Anti American sentiment

Post Reply New Topic

America will never invade China.

It is not good for big business, in America.

American manufacturers use chinese people (in china) as slaves. Nike' for instance, can pay the chinese citizene a slaves wage, produce a pair of sneakers for dirt cheap, the import them back to the US and sell their crap for $250.00 a pair.

Thats only one of a multitude of examples.

You also mentioned india, same principle. Good for American Big Business, not cost effective to invade.
According to Bush and the Right wing pro business position, Why should we invest all the money it take to wage war just so we can put another country under our thumb..The conservatives realize their is no need, they already are, and the do it for practically nothing.

Between China and India you have a couple billion slaves, to the world.
It makes me sick that we continue to shop at Wal-mart, and with our Dollar we are supporting slavery.

OK then. I am the new voice of the right-wing reaching out to the meagre and the pathetic and promising a bright right-wing future of conservative goodness. I shall aspire to make every disabled and mentally ill person in control of government and business.

I will pursue a radical line of turning normal people into slaves. Anyone who is able-bodied and sound in mind too will be expected to live in poverty and squalor. However, the disabled and mentally ill will never have had it so good.

I will make a clause that restricts people from inheriting wealth unless they're disabled or mentally ill. And, indeed, if someone is born into poverty if they're either disabled or mentally ill they will be moved into the upper class.

George Bush is a lousy Republican. I, on the other hand, could be great.

If necessary, let American rights trickle into China and India for the most part. But keep the rest of America out of there. We're setting a wonderful example and now China is using almost as much oil as we are. And commercialism. Everything is now focused on "the product".

There doesn't need to be more America in the world. In my opinion we could do with a lot less America here in America. Bring back a little more respect for fellow humans and dispense with more of that sickening greed.

But there's still a lot of injustice in those nations like China and India, too (like there is everywhere in the world). And I don't know if there's any answers to that but time.

Oh, and I think people should watch more cartoons and less of the news.

As long as they dont watch GI Joe cartoons and present them here as fact. Naming no names of course.

Post anti
maybe i am misinterpreting, or i am not getting your sense of humor.
But it seems like your new position, inresponse to my response of your response, is that the citizens of china and india are disabled?

No. That is a racist argument. Of course Indian and Chinese people aren't disabled by default. There are disabled and mentally ill people across all countries and cultures. A hierarchy of disabledness would be the best one you could have. It would be adhering to conservative values through and through.

You see, once the disabled and mentally ill people head the business and government of society, then there will never be change again. That is why it's conservative - it's a vision opposed to change once its fulfilled. There would be peace on Earth but normal people could still be shot for being inferior to the Godly disabled.

I am lost.

Don't worry, i lose people all the time.
My mind doesn't make sense to most.
Because i am ahead of my time

Have you seen the edited ones on Ebaums world/Heavy?
My favorite is "Hey computer stop your downloadin, help computer"

No i havent seen that Mithrandir, GI Joe is called action force in Britain what about Canada? What's Ebaums world? Iv had a look for it now and seen a couple of vids, the gay one and the belch one, they're hilarious. Im gonna look into the site and if it keeps me laughing like this im gonna bookmark the ebaum site. Thanks for informing me of this.

ante, I can't help but notice your sudden shift in ideology. But I think you've got it all wrong!

A person on the right would institutionalize or jail people if they couldn't contribute to the economy.

A person on the right would never let a mentally disabled person, let alone a working class person from having any say in how a country or the economy is run, those decisions are best left to the plutocrats because they know best what's going on.

Your a neo-con!

The 'Right' Right.

now i get it.

Since plutocrats are simply the wealthiest people in society - the upper class - and not necessarily talented in their own right, I don't think that's a problem. I am proposing the creation of a new class of plutocrats to replace the old.

These plutocrats would all be disabled. Let me explain myself clearly so there are no misunderstandings. I am describing disability according to the social model of disability. This model says, if you face barriers in society because you are in any way unique from the majority you are disabled by these barriers.

Mentally ill people fit under the banner of disability by this model. There is stigma against them, for example a belief that they're mostly mass murderers and serial rapists, and not much recognition of how ingenius people with mental illness can be, and how much they can contribute.

Of course, the most obvious disabilities like being in a wheelchair, having arthritis, being blind or partially blind, deaf or partially are included because any physical disability places barriers around what people affected by them can do, too. Then, there are also conditions like Asperger's syndrome which are disabilities that are entirely based upon social barriers, but they are still disabilities no less because social barriers are powerful.

People who are different usually have great and unique insight. They have something special to contribute. In my society, probably a lot of the people on this forum would be on executive boards of big businesses and be ruling the land in government. We would all live in mansions, designed to meet the sensory, mobility and social needs we disabled people have.

Our lives would be luxurious but not in my opinion unjustified. We have been born, all of us who are different and not one of the normal people, to struggle against the odds. We have gifts that are so often cruelly wasted and we could do so much better than the status quo if only we had a chance to have power.

The problem with Communism is that it succumbs to vile populism that endangers the disabled and the problem with the present order is that it simply is apathetic for the most part to the needs of disabled people and doesn't recognise the potential they have that should be being harnessed. Ironically, it's the normal people's loss that we aren't in power.

So why is this a Conservative policy? Because it is economically pragmatic, it is a system in which social welfare could be cut since that would be paid for by the new plutocracy's vast wealth, a system in which there is democracy but only to people who can serve under the grade of God - disabled people - thereby restricting normal people from cursing society with their sinful mediocrity.

This is a Conservative, Republican mandate that puts the moral back in the Grand Old Party. I could be your President. Just imagine what good times we would have, we would never have had it so good.

This idea of yours, on the surface seems ludacras.

Why am i finding it difficult to challenge the merits?

It is, of course ludicrous, for at least two major reasons.

One, then the disabled would, by sheer circumstance be the privelaged and therefore no longer looked upon as truly disabled, the insight, that makes them unique would eventually fade and be replaced by smuggness and privelage.

Two, because, humans, in general, are on a fixed "Wheel of Life", to use an eastern metaphor. So that the humans that achieve absolute power are thusly, corrupted absolutely. Though, there are a handful of humans that, for some reason, seem to buck this trend, but it is in no way exclusive to disabled nor are the disabled wholly made up of these outstanding and unselfish individuals. Being disabled, would not neccessarily preclude any human from, otherwise bad behavior. One can be handicapped and still be as evil as Idi Amin, as corrupted as Boss Tweed, as ill mannered as Henry VIII, as lustful as Caligula, as wicked as Countess of Bathory, as demeaning as Marie Antoinette, as murderous as Adolf Eichman, or so on.

Flawed humans as these are not just among the normal. Hitler's father was unitarian, strict, and overbearing, so one can conclude, he was not mentally fit (note: he also, more than likely had Jewish blood, since his family's real name was Schicklegruber). Jeffery Dahmer, was said to have aspergers, yet he still killed and ate dozens of people. Ed Gein had an overprotective mother, who apparently warped his psyche and thus inspired Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Psycho, and Silence of the Lambs.

My idea? Ludicrous? Surely not? I'm a Conservative!

...that's a bit of a contradiction, don't you think? A conservative that makes sense? pfft...