Some one explain the problems with Autism Speaks?

Post Reply New Topic

Typically it is those who try starting such things that end up taking the most risk though...at least I assume since the government and so called wealthy elite don't like threats to their power no matter how peaceful. Then again I don't really have much to really live for anyways so maybe someone similar to me that's a little bit more confident and doesn't get anxious as easily would be the perfect one for the job. And of course I would not be opposed to participating in such a thing

And now for an actual reply that ignores the blatant insult.

Just because I'm smart does not obligate me to do anything. I'm entitled to my own interests and needs just as every other person on this planet is or at least should be, and my interests and needs are not particularly people-oriented. Why? Because people don't listen, that's why. They're boring, predictable in that they only care what the majority thinks. Does this stop me from having political views and opinions on things such as poverty? No. Do I voice them? Sometimes. Do people listen? No. They don't. No one cares what an autistic "kid" has to say.

People who want to be a genius are morons. Everyone else thinks you're obligated to be smart in their stead.

Just because you can't think for yourselves doesn't mean you should turn to someone who can to do it for you. Yeesh.

Never.

Well yeah if people are forced into it it quickly starts resembling facism.

A very very large majority of China wanted and supported communism in the early stages; it wasn't until the poor organization caught up with them that they [the middle class and poorer citizens] started to oppose, but they were given less choice because the government was becoming a dictatorship.

I'm oversimplifying it, but China ran well for a few years before the disorganization caught up to them.

There is no one else for the job.

The conventional wisdom is that the capitalist will not give up his wealth voluntarily and his wealth must be taken from him by force. If the revolution succeeds the counter revolutionaries must be brutally suppressed which results in executions. Thus a totalitarian state is created without freedom so the people are actually no better off.

If you can convince the wealthy to voluntarily give up their wealth...

+1

Actually, a former politician in China said something along the lines of, "We'll do whatever we want and call it socialism." Gives you a little insight as to how it's not really communism.

A better form of society is worth such carnage. There wouldn't be a society with the liberties we have if it weren't for war. Such scary things may seem abominable to middle class individuals living in safe locations, but there's no reason to see it as an unjust option for those living in misery. Pacifism is a joke. Hipster tactics never solve any problem and even hurt other efforts to make things better. That kind of liberalism is based on emotionalism and isn't analytical. Violent revolutions have helped, and have been implemented by genuine individuals.
Many will act selfish when it's the only way available to accomplish survival. Lots have an instinct to be altruistic. But they won't act on it if they're convinced by the demoralizing claims that others are only selfish and corrupt, and that there's no substantial way to make things better for all. Why respect the well-being of others if they're corrupt and selfish?

I'm going to go ahead and point to my ancestors in Russia.

My great great grandmother and her family were moderately wealthy; she was a very gifted seamstress, and despite being Jewish was looked upon very highly by her customers, most of whom were also wealthy. When she still lived in Russia, most of her time that was not spent working was spent...well, working, but more along the lines of running a makeshift soup kitchen. She got kicked out of Russia for being a communist activist. Along with her entire family, which included quite a few people.

Later, Russia did become communist...briefly, until they actually turned fascist.

So it's not a matter of the wealthy voluntarily giving up their wealth, it's a matter of putting literally everyone on the same economic level no matter what they do. It would almost necessitate money being eliminated. I don't know exactly how, but I don't think that communism can work as long as humans exhibit pack behavior.

Last edited by LennytheWicked on 14 Jun 2012, 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Yeah screw totalitarianism, I want no part in anything like that so I'd have to come up with another way. But as far as I know there's people already actively coming up with a better plan than I could come up with as to what to do.

Well all it does is continue the vicious cycle...I mean its not like I honestly think I can really change anything or start a peaceful communist revolution I certainly think it would be cool though . Also I think humans fighting over resources that are running out and killing each other over it when they could put all those materials and technology to better use and use more efficient and renewable energy as well as possibly put things like industrial hemp to use but I guess it's better to fight to the death till its too late and we're all f***d. I know ha ha ha, more hippie bs...well whatever.

Also not everyone is so corrupt and selfish...and I don't know that it was directed at me but I'm not middle class, and what the hell is a safe location? apparently not the public schools, but I guess that is a separate issue and I don't want to go off topic.

All I was saying was, let someone else have something if you really don't value it. You're not obligated to do anything specific. But knowing your views, you wouldn't want to share your "gift" with others who lack even basic aptitudes. Considering that you admittedly don't like others. I seriously wonder why you would exhibit altruistic viewpoints despite that.

Your first point doesn't make any sense, and I'm ignoring it. You can't "share" an innate ability. You can teach learned ones, but you can't just share extra IQ points. And if you could, and did, then everyone would be at the same average level and nothing would be innovative because no one would think differently.

I exhibit "altruistic" viewpoints because I believe people shouldn't have to suffer because some egomaniacs cheated and stepped on people to get ahead. It's one thing if you make bad decision upon bad decision and never learn from your mistakes, but a lot of people are victims of circumstance. [E.G. cancer, wrong-place-wrong-time, car crash, things like that.]

I think modern people have the judgment to know when to stop being belligerent. I'm not sure what exactly defines middle class, but I was thinking those who generally have a place to live and who aren't starving. Hipsters have decent goals, but advocate weak tactics. When I say a safe location, I'm thinking of areas that aren't war torn and are without lots of violent crime.

With advancing technology, who knows. There is no proof that such disparity is needed to have innovation. Not all with the same IQs have the same ideas, and differing IQs don't inherently lead to different thoughts.

Well I am in an odd situation actually...I personally have no money or job to get income from, my mom has a job and a house but she's barely above the income level one would need to get on food stamps. I technically live at her house but I am not helping with bills or anything and she is not giving supplying me with any sort of income. Then of course my dad is currently homeless and stays at friends houses and such. But yeah most of my childhood I got to eat because of food stamps since my mom wasn't working and my dads jobs couldn't quite bring in enough money to feed me and my siblings its not untill recently my mom started doing better financially but it does not really help me I suppose I am happy for her though.

Honestly I can't stay at her house though...so unless I can move in with a friend or family member...I shall have to figure out where to put my vinyls, vinyl player, cd's and all the crap I cant fit into a bag or two. Then I guess I'll see where my walk takes me.

Also I suppose I see your point there...but I don't see why being in a safer location is a reason to just ignore the issues. I mean sure its not so bad when it is far away, but the way things are going it wont be long before the U.S is that way. I mean unless drastic changes are made quickly its likely to collapse, at least that is my theory I could be wrong but it certainly does not look like things are improving.