Colorado schools to promote communism! Developing story

Page 5 of 8 [ 125 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

mrpieceofwork
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2023
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 717
Location: Texas aka hell

01 Jun 2023, 12:12 pm

The only Peopl... people who are truly free are the ones in the "Leisure Class" AKA "The Ruling Class" AKA "The Capital Class" AKA "The 1%"... all others are literally subservient to this class. There is no real "freedom" nor "democracy" in the US, as well as in many other western regimes (though there are quite a few liberal countries which are relatively "progressive" compared to the US... though it can be argued that this is by design)

*screa...


_________________
EAT THE RICH
WPs Three Word Story (WIP)
http://mrpieceofwork.byethost33.com/wp3/
My text only website
https://rawtext.club/~mrpieceofwork/
"Imagine Life Without Money"


Honey69
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2023
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,076
Location: Llareggub

01 Jun 2023, 12:33 pm

AngelRho wrote:
Honey69 wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
People who are legitimately victims, such as African slaves, cannot achieve greatness simply by forcing freedom on them. The way this happened in America did them more harm than good.


You didn't care much for the 13th Amendment?

Well, let’s see:
Quote:

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


Why would I have a problem with that? It’s absurd for a society that claims to be free to have human slaves.


:scratch:

Well, you did state

Quote:

African slaves, cannot achieve greatness simply by forcing freedom on them. The way this happened in America did them more harm than good.



The 13th Amendment freed the slaves. How did this do more harm than good?


_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

01 Jun 2023, 1:08 pm

Honey69 wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
Honey69 wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
People who are legitimately victims, such as African slaves, cannot achieve greatness simply by forcing freedom on them. The way this happened in America did them more harm than good.


You didn't care much for the 13th Amendment?

Well, let’s see:
Quote:

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


Why would I have a problem with that? It’s absurd for a society that claims to be free to have human slaves.


:scratch:

Well, you did state

Quote:

African slaves, cannot achieve greatness simply by forcing freedom on them. The way this happened in America did them more harm than good.



The 13th Amendment freed the slaves. How did this do more harm than good?

The 13th Amendment just says that slavery/involuntary servitude shall not exist and Congress shall have the power to enforce it. That’s not the same thing as freeing slaves.

I mean…it just made slavery unconstitutional. If it actually freed anyone, how do you explain the Black Codes?



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,023
Location: Right over your left shoulder

01 Jun 2023, 1:11 pm

AngelRho wrote:
I mean…it just made slavery unconstitutional. If it actually freed anyone, how do you explain the Black Codes?


While the Black Codes were a terrible injustice, they didn't impose chattel slavery on anyone, they didn't place anyone in bondage - meaning they didn't take away anyone's freedom as provided by the 13th.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

01 Jun 2023, 1:38 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
I mean…it just made slavery unconstitutional. If it actually freed anyone, how do you explain the Black Codes?


While the Black Codes were a terrible injustice, they didn't impose chattel slavery on anyone, they didn't place anyone in bondage - meaning they didn't take away anyone's freedom as provided by the 13th.

You are TECHNICALLY correct. But then look at vagrancy laws at the time as well as the convict leasing program

And that’s just covering involuntary servitude. Denial of civil rights is a broader issue than unpaid labor alone.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,023
Location: Right over your left shoulder

02 Jun 2023, 2:46 am

AngelRho wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
I mean…it just made slavery unconstitutional. If it actually freed anyone, how do you explain the Black Codes?


While the Black Codes were a terrible injustice, they didn't impose chattel slavery on anyone, they didn't place anyone in bondage - meaning they didn't take away anyone's freedom as provided by the 13th.

You are TECHNICALLY correct. But then look at vagrancy laws at the time as well as the convict leasing program

And that’s just covering involuntary servitude. Denial of civil rights is a broader issue than unpaid labor alone.


We both agree on the underlined.

It's just that what was implemented was pretty specific and minimal.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

02 Jun 2023, 2:16 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
I mean…it just made slavery unconstitutional. If it actually freed anyone, how do you explain the Black Codes?


While the Black Codes were a terrible injustice, they didn't impose chattel slavery on anyone, they didn't place anyone in bondage - meaning they didn't take away anyone's freedom as provided by the 13th.

You are TECHNICALLY correct. But then look at vagrancy laws at the time as well as the convict leasing program

And that’s just covering involuntary servitude. Denial of civil rights is a broader issue than unpaid labor alone.


We both agree on the underlined.

It's just that what was implemented was pretty specific and minimal.

Well, Mississippi (where I'm from) was the first state to enact Black Codes. Fun fact: Mississippi didn't officially ratify the 13th amendment until 2013. The 13th amendment made institutional slavery unconstitutional, and technically the Black Codes weren't institutional slavery, or at least not slavery as Southerners understood it prior to the Civil War.

One intent of the 13th was to protect forced labor as punishment for crime. Southerners used this loophole to revive slavery. Black Codes defined vagrancy as not having a job within the last year, and blacks had to submit proof of employment. And that meant more blacks could be picked up by the prison system and leased out to private entities for labor. Apprenticeships returned slaves to their former owners who had the freedom to use corporate punishment on apprentices. There were laws restricting movement, assembly, etc. And according to Dred Scott, black people weren't even American citizens.

