. i don't know why the heck that link isn't working. it was fine yesterday. i'll try to fix it tonight. cheers! Murderbike 06:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Userboxes

Hey great userboxes! In-fact I like them so much I've copied a few to my own Page, hope you don't mind other people using them. Thanks --Hibernian 20:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Veganism

Go you! That's wonderful! I take vitamins when I remember to. The obvious thing is protein, but if you've been veggie you'll not be scared of that. You can get basically everything you need from eating a varied diet of fruits and veggies & grains and including lots of different kinds of leafy greens. That's really the major thing; varying your diet, and not relying on the frozen Gardenburger-type stuff. As far as Vitamins... I take a Calcium supplement, and a mixed "vegetarian multivitamin" which has a bunch of stuff in it, but the thing I actually remember to take the most is a B-12 supplement, because that's what I see as the most important. If you don't get enough B-12 funky bad deterioration things happen to your brain (and it's really lame).

Omega-3s are an essential fatty acid or some such nonsense, basically good fat. Flax seed oil is full of them, and so is fish (cod) liver oil, but Hemp seeds & Hemp seed oil is packed even fuller. Plus, c'mon: it's way more hippie. :P It's another one of those health-nut nutrition fads that I tend not to take notice of, but some people, and a large group of Vegans, make sure to mix in some flax seed oil with everything they eat that can take it (Oatmeal-type stuff especially, but also baked stuff or pancakes or other breads, etc). I'd love to talk with you about it whenever, feel free to ask me whatever. I've got a bunch of good online resources that I need to re-hunt down. Canæn 23:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I actually get mine at Raleys! The multivitamin is "Schiff's Vegetarian Multiple with Beta Carotene". Failing Raleys, random small health food stores should have something for twice the price. You're right about the B12 thing -- B12 is hard to absorb, and that's the reason it's a million-kajillion-times overdosed. Calcium really depends on your diet; I think I have a calcium deficiency, but that's because I'm lazy about keeping my diet what it should be. There're hella veggies loaded with calcium (Broccoli is one of 'em), and Kale is too! Kale is wonderful (mmm, Colcannon...). It's pretty simple-ish. Good luck with your research! My talk page is always open. Canæn 06:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

B12 absorption is best when you spread the dose out over the course of the day. If you take in all in one go, you're going to need to take more than you would otherwise. Kinda weird. And if you're adding oils rich in omega-3's, make sure you're not cooking them! The key molecule gets destroyed by heat. So adding flax oil to baking wouldn't do you any good, for example. I went vegan almost 2 months ago, so I'm still learning, but if you have any questions or anything, please ask! Book suggestion: Becoming Vegan, by Brenda Davis and Vesanto Melina. Chock full of handy dandy tips about nutrition and whatnot. It can be a little heavy at some points (it's hard to make vitamins interesting all of the time) but they manage to make the information really accessible. Mirmadon 22:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You're probably fine on Omega-6's; what you need to worry about is the Omega-3's. The best/easiest source of them is flax seeds. You can buy them whole, grind them up (to aid absorption) and sprinkle them in/on things like oatmeal, or you can buy flax seed oil and use it in salad dressings and the like. Just remember not to expose the omega-3's to too much heat, or you'll be wasting your time. Personally, I take a flax oil pill. I bought the bottle at CVS when I was still just vegetarian, so they've got gelatin in them, but I'm pretty sure they carried just plain old non-pill flax seed oil, and I'll bet you can find vegan flax supplements at more specialized stores or online. Mirmadon 13:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I didn't feel wonderful about it, and I figured I would eventually phase it out, but I did eat it every now and then. It doesn't help that I'm financially dependent on my parents for the time being, and that they aren't wonderfully supportive of this whole vegetarian/vegan business. I have to pick my battles. Arguing about the minimal amount of gelatin binding together a multivitamin seemed less pressing than convincing them that no, I really didn't want a piece of turkey for Thanksgiving. Joanna 00:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

My mom keeps buying me leather things. Especially shoes. And then she pulls a "well, I already bought it, so I don't see how it's a problem." Very frustrating. I don't think she's made the connection between my not eating animals and my not wanting to wear them, even though I've tried to explain it to her. I mean, honestly, if I'm not willing to drink a cow's milk, why would I want to wear its skin? Joanna 01:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aldous Huxley an Anarchist?

