[ckaihatsu]

C'mon man.

This is a bluff, an attempt to reply to my original response. It lacks heart and sincerity. Where is the direct engagement and level-headed approach to the content? I'm sorry you're physically and mentally abused by a potentially fictional character. If you'd like me to go into detail, I can write you a detailed paragraph describing the ailments you face.

Late's a State-Department-type, so he'll just spin, spin, spin to waste time.


Interpersonal Meanings

Spoiler: show

philosophical abstractions

Spoiler: show

[ckaihatsu]

Also here's my own method, f.y.i.


Anatomy of a Platform

Spoiler: show

[late]

Late's a State-Department-type, so he'll just spin, spin, spin to waste time.

While Ckaihatsu builds castles in the clouds.

But I love the projection...

[ckaihatsu]

While Ckaihatsu builds castles in the clouds.

Should we just *settle* for whatever-the-hell *this* offramp destination was -- ?

But I love the projection...

Yeah, the projection's gonna be *blank wall sized*, from my side of things. (grin)

Okay, late, you are like an *official* of the state -- a 'super-statist'. I've used the terms 'international statesman' and 'geopolitical ombudsman' in the past -- don't make me use those terms *again* -- (!) (grin)

[late]

Okay, late, you are like an *official* of the state

Translation into plain English: I know what I am talking about.

Usually.

[ckaihatsu]

Translation into plain English: I know what I am talking about.

Usually.

Never said you didn't -- but these things are... how-shall-I-say, *political*.


= D


Interpersonal Meanings

Spoiler: show

[late]

Never said you didn't -- but these things are... how-shall-I-say, *political*.

I was going to say politics usually intersects with reality at some point.

But the tv is full of people saying what a big deal a fraction of a second of fusion energy is.

Kinda leaves me nonplussed..

Perhaps I should be asking myself if reality is just too boring to bother with.

[ckaihatsu]

I was going to say politics usually intersects with reality at some point.

But the tv is full of people saying what a big deal a fraction of a second of fusion energy is.

Kinda leaves me nonplussed..

Perhaps I should be asking myself if reality is just too boring to bother with.

The political terrain *does* have its *pitfalls*, so maybe hold-off on investing your full portfolio there.

Just posted *this* the other day:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_scarcity


---


Nor was it a satisfactory solution to keep the masses in poverty by
restricting the output of goods. This happened to a great extent during
the final phase of capitalism, roughly between 1920 and 1940. The economy
of many countries was allowed to stagnate, land went out of cultivation,
capital equipment was not added to, great blocks of the population were
prevented from working and kept half alive by State charity. But this,
too, entailed military weakness, and since the privations it inflicted
were obviously unnecessary, it made opposition inevitable. The problem was
how to keep the wheels of industry turning without increasing the real
wealth of the world. Goods must be produced, but they must not be
distributed. And in practice the only way of achieving this was by
continuous warfare.

The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives,
but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces,
or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea,
materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable,
and hence, in the long run, too intelligent. Even when weapons of war are
not actually destroyed, their manufacture is still a convenient way of
expending labour power without producing anything that can be consumed.
A Floating Fortress, for example, has locked up in it the labour that
would build several hundred cargo-ships. Ultimately it is scrapped as
obsolete, never having brought any material benefit to anybody, and with
further enormous labours another Floating Fortress is built. In principle
the war effort is always so planned as to eat up any surplus that might
exist after meeting the bare needs of the population. In practice the needs
of the population are always underestimated, with the result that there is
a chronic shortage of half the necessities of life; but this is looked on
as an advantage. It is deliberate policy to keep even the favoured groups
somewhere near the brink of hardship, because a general state of scarcity
increases the importance of small privileges and thus magnifies the
distinction between one group and another. By the standards of the early
twentieth century, even a member of the Inner Party lives an austere,
laborious kind of life. Nevertheless, the few luxuries that he does enjoy
his large, well-appointed flat, the better texture of his clothes, the
better quality of his food and drink and tobacco, his two or three
servants, his private motor-car or helicopter--set him in a different world
from a member of the Outer Party, and the members of the Outer Party have
a similar advantage in comparison with the submerged masses whom we call
'the proles'. The social atmosphere is that of a besieged city, where the
possession of a lump of horseflesh makes the difference between wealth and
poverty. And at the same time the consciousness of being at war, and
therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste
seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival.

War, it will be seen, accomplishes the necessary destruction, but
accomplishes it in a psychologically acceptable way. In principle it would
be quite simple to waste the surplus labour of the world by building
temples and pyramids, by digging holes and filling them up again, or even
by producing vast quantities of goods and then setting fire to them. But
this would provide only the economic and not the emotional basis for a
hierarchical society.

http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100021.txt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

viewtopic.php?p=15258784#p15258784