Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Other
  3. Off-Topic

ITT 2: We post shit that is neither funny nor interesting

posted
Total Posts
56,153
show more
B1rd
2,974 posts
Joined December 2013
B1rd
This concept that consent of your rulers is a prerequisite for self-determination is quite funny. When will people realise that arbitrary rulings of various administrative bodies aren't the source of human rights?

If I was a Catalonian I wouldn't want to be part of Spain either. Spain is a shitty illiberal and corrupt state with a comparable economic freedom index as Mexico.

DaddyCoolVipper wrote:

The Catalonians aren't actually allowed to vote for independence, it's in the Spanish constitution. It's the same as American states.

Basically, Catalan has no right to hold an illegal referendum for independence, it's essentially an act of rebellion against the Spanish government and will presumably be met with military force
The illiberal left strikes again. You think it's okay to use violence against people who just want to be free.
Last edited by B1rd , edited 1 time in total.
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
As he was summed, so he will appear.
Freedom to Bird! The free market must reign supreme!

I guess all that time in Tanzania messed with your brain, bud. :p
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
I think you're exaggerating a bit, Aurani. The deciding factor in an independent Catalonia's economic development would be the stance of the EU to it. If it was part of the EU right from the start, things might not look so bad. Market and infrastructure are already there so as long as there aren't any major changes to the accessibility of these, I don't think companies would go ahead and rebase their facilities elsewhere just because it is named Catalonia now. The actual politics would matter.

Aside from that I agree with B1rd here on the question of requiring consent from the spanish government (not on the free market thing but hey...).
The law in place that forbids the referendum has nothing to do with human rights and nothing to do with democracy. Its sole role is to conserve the construct called state and it serves no other purpose than that.
Dividing a society can be a viable solution to avoid conflicts and to give people the chance to choose the society they prefer. If pushed forward in a peaceful and constructive way, there is no reason why splitting a country shouldn't benefit both parties in the end. The actual issue is that people don't even bother to talk about problems. Instead we got a polarised superficial battle of dramatic gestures instead. But hey, that is modern democracy where a majority supresses many minorities.
Railey2
512 posts
Joined February 2015
Railey2

B1rd wrote:

This concept that consent of your rulers is a prerequisite for self-determination is quite funny.
It's all fun and games until you say the same thing to your mom and she takes your computer away.
The same also applies to states in principle, except instead of only having your computer taken away, you also get shot.

What's funny about this, the concept of power? Cause I can tell you it's not funny, and many people get hurt every day because they think that they have rights that are different in nature from the protection they get from their government. But not so. It's all that rights are: A promise and a threat. Like your mom granting you the right to stay up for an hour longer. But only tonight!

B1rd wrote:

When will people realize that arbitrary rulings of various administrative bodies aren't the source of human rights?
Human rights only exist as an idea, that's the thing, they don't exist like anything that's tangible that you could touch or point towards. You've got it entirely backwards. THE ONLY ENTITY that can grant you something as abstract as "human rights" consitently, is the entity that has enough power to force everyone to consistently live as if the idea of human rights existed like something real.

Let's make it a bit more clear using this example: Do Nation-borders exist? I can assure you they do not, not in the sense a tree or an apple exists - when I was hiking in a forest between Germany and Austria, there wasn't a yellow-glowing godly line that stated "this is Germany's border btw". Borders only exist in the sense that a powerful entity (government) forces us to act as if there was this yellow-glowing godly line - in the case of my little hiking-trip with no consequence.