Thanks for your comment on this today. I've added my reasons for inclusion of Huxley in the Wikipedia list of anarchists on the talk page there. Ottershrew 17:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] pissin off

it's funny, i sat for a couple hours with nothing better to do just watching the recent pages page, taking care if petty vandalism stuff, and putting simple warnings on people's talk pages. apparently it was enough. pissed off the "right" people. it's really amazing to see how it all works, vandals, admins, etc. Murderbike 10:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

PS, some of your vandalism is pretty funny. in a totally dumb annoying way, but funny, after the fact i guess. Murderbike 10:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anarcho-punk

Hi UG, have made some minor contibutions to the anarcho-punk page as per your request, I'm afraid I don't know enough about SXE to make much of a useful contribution however quercus robur 12:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] [edit] Removal of ape category from Neanderthal

Thank you for your comments. I have put my reply in Talk:Neanderthal.

--Ziusudra 16:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

heh, that is funny. using images of che to refer to anarchists is always good for a laugh. Murderbike 06:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

... for removing the vandalism to my userpage this morning. Much appreciated! Sam Blacketer 00:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Care to weigh in...

on whether or not my created category (Category:Subversive artists) should be deleted? Cheers! Murderbike 04:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] If you were an Asian?

Hi there. I read "Still, if I were an Asian and I saw a group of people who were using a right-facing swastika that was clearly not meant to be a religious-based swastika I would be pretty freaked out." It made me wonder what sort of Asian you would be if you were an Asian? As the Japanese Empire was an ally of Nazi Germany and people like the Tiger Legion joined the Nazi war machine to defeat the British war machine my mind started to reel. If you were an Asian would you get involved with PAKI TV?Harrypotter 17:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Ummm, am I supposed to answer that? I don't know what type of Asian I'd be, that seems like a strange question to ask. I guess I'd be whatever type of Asain I was born as. And as for that PAKI TV, what is it exactly? I looked it over real fast, but couldn't get a clear indication of what it was. Ungovernable Force^{Got something to say?} 20:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

But what type of asian were you born as?!!??? a european or an american asia? as for asia what is it exactly? i looked over it real fast, but couldn't get an indication of what it was. Paki.tv 02:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

WTF? What kind of joke is this exactly? I mean, c'mon, is there meant to be some kind of coherency to this or is it all purposefully ridiculous? Ungovernable Force^{Got something to say?} 07:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually there is something very serious here. It's to do with the way stereotypes emerge in everyday thought and speech. Sure, you were trying to empathise with "asians", particular those threatened with Nazi violence, but actually to be meaningful, then you have to go a little closer: consider seeing a group of young white men in sub-cultural clothing walking down a British street, it may be impossible to tell whether they are anarchists or Nazis or something else - particularly if "you" are unfamiliar with British sub-culture. Or if "you" go to one of these Social centers - often to be found in areas where there are many "Black" or "Asian" people living - only to discover that when you enter the building there are only White people there, "you" might well think the difference between ideologically white separatist organisations and practically white separatist organisations is not worth worrying about. Or to put it another way, maybe the question seems strange because it illustrates how strange your comment was. As regards the National anarchism page I would prefer to see a general page on anarcho-nationalism summarising the history of the crossover between these ideologies, from Proudhon, Bakunin and Kropotkin, touching on Har Dayal's Aryan Anarchism and Rudolf Rocker's racist anti-nationalism, before looking at more contemporary manifestations of this phenomenon.Harrypotter 18:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so are you saying I should have been more specific than "Asian"? Fine, if I were Asian, I'd be Indian and of the Hindu tradition. Perhaps I would be a Vedanta Hindu more specifically. The other person was as broad as was I and I was responding to them. The question seems strange because it sounds like one of those weird "If you could be any type of fruit what would you be?" ones, and I frankly had no idea why you would ask about something like that related to Asians. If it was to make a point that Asian is an overly broad term, I agree, as are many ethnic terms. Native American is overly broad because there are hundreds of different ethnicities represented by the term. So is Asian, White, Black, and Hispanic. And yes, there is a problem within Western anarchist (and other radical) movements to create true diversity. I'm aware of that as well. And I'm not part of some isolated young white male subculture. Yes, I'm punk, but I don't spend all my time hanging out with punks (or with other white men). Heck, most of my friends at school are either non-white, women, gay or a combination of the above. Only a small proportion of my friends are punks who might be mistaken for Nazis. I make efforts to outreach to cultures other than my little punk clique. Ungovernable Force^{Got something to say?} 01:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Immigrants, terrorists and Indians...Oh my!

