“We are not here in this world to find elegant solutions, pregnant with initiative, or to serve the ways and modes of profitable progress.
No, we are here to provide for all those who are weaker and hungrier, more battered and crippled than ourselves. That is our only certain good and great purpose on earth, and if you ask me about those insoluble economic problems that may arise if the top is deprived of their initiative, I would answer ‘To hell with them.’ The top is greedy and mean and will always find a way to take care of themselves. They always do” – Michael Foot. RIP.
On Addiction
And The Void Mooned Back...
The Spirit Of The World
A Machine to Steal Souls
More Anti Digital
Thync
Robotic Sensory Loops and Whatnot
Cartestian Robot Roundup.
Post-Scarcity Link-Dump
Servo Bender
Wow, I’m glad that bastard is dead. Talk about imposing beliefs on others.
Do not ever say that the desire to “do good” by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives. -Ayn Rand
Oh great. A teabagger.
How’s that going for you? Tearing your country apart much? Destroying any chance of any rational public discourse?
Life isn’t as much fun as it used to be is it?
Here’s an article from a fellow-fascist, David Frum. You’ll like him. He’s the kind of guy who dances around sticking up for bullies as well.
http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo
“Conservative talkers on Fox and talk radio had whipped the Republican voting base into such a frenzy that deal-making was rendered impossible. How do you negotiate with somebody who wants to murder your grandmother?”
—
Listen to yourself. You’re dancing on the grave of someone you don’t even know. Your basic morality has been warped to the point where “do-gooder” means something bad.
How did you get like this?
Can’t you see how ugly you’ve become? What happened to you?
Tea Bagger…hey how original! Did you make that up yourself?
I’ve never heard of Frum. No idea who his is.
what right do you have to take what is not yours in the name of others?
There is nothing do-gooding about taking from others. It’s called stealing.
You can provide for others all you want, just out of your own resources. Out of a rational argument for others to provide resources, so they may give or provide freely. But not take other’s resources because you deem it right.
For this Michael Foote quote, shame on him the thief.
For argument’s sake, let’s say with perfect knowledge, two “recipients” are of equal value in receiving aid, A and B. Let’s say there are two “providers” of aid. One has the means of providing aid (provider 1), one has the authority to determine the recipient, but not the means (provider2).
One provider chooses A, one provider chooses B for equally valid reasons. Note both A & B are of equal value and both reasons are of equal value.
What makes the ability of the provider 1 unjust and the authority of provider 2 just? Is not provider 1 free to choose either recipient A or B? or both? or neither? Since he has earned his ability to provide aid?
Why is “provider 2” morally just in confiscating provider 1’s means to give to recipient B or even A, or both? or neither?
Infringing on Provider A’s freedom to choose has no validity. Yet this is what Foote is advocating.
For a real world example, research Warren Buffett’s reasons for minimal charitable donations until after his death. It has to do with compound interest, and the ability to affect a GREATER change at a later date, with more money.
What the fuck are you talking about you crackpot?
What are you even doing here? Won’t anyone else talk to you?
—
Well sorry – I don’t have a lot of time for right-wing nutjobs.
Over and out.