It's the same with human rights. Various administrative bodies ARE a source of human rights. I might even add that they are the most consistent and reliable source of human rights.
Last edited by Railey2 , edited 3 times in total.
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
Bird and his wild views on the state. While being theoretically plausible, such things would never work in practice and no matter how much he spouts such things, it can't apply as a valid argument.
B1rd
2,974 posts
Joined December 2013
B1rd
Rather than asking whether natural rights exist or not, the more pertinent question is whether they should exist. And the answer is yes, people should have the right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, and indeed no one needs those things given to them, they already have them without a government. The alternative is that "might makes right', and the state can legitimately subject people to unspeakable tyranny. It's easy to see who's right here when you advocate for people to be shot for the crime of doing nothing but wanting to be left alone.
Railey2
512 posts
Joined February 2015
Railey2

B1rd wrote:

Rather than asking whether natural rights exist or not, the more pertinent question is whether they should exist. And the answer is yes, people should have the right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, and indeed no one needs those things given to them, they already have them without a government. The alternative is that "might makes right', and the state can legitimately subject people to unspeakable tyranny. It's easy to see who's right here when you advocate for people to be shot for the crime of doing nothing but wanting to be left alone.
Your "more pertinent question" has no bearing on reality, sadly. The world we live in clearly is one where the state can legitimately subject people to unspeakable tyranny, as they do so frequently. Just ask the people of North Korea. Might does make right (right in the sense of law). You should never forget that. If you do forget it, you might (hah) have to pay for it dearly.
Tupsu
7 posts
Joined September 2012
Tupsu

B1rd wrote:

Rather than asking whether natural rights exist or not, the more pertinent question is whether they should exist. And the answer is yes, people should have the right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, and indeed no one needs those things given to them, they already have them without a government. The alternative is that "might makes right', and the state can legitimately subject people to unspeakable tyranny. It's easy to see who's right here when you advocate for people to be shot for the crime of doing nothing but wanting to be left alone.
you're still an idiot lol
B1rd
2,974 posts
Joined December 2013
B1rd
The state is just a group of people, and the beliefs of the people that make up that group and the people around it decide what power that group has. Thus it's everyone's moral imperative to stand up for what's right, even under threat of persecution. Otherwise you end up with what happened in the Soviet Union, where everyone's cooperation just made it easier to lead people straight into the gulags. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Last edited by B1rd , edited 1 time in total.
ColdTooth
1,100 posts
Joined June 2012
ColdTooth

B1rd wrote:

The state is just a group of people, and the beliefs of the people that make up that group and the people around it decide what power that group has. Thus it's everyone's moral imperative to stand up for what's right, even under threat of persecution. Otherwise you end up with what happened in the Soviet Union, where everyone's corporation just made it easier to lead people straight into the gulags. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Can you teach me on how you can so politically correct in a way that people will believe me?
Mara
4,906 posts
Joined November 2009
Mara

Tupsu wrote:

you're still an idiot lol
Oh, hi there.
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
Off to tuuba with you, Mara.

B1rd wrote:

The state is just a group of free markets, and the beliefs of the free markets that make up the free market and the free market around it decides what power that free market has. Thus it's everyone's moral imperative to stand up for the free market, even under threat of persecution. Otherwise you end up with what happened in the Soviet Union, where no free market just made it easier to lead people straight into the gulags. The free market must be refreshed from time time with the blood of faux free markets.
I entirely agree with you.
Mara
4,906 posts
Joined November 2009
Mara
I haven't posted in Tuuba for months mate.
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
Why not? The place needs refreshing.
Tupsu
7 posts
Joined September 2012
Tupsu

Mara wrote:

Tupsu wrote:

you're still an idiot lol
Oh, hi there.
don't mind me I'm just here to call bird a dipshit
we miss you at tuuba forums you should come back and try to reinvigorate it some more
maybe run a mafia game or something
Mara
4,906 posts
Joined November 2009
Mara
I really don't know how to refresh it. I'm clearly not the person for the job, seeing how the another project died on the launch day.
B1rd
2,974 posts
Joined December 2013
B1rd
Ha, I hope it dies. Good riddance.
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
Mara, the guy who runs a discord of 200+ people, but thinks he can't revive a local forum of barely 20.