if u hate america, why don't you leave?? also, saying illegal immigration should be condoned because europeans came here illegally is kind of stupid because when europeans came here this was not a country, AND that was over 300 years ago

how is bush fascist? (although I agree he is stupid, I find it hard to believe he's a nazi) also, why are you against civilian gun control? It prevents crimes

Ok, this "why don't you leave?" question is getting really old now. I'm going to answer with lyrics from the Crucifucks because I think they said it pretty well: I've been told so many times/ to love it or leave it, it's the same old line/ [...]Well fascists I've got news for you/ I was fucking born here too/ And I'm not gonna tolerate/ Your violence, bigotry and hate. So that's why I'm not going to leave. I was born here and have just as much right to be here as anyone else, and since when has running away from a problem solved anything? Besides, I have no where else to go. Gun control: when guns are outlawed only outlaws will carry guns. I'm sorry, but people are going to always have guns until society undergoes a drastic social change, and the government taking people's guns away isn't going to help anything. It just means the govenment and violent criminals will have guns and the common people won't be able to protect themselves from the government or from other assorted thugs (like cops). The Bush is a fascist thing is somewhat exaggerated perhaps, but a lot of his policies are quite totalitarian in nature. And as for the illegal immigration thing, do you think I care about whether there was an established nation-state during the early colonization period? I'm an anarchist, which I'm sure you can tell since you clearly read my userpage. When Europeans came over there were in fact dozens, if not hundreds, of individual nations (not nation-states). This land was stolen from those nations by force in a process of genocide, which continues in some forms to this day I might add, so it does still matter. It's no coincidence that Native Americans often live in some of the most impovershed conditions of any ethnic groups here in America. I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of Euro-Americans who complain about Mexicans and other immigrants coming over the border to eek out a meager living and scapegoat them as a serious problem (when in fact they are the basis of our agricultural economy, and they are coming here largely due to American-backed economic policies like NAFTA), while overlooking the fact that their (and many of my) ancestors came here in a much, much, much more destructive manner. It's pretty ridiculous. Ungovernable Force^{Got something to say?} 00:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

actually I'man afro-american and have respect for native peoples. my hatred of illegal immigrants is not based on disrespect for mexicans but because they (illegals) cause crime, i just don't like when people use unrelated events in the past ( such as the genocide of native people) as justification for illegal immigration. The Spanish cae here and raped and pillaged the natives of Mexico and the southwest, now their descendants want to claim the land??? also, it's adouble standard to allow mexicans to come in with a hop of the fence and yet make hard-working, impoverished people overseas wwait years and years

besides all that, a weak border allows terrorists to come in

Well, the part about it being easier for Mexicans is a matter of geography and you shouldn't hold it against them as they have no control of that. Anyways, I purposefully said "Mexicans and other immigrants" because I think anyone should be able to come here just about. Most of the immigrants I interact with are Russian or Ukranian actually, and I interact with quite a lot as I work part-time tutoring immigrants in English. As for the terrorism thing, we're never going to prevent terrorists from coming into the country (or being born and raised in this country) until we stop giving them a reason to hate us. Closing our borders because Americans are too selfish to share the wealth that we've stolen from the rest of the world isn't going to improve our image any and will only contribute to more resentment (and rightfully so if you ask me). Most of us have a damn cushy lifestyle compared to the vast majority of everyone else and it isn't because we worked for it fair and square. If some of the people who are poor because of our (and other nations') colonialism are able to get here than I think they are welcome to stay. Heck, I think we should be actively shipping our wealth to them so that everyone in their countries can benefit and we won't have to worry about overcrowding here, but that of course will never happen. Allowing free immigration is the next best thing. As for accussing them of causing crime, you might want to watch who you are accussing of that. Remember that most Americans would say the same about you. And you're right, immigrants (legal or illegal), and all people of color for that matter, are more likely to commit crimes in terms of the percentage of them that do. It's because they also tend to be a lot poorer as well, which creates desperation and greater inclination for crime. The way to solve it is (again) to have our wealth distributed in a sensible way that doesn't leave the vast majority of the world broke while a few rich scumbags sit on their posteriers. Continuing to demonize immigrants (or Blacks, or Jews, or gays, or women, or Natives, or any other minority group that's been scapegoated in the past) will only perpetuate that poverty, and therefore, that criminality. Also, I'm not using the European killing of Natives as justification for immigration because it isn't the strongest case, but I am pointing out the hypocricy involved, which most Euro-Americans are all too happy to overlook. They'll wave a flag on Columbus Day and be calling for a fence to close the border the next day. At the same time, they are related, which is the point I've been trying to make. The thing that oppressed Natives and oppressed Mexicans have in common is that they were and are the victims of colonialism at the hands of first Europeans and then Americans. We stole this land through imperialism and now we want to close it off from the descendants of the victims of that same colonialism, as well as victims of our modern neo-colonialism. The roots run deep and are felt today, just like how the legacy of slavery is still in effect today for Blacks, even though most whites don't want to admit that. Also, I hope you realize it wasn't just the Spanish oppressing people in Mexico and the South West. Europeans from many countries were screwing over Natives north, south, east and west. Ungovernable Force^{Got something to say?} 05:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

what do you mean, stop giving the a reason to hate us? Are you saying we provoke the terrorists, not their own sick ideology?? what do we (americans) do to terrorists that makes us deseving of their hate?? we can't stop terrorists by being a kinder, gentler country, we stop them by not letting them in! at this point, any terrorist with dark enough skin to pass for mexican could easily sneak into this country using the sae tactics mexican illegals do. So if we open our border to good people, we also open it to terrorists and criminals. also, illegals take away jobs because companies would rather higher illegals than citizens, so those who were born here get screwed over.

illegal immigrants cause crime, that's a fact. Most racial stereotypes about crime are based in truth, and yes that does apply to my people. They come here, do their business, get deported and sneak back to hurt more poeple, it happens every day. that may not be all illegals, but there are too many for us to risk letting the all in. besides, opening our border would be rewarding illegal imigration.

as for native american poverty, they are in bad conditions but that's because they live in reservations! as far as I know, nobody's forcing them not to leave their impoverished reservations. Shroooooooof 15:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)the same guy who did the other ones

Well, I'll start with the place where we seem to have the most common ground: Native Americans (as in Native US Americans, because many Mexicans are technically Native American or mixed race with Native American). Yes, a lot of the poverty is due to the reservations, and of course there is not a law that says they can't leave. At the same time, many have few prospects for good jobs, largely because a lot of reservations have really crappy schools. Poverty is a cycle and it can be very hard to break. Why don't all the blacks just get out of the ghettos? It's really not that simple. And the Natives who live off reservation often lose some government benefits, which although they may not be much, are something at least. Not to mention that they have the right to live where they choose within their own culture. There really shouldn't be any pressure on them to force their assimilation into our culture if they want to stay on reservation. Hell, the way I see it, we should be trying to assimilate with them, as it's their land. And for an example of some fairly recent examples of genocide against Native Americans (as in within the last generation), look up the Indian boarding schools, like Carlisle Indian Industrial School. More generally see Americanization (of Native Americans), which has a section on the boarding schools. And although it may take a while, I strongly, strongly suggest you read this article from Amnesty International. I had to read it for my Native Peoples of North America class a couple months ago and even I was shocked by how recently some of this crap was going on, and I tend to not be shocked by that kind of thing too often as I'm used to reading about it. In fact, if you only do one thing related to this post, it should be reading that article. It would be a lie to say I didn't tear up a bit while reading it.