Come you bum, you can do it!
Tupsu
7 posts
Joined September 2012
Tupsu

Mara wrote:

I really don't know how to refresh it. I'm clearly not the person for the job, seeing how the another project died on the launch day.
"well maybe if you didn't try to further split an already small community with another forum" - loosely paraphrased from ipep, 2017
just invite people some more, that was working for a while
Mara
4,906 posts
Joined November 2009
Mara

Aurani wrote:

the guy who runs a discord of 200+ people
More like about 15. Majority of people are there just for ösy! related news or something and never participate in anything. We're constantly losing members each day since there's nothing interesting to show.

Tupsu wrote:

"well maybe if you didn't try to further split an already small community with another forum" - loosely paraphrased from ipep, 2017
My goal wasn't to split the tuuba's community but simply try to move my own sauna community into forum form. Didn't work.
Tupsu
7 posts
Joined September 2012
Tupsu
just use the pre existing forum though, it's not like the comms are that hugely different
I'm sure if you asked nicely you could even get a special snowflake subforum, though I'm not sure why you'd want one
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
Yeah but they're still there. I'm also there just for 3 people, but I am there - I still count. If they didn't see a reason to be there, they would've left. Fact is, they're all still there, regardless of a reason, and the one holding them all together is you.
You're running the smoothest server I know, with the most interesting things around, so you can definitely not convince me that you can't manage a forum full of ex-osu users.

I do admit that making yet another forum was a pretty...... interesting idea.
Mara
4,906 posts
Joined November 2009
Mara
I'll think about it, but I am not going to spend any time with any community thing for quite some time. I burned myself pretty hard with constant disappointing results. The discord server needs some cleaning but I really can't bother. Just want to do solo things for a while.

That being said, sauna members won't move to tuuba. I already know that it won't work.
Last edited by Mara , edited 1 time in total.
B1rd
2,974 posts
Joined December 2013
B1rd
I'd come back any time I got an apology from IppE for deleting my posts.
silmarilen
5,579 posts
Joined February 2010
silmarilen
what is tuuba?
DaddyCoolVipper
342 posts
Joined July 2012
DaddyCoolVipper

B1rd wrote:

Rather than asking whether natural rights exist or not, the more pertinent question is whether they should exist. And the answer is yes, people should have the right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, and indeed no one needs those things given to them, they already have them without a government. The alternative is that "might makes right', and the state can legitimately subject people to unspeakable tyranny. It's easy to see who's right here when you advocate for people to be shot for the crime of doing nothing but wanting to be left alone.

Oh Jesus you're actually spouting molyneux talking points.

2 counter arguments; one being that you suggest all people can pursue life, liberty and happiness without a state existing. This doesn't take unfair discrimination into account at all- your statement would be a lot more accurate in some utopia where nobody is unfairly treated.

Secondly, without a government to provide people safety, the world would very quickly become "might makes right" anyway. There's no avoiding it- at least there's structure when governments are ruling instead of whoever had the best weapons and most soldiers.

additional note: libertarianism and the desire for borders to exist aren't exactly compatible unless you're a xenophobe
DaddyCoolVipper
342 posts
Joined July 2012
DaddyCoolVipper

B1rd wrote:

Thus it's everyone's moral imperative to stand up for what's right, even under threat of persecution. Otherwise you end up with what happened in the Soviet Union, where everyone's cooperation just made it easier to lead people straight into the gulags.
Please for the love of god don't speak about the Soviet Union when you have no idea what you are talking about lmao


B1rd wrote:

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
very original
B1rd
2,974 posts
Joined December 2013
B1rd
Yes, I know a thing or two about the Soviet Union.

And no, I don't consider discrimination to be intrinsically bad and I don't consider so-called unfair discrimination to be anything but an subjective judgement that should not be the basis for any laws.

We weren't talking about anarchism, we were talking about natural rights. If you want to debunk the theory of voluntaryism, you'd better come up with a better argument than the tired old assertion that it would instantly devolve into a society where might makes right.