Now, back to the mixed-race Native Americans from below the arbitrary border that only exists due to European imperialism. That and terrorism. Yes, I'm saying we provoke it to some extent. I'm not saying the ideology behind the militant and fundamentalist brands of Islam are not part of it, but the ideologies (or at least the popularity of those ideologies) is due largely to our actions towards the rest of the world. When people are screwed over they start looking for an enemy to scapegoat, and often they will turn to whoever offers them a promise of hope. How do you think Hitler got so popular? The Germans were broke because they had to pay war reparations (plus the entire global economy was in tatters) and here comes a leader who can pinpoint the problem (the damn dirty Jews) and who can solve it and bring the German people back to their previous glory (by waging war on the world and killing all the Jews, queers, dissidents, disabled, etc). It's a fucking crazy and depraved ideology, but it had huge support. Same thing happens with militant Islam. Read the essay Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens by Ward Churchill. I know there has been a lot of controversy surrounding his scholarship recently, but AFAIK, that particular essay wasn't targeted for it's scholarship (although it is the essay that started the whole controversy in the mainstream press regarding him, and led to an in depth examination of his materials). I haven't yet to really take a stand on whether his scholarship flaws are as serious as some want to say (largely because I think a lot of scholars would probably have some of the same issues, but people aren't usually on a crusade against them trying to find any little thing they can to discredit the person, and because I don't care much about plagarism, although I don't do it myself). I will say though, that I read that essay right as he started getting hammered for it, and I thought it was actually pretty right on in it's conclusions. In fact, one of the first things I thought on 9/11, after the shock wore off, was "what did we do to make people hate us that much?" and then, "well, at least some good will come of this; we'll have to really examine how we treat the rest of the world and will make some reforms so that it won't happen again." Although I was pretty liberal, I was not a radical at the time, and in a lot of ways, our response to 9/11 was one of the key things that made me radical. The text of the essay is online (they even link to it from the article here). And again, I recommend you read it all the way through.

And I think I tried to say this, but there is absolutely no way short of a Berlin Wall type of thing (in which we not only have a strong physical barrier, but also don't allow anyone in or out at all really, including our own citizens) that we will keep all the people out who want to hurt us, and even that wouldn't be full-proof. All systems fail and we will always be vulnerable in one way or another. As the t-shirt says, "If you make something idiot proof, someone will make a better idiot" (just replace "idiot" with "terrorist" and it works). Just talk to a hacker. Yeah, systems designers have done a lot to increase security over the years, but as my friend Adrian Lamo can attest, it's always possible to get around that sort of thing. It's the same principal. So the only way to really prevent terrorism is to prevent what causes terrorism, and that is well within our ability. And guess what? Same thing with crime. It's amazing how everything in the world is connected. You can hire thousands of extra cops if you want and make really stiff sentences, but crime isn't going away because of a bit of extra security. The only way to reduce crime is to reduce the cause of crime, and that is poverty and lack of empowerment, which go hand in hand. They also happens to be the same things that are needed to prevent terrorism. This is why I'm a socialist (and an anarchist one at that). As far as I'm concerned, as long as we keep up our ridiculous methods of distributing wealth and power we will continue to have these problems. Just about any doctor will tell you that preventative medicine that snuffs out the cause of sickness is far better in terms of outcome for your health than fixing the problems as they arise, but they aren't always better in terms of the insurance industry's profits (or the drug companies' for that matter). Yeah, it may initially be more expensive and it will bring the rich down to our level, but hey, it will solve the problems and will lead to much more freedom and benefits for the vast majority of people in the world. Oh, and as for illegals taking jobs, poor whites (notably Irish immigrants in New York) used the same excuse for killing free blacks a hundred and some odd years ago. They were willing to break their back for nothing because they had no better options, and it led to race riots and some seriously ugly racist crap. Again, people are far too willing to turn the tables and start exploiting others even after they themselves went through the same crap. Same thing with the rampant sexist and anti-gay attitudes amongst a lot of Blacks and Latinos these days (not to mention the racial tensions between those two groups, that you seem to be demonstrating quite well, if I may say so myself). You don't give a damn that people are suffering if it means you have to actually do something about it or face a little extra economic hardship. It's the majority opinion so don't think I'm not trying to single you out specifically. Honestly, I don't know where you are coming from economically. Perhaps you are one of the people (sorta like the Irish in the 1800s) who really are seriously screwed as a result of the competition with the "other," and if so, I'm truly sorry. All I can say is that the answer shouldn't be to let them suffer just because they are from another country, but is instead to do something to end everyone's suffering once and for all. This is why we as humanity need to unite and fight together, instead of fighting each other based on stupid extrapolations like race, gender, sexual orientation, religion (as long as it's not fundamentalist, I'm ok with it), nationality, subcultural affiliation, etc, etc, etc. As the very wise band Crass once said

Punk's the people's music and I don't care where they're from/ Black or White, punk or skin, there ain't no right or wong/ We're all just human beings, some of us rotten, some of us good/ You can stuff your false divisions cause together I know we could/ Beat the system, beat its law/ Ain't got no religion cause I know there's more/ Beat the system, beat it's game/ Ain't got no color, we're all the same/ People, people not color, class or creed/ Don't destroy the people, destroy their power and their greed.

Perhaps I'm too idealistic, but it's the only thing that keeps me sane in this crazy world. And I'm glad that you haven't turned out to be just some anon who comes and gets upset at me for my beleifs and then leaves. I really do appreciate that you are willing to discuss these things in a productive manner, because a lot of people are not willing to do that. And I'm sorry these posts are so long, I have a tendency to go on for a while like that. Ungovernable Force^{Got something to say?} 06:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RJII

I'm getting a strong suspicion that User:Anarcho-capitalism is User:RJII. Two things tipped me off; first, the "FAQ" on his page includes quotes from obscure individualist anarchists such as Clarence Lee Swartz and Henry Appleton, whose articles were created by RJII. But even more, I noticed he created an article on Philosophical anarchism without categorizing the article. Few experienced editors do this in creating a new article, so it seems highly suspicious that both these users would. I don't have any evidence more than that, though, so I'd rather not make an accusation at this point. But if you see something, please let me know. Owen 18:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think most of us have assumed that all along. But it's obviously hard to prove. Ungovernable Force^{Got something to say?} 20:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Wikipedia member

Hi, I'm getting involved in the Wikipedia thing and wondered if I could ask for a bit of advice. I'm starting on editing a few things, but I was also pretty impressed with your userpage. If you could, would you be willing to share the code to some of your userboxes? I couldn't find them on the userboxes listing and would like to also list my support for anarchism and other believe we share.

Thanks!

Aufheben 22:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Derrick Jensen

hey, did you finish A Language Older Than Words yet? I started Endgame last week. it's really intense, almost depressing. i think it's supposed to be motivating, but i think it might be exacerbating my misanthropy. oh yeah, good job maintaining your cool and coherence with immigration discussion. cheers! Murderbike 05:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

at the time of writing Endgame, he was living in Crescent City. not sure exactly where that is. it seems like he's a fairly accessible guy, my buddy has talks with him. the forum connected to his webpage is contributed to by him. it's a weird forum with waiting periods and shit til you can post, and needing to introduce yourself/justify your presence and whatnot, but i presume it's an interesting forum. Murderbike 06:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

good call on the Dystopia by the way. was listening to that the other day. Murderbike 08:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philosophical critique, etc.

Thanks for the comments and advice on my talk page. Since you asked, here's what critique I can present against your views on objective truth, et. al.: "I do not believe there is any objective truth," is in itself a logical claim of universal truth and therefore paradoxical. "I do not believe there is any objective truth;" what is truth and what can be proven are two different things - the truth philosophers seek is independent of any proofs for, lacking, or against. "Are you sure you're not just dreaming?" Cartesian doubt is circular, if you want to get to the bare bones of sophistry. "...we should be careful with our conclusions and should question everything," this is absolutely true and the basis of European philosophy. "A fact is nothing more than an opinion that most people agree on..." is again paradoxical.

Not that your views are bad, per se, but they seem endemic to beginning philosophy students, where they have learned to doubt, but not how to build upon that doubt to what lies beyond it. I do think you're on the right track, though. Get into more debates (I'm always game, though I don't think the internet is a good medium for it), read more, and you'll refine your beliefs (which could become a different formulation of what you believe now, not something entirely different.

So far as userbox mooching (and thanks for clarifying why there are no listed political userboxes; I signed your petition), I was wondering if you could get me the codes for the following: "this user is an anarchist," "this user strongly opposes fascism in all its forms," "this user is an environmentalist, "this user supports recycling," "this user is a male in support of feminism," "this user is a supporter of the lgbt community...," "this user is against imperialism," "this user is against gun control...," "Despite being born and raised in America...," "This user understands biological evolution," This user believes the world would be a happier...," "This user will oppose racism on Wikipedia..."

Again, thanks! Aufheben 16:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I understand your critique (except for the part about the Cartesian doubt being circular; if you could give me a bit of an idea what you mean by that, I would be grateful). I was sort of aware of those problems and I guess I just did a bad job of addressing them in the writing. I think it was pretty late at night when I first wrote that, but I have reread it while fully awake, so I guess I just didn't notice that. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment on it. I'll try to rephrase it sometime to address those.