And lastly, there are a number of prerequisites you need to satisfy before you "open borders", so to speak. Getting rid of borders without changing anything else is as good an idea as getting rid of the police force without changing anything else.
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
Softwarm
53 posts
Joined April 2014
Softwarm
Just fuck already.
Ryoid
250 posts
Joined May 2017
Ryoid
I'm still wondering why this thread have so many page
AutoMedic
1,166 posts
Joined April 2014
AutoMedic
thats fucking gay
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
I don't have the feeling that anyone wants to discuss this matter, instead you're just all baiting B1rd and telling him, he's stupid.
Or I'm on everyone's ignore-list.
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
Let's look at it this way:
If you try to discuss something with someone and you have thoughts on the matter that are seriously, SERIOUSLY far off from the other person's point of view, there is no reason to discuss it any further. Lack of proper knowledge on the matter means you will NEVER be able to bridge that big of a gap and the discussion is always going to end up with someone going ad hominem.
The only reason to ever continue a discussion is if the other person's point of view is in the same ballpark, but you can't agree on certain intricacies of the matter being discussed.

So, if someone doesn't answer your post or anyone else's for that matter, know that it is because the person simply recognised how it will ultimately end for both parties.

As for Bird - he is far, far from being stupid. I know that the lad has much in him, but sometimes he just comes off as too crude.
The first thing he said when he dropped in was "soviet union" and of course you're going to make fun of it. On top of it, he's known for his free market meme, so some free jokes at his expense must be made, regardless if he's right or wrong about something.
Last edited by Aurani , edited 1 time in total.
DaddyCoolVipper
342 posts
Joined July 2012
DaddyCoolVipper

Aurani wrote:

Let's look at it this way:
If you try to discuss something with someone and you have thoughts on the matter that are seriously, SERIOUSLY far off from the other person's point of view, there is no reason to discuss it any further. Lack of proper knowledge on the matter means you will NEVER be able to bridge that big of a gap and the discussion is always going to end up with someone going ad hominem.
The only reason to ever continue a discussion is if the other person's point of view is in the same ballpark, but you can't agree on certain intricacies of the matter being discussed.

So, if someone doesn't answer your post or anyone else's for that matter, know that it is because the person simply recognised how it will ultimately end for both parties.
Very true post, here
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
So you still discuss with B1rd but not with me. This does not make much sense either when you were honest with what you wrote because I don't think I'm farther from your point of view than B1rd is.
Aurani
762 posts
Joined January 2013
Aurani
Are you referring to Daddy or me? If it's me, I actually believe your statement couldn't be farther from the truth. Bird's point of view is quite far away from mine in most cases, but the reason I like discussing things with him is because of our great relations. I know he will never go for a cheap shot when I'm involved and I respect him for that.
As for you.... what gave you the idea that I wouldn't discuss things with you? I just skipped your post yesterday because I didn't feel in the mood to be discussing it anymore, and then it all turned into a memefest.

If that post wasn't aimed at me, forget what I said. :p
B1rd
2,974 posts
Joined December 2013
B1rd
Problem with people who have radically different views than you is that they have fundamentally different presuppositions about the world. The other day I had a leftist tell me, honest-to-God, that hierarchies don't exist without Capitalism and CEOs aren't any more competent than your average worker.

But regarding what was said in this thread, I'm wondering if Vipper is going to just wiggle out of backing up his unprovable assertions, like how I don't know what I'm talking about regarding the Soviet Union.
Comfy Slippers
194 posts
Joined April 2015
Comfy Slippers
SPOILER
Railey2
512 posts
Joined February 2015
Railey2

B1rd wrote:

Problem with people who have radically different views than you is that they have fundamentally different presuppositions about the world. The other day I had a leftist tell me, honest-to-God, that hierarchies don't exist without Capitalism and CEOs aren't any more competent than your average worker.

But regarding what was said in this thread, I'm wondering if Vipper is going to just wiggle out of backing up his unprovable assertions, like how I don't know what I'm talking about regarding the Soviet Union.
Talking about unprovable assertions, do you think that a society without leadership could stabilize itself with nothing but the free market?
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
50571 / 56,153