And I totally know what you mean about the learning to doubt but not to rebuild. I had about a day or two where I felt like life was totally meaningless last summer. It kicked in the last day of my philosophy of religion class and I remember having to spend a lot of time just trying to reassure myself that everything was ok and trying to come up with a reason to live (not that I would have killed myself or anything, but life seemed totally lacking in a point). I was really worried for my mental health, and the fact that it was the last day of class meant I was pretty much isolated from anyone I could really talk about it with, so I had to do it all on my own. That was pretty scary :-0 You can see the stress meter onmy userpage that day, it was pretty funny. I think pulling an all-nighter the night before to finish stuff for both of my classes at the time didn't help either, or being rejected by a girl I really liked a day or two later. Ah, good times. And I'll get to work putting those userboxes on your page right now. I should have it done within 15 minutes or so at the most. Ungovernable Force^{Poll: Which religious text should I read?} 03:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Cartesian doubt (i.e., "cogito ergo sum") is circular because it assumes that the thing that is is the thing that is doing the thinking. In other words, there is no logical correlation between thinking and being other than the assumption that they do. This is why "I think, therefore I am," is referred to as the Cartesian Circle. And I know how the philosophical stress goes - I've been there too, and most philosophers have been too. Most died crazy in the gutter, and there's a reason for it.

And thanks a ton for the boxes. Hopefully I won't get vandalized, but we'll see. I'm still feeling this thing out. Aufheben 14:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ...and if i were white...

The point is that asia is no more fixed than 'white' is - or 'punk' or 'you' 'your' 'self' for that matter, but u seem to imagine the existence of some kind of white nation (or continent!) - and such racial analysis is always bound to be subordinate to class analysis, because race is merely one type of class. for example a 'black' 'african' 'american' or indeed many 'asians' were considered honorary whites during some of the apartheid era in south africa, or to take another example a 'british' 'asian' in london during the 80s would have been called 'black', whikle the same person in, say, the solomon islands would be referred to as 'white'... Paki.tv 23:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

You are assuming a lot about my beliefs without really knowing them. Yes, I realize racial terms change in meaning and such--I'm studying anthropology for goodness sake! Any analysis based merely on race or economic class or whatever is bound to be weak on many points. Give me some credit here. Where did I ever say that terms like "White" and "Black" can and only ever do refer to one homogeneous group of people and that such terms never change. You are really making a lot out of a fairly simple comment. Take for example the dark skinned Latina, or should I say a woman who is a mix of European and Native American ancestry, oh, wait, maybe I need to say specifically what nationality her European ancestors were from, and, perhaps even what region, and what economic class they were from, and their religion, and what their sexual orientation was, and their education level, and on and on and on, plus all the same information for her Native ancestors. Or maybe I can just keep things simple and say "Latina". Anyways, it's like the dark-skinned Latina I recently met who is viewed as a white in Jamaica. Overly broad labels can be useful in some situations to save time and save sanity, and I think you are being ridiculous. Ungovernable Force^{Poll: Which religious text should I read?} 01:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstars

hey, thanks a ton! certainly nice to have people appreciate the work. i just hope people read the articles (and maybe expand some of 'em a bit!). Murderbike 02:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gun control and property

Yeah, I've read some of your opinions on the subjects, and I think we agree on most things. I've had arguments about this with certain Marxists who don't quite seem to understand "property" and have some terrible confusing views - and who also support censorship of "political extremists", no less! How they reasoned that, I don't know. ~Switch ^t 17:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biases

Saw a few I'm curious to hear you explain.

• "This user believes that meat is murder and is a strict vegetarian." If killing animals is murder, animals must be similar or equivalent to humans in some way (since murder is usually applied to humans). Are you arguing that since animals also possess intelligence of some sort, we shouldn't kill them? Does your belief only apply to the higher animals?
• "This user believes the world would be a happier, safer and saner place without religion." I have a feeling that in the absence of religion, people would revert to superstition and/or cults of personality.
• "This user supports the use of gender inclusive language." Why bother? Will using "humankind" rather than "mankind" really change anything?

Looking forward to your answers. Λυδαcιτγ 06:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

1) It's not a matter of intelligence; it's a matter of suffering. I went into depth on my feelings around animal liberation a while back (see the section titled "Quick Question").

2) Aren't all religions superstitious? I'm serious here. What separates the idea of the virgin birth or the resurrection from any other irrational outlooks on the world? (Ok, technically neither are superstitions as defined by wikipedia, which says they need to involve future predictions, but still, they are equally irrational). As for cults of personality, we have those with or without religion, and I personally would define a cult of personality as a type of religion or near-religion. And in all honesty, my real problem is not with religion, but organized religion, especially the fundamentalist varieties. Cults of personality are clearly organized and fundamentalist in nature, so I don't like them at all.

3) Possibly. See the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis. Even if it's not true, isn't it a goodt thing to avoid excluding half the population when we are trying to refer to the whole population? Ungovernable Force^{Poll: Which religious text should I read?} 06:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hey

I'm gonna be mostly outta here for next two months, would you care to put my user page on your watchlist? Cheers! Murderbike 09:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anarcho-capitalist trolling

Hi there! If User:Anarcho-capitalism keeps trolling the articles on anarchism to bias them towards his own ideological POV, do you think a case should be made against him and brought to the attention of administrators? Full Shunyata 05:21, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opinion disclaimer

Hey Force, do you have an opinion on my opinion disclaimer? I just figured out how to turnit into a template, and User:Xoreox is using it too, and since my greatest personal fault is that I'm terrible at self-criticism, I thought another opinion might help me improve it. Thanks. ~Switch ^t 12:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. ~Switch ^t 19:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Religion

Hello, I agree with almost everything you believe in, however, I don't surrport the abolishment of religion, and I find it funny you like to learn about religion, but you want it abolished. I am a non denominational Christian. Do I follow what a minister tells me to believe? No, I read the Bible and get all my religious instruction from there. Unlike most Chrisitans, I believe in freedom of the people to do as they wish, because G-d does not prevent us from doing wrong, it is up to the individual to make such choices. The problem with Christianity is most of it's followers are nothing like Christ. They want Muslems, gays, and anyone else they don't like. Christ said "He who is without sin throw the first rock", meaning, we can't judge others. I support freedom, however I don't support abortion. I see it as the killing of fellow comrades. I hope this will help you view Chrisitanity in a different light. XXMurderSoulXx 23:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I'm fully aware that there are fine Christians (and other religious) people out there. One of my good friends is Catholic (heck, if she didn't have a boy friend I'd ask her out). Personally I don't really understand why anyone would put so much faith in any book, such as the Bible, but whatever. And even though I'd prefer it if people abandoned (organized) religion, I would be the last person to try and enforce that desire. I realize it will never happen and people should be able to believe what they want, as long as they don't try to force me to believe their way. Ungovernable Force^{Poll: Which religious text should I read?} 04:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dead or Alive?

In your chapter titled "Wanted, Dead or Alive!" you seem to equate "sock puppets" with a poster exhorting civilians to bring genocidal leaders to justice. In 1994, 800,000 civilians were murdered in Rwanda. You might wish to read "Shake Hands with the Devil," by the Canadian general, Romeo Dallaire, who lead the peace-keeping mission there at the time of the slaughter, and who, ultimately, was powerless to stop it, because of the lack of will of the U.N., the U.S., and other nations that were clearly in a position to help. In the years following he was so distraught by what he saw that he tried to kill himself several times. I suspect that after reading this book, you may reconsider your glib use of this image. Fagiolonero 06:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for voicing your concern. I understand what you are saying, and perhaps the joke is in bad taste. I'm not in any way equating them as equal though, and I doubt most people would believe that I was. It was a mix of hyperbole and a lack of any other wanted posters being available. I'm not trying to downplay the serious nature of what happened, but perhaps it may come across that way. Even though I don't really think it's that bad, I'll remove it since you asked nicely and I don't see any serious need to keep it up. I almost removed that entire section a few days ago anyways. Ungovernable Force^{Poll: Which religious text should I read?} 04:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: I must profess my undying love for you!

You are welcome. If there are any more of your favorite albums without covers around please let me know :-) Jogers (talk) 13:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your entry in User:Lar/Wikipedian_Bookshelf

Hi. The image you are using, Image:MaskedIcon.jpg got deleted, so you may want to edit your entry and either remove it, or change to a different image. Just thought you might want to know. Happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 21:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grad school update

I remember you saying that you'd like to know, so I'll inform you that I've been admitted to Yale, NYU, and UC Irvine, so far. :D Still waiting to hear from Johns Hopkins and Harvard.

I'm exuberant. XD

Good luck to you.

Best, --AaronS 17:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)