The next few amendments are aimed at closing those loopholes.

As critical as I am of CRT, it's not because I don't know history. When I read through those amendments, race is never mentioned. The focus and, I believe intent, was the protection of individual rights and making sure unjust institutions could never be revived in a different form--enslaving a different race, possibly. Race doesn't matter. Individuals matter. I don't object to the 13th and other amendments for providing a constitutional guarantee of personal liberty. My objection is all in implementation and interpretation. They've been "hacked" ever since to create a special class within America. I don't have a problem with any individual enjoying high status or privilege--if they're born into wealth or work hard, they are entitled to those things they earn or what someone else believes they deserve (gifts/inheritance). What I have a problem with is the granting of privilege by the state.

But wait...it's ok for white people to have privilege but not black people? No, it's not ok for the government to grant ANYONE, especially not racial groups, special rights and privileges. Prior to the Civil War, laws established and recognized white men as the only group with any political power. The effects of the Reconstruction amendments has been the constitutional removal of any government-recognized and enforced racial power structures. Interpretation and subsequent court cases let to the creation by the government of special protected classes--groups of people whose rights/entitlements supersede the rights of individuals. Rights/privileges are granted, not earned. My objection to those entitlements isn't that I think PoC shouldn't have any help from the government. My issue is that government entitlement programs merely have the guise of helping minorities while in reality only keep minorities dependent on government services. By supporting a certain party, black people need no incentive to produce anything or support themselves. And because they become dependent on government for essentials, they ensure that their white representatives keep their jobs and always enjoy a better quality of life than their voting base.

If government programs were really about improving the lives of black people, you'd have fewer blacks living in poverty, not more. And those government policies spun off the Reconstruction amendments ensure that there will always be a permanent, racial underclass.

It's not like the Republicans weren't expecting to expand their own voter base, which they did for a short time. For the Republicans, granting blacks freedom should have been the answer. White supremacists within the Democratic Party initially worked to prevent blacks from voting, including Klan terrorism as well as literacy tests. Depression-era policies sparked a shift in which the working poor had a safety net. Discriminatory policies made moving jobs difficult and left blacks dependent on subsidized housing projects. Even after these policies were lifted, Depression-era entitlements couldn't be rescinded without losing voters.

It is not objectively true that blacks MUST, to put it bluntly, "stay on the plantation." They're not compelled to do so. Blacks have every much the right to achieve as anyone else in America does. Well...more or less. But you cannot have it both ways. You cannot attempt to achieve anything any time you are dependent on government support. Why? Because entitlements come with conditions--you cannot receive welfare and earn a meaningful income at the same time. You have to pick on or the other. But you cannot work your way up without enduring entry-level jobs. And entry-level jobs often pay less than cumulative government income that you might be entitled to. If I want to make a lot of money, I'm have the right to seek jobs that pay well. But if I make over a certain amount, I have to pay back student loans. I can have my loans forgiven if I'm poor for the next, roughly, ten years. But if I have to start paying back loans, it means I have less of a paycheck to go around. I might even end up having less money once I have to start making those payments, otherwise whatever I make has to be a significantly large amount to support my family. If I can't afford to make those payments, I can't afford promotions/raises, and it takes a long time to work up to the kinds of jobs that pay well. It's more affordable to just stay poor.

And that's entirely a matter of government policies. It's a system of ongoing indebtedness that reduces American success to a zero sum game, something the other side claims is intended to make sure everyone has an equal opportunity for achievement. If I'm a WHITE GUY who is upset over what student debt does to people, I can't even begin to imagine what it must be like growing up dependent on programs you never asked for. That's really all white privilege is--REAL white privilege, not the fiction put forth by CRT folks--growing up knowing that, despite difficulties along the way, I can always make as little as one single decision that can turn my plight around. Many poor people, in particular racial minorities, are sold the lie that achievement is unattainable because they are born a certain skin color and dependent on government programs. You lose your entitlements once you begin to do something good, so is it worth it to achieve anything? And they are sold on the notion that those entitlements are worth more than any achievements they might make. The truth is any single black individual can rise above it simply by deciding he wants to, same as anyone else. Same as white people, same as me.

On a totally unrelated side note: I'm not REALLY all that outraged over the student loan thing. It is a difficult reality in my life that I happen to believe is cruel, but the real life impact is next to null. In one of the few instances when I disagree with Republicans, the Republican assault on student loan forgiveness is just as much a political stunt as Democratic support for loan forgiveness. Under certain repayment programs, loans are expected to be paid off within a given time frame. Anyone who qualifies for IDR programs can expect their loans to go away within that time frame. All Biden did was try to move up the time for certain borrowers on loans that were going to be forgiven anyway, which is advantageous for Democrats in terms of optics. Republicans oppose loan forgiveness because their voter base has a lot of people who either paid off their loans or worked their way through college who feel it would be unfair. They are somehow unaware that loan forgiveness is already part of it and inevitable. By arguing over student loan forgiveness, Democrats don't lose anything if they fail to get loan forgiveness because they're going to get loan forgiveness anyway. Republicans win out ALSO because they can vote against loan forgiveness without actually taking any loan forgiveness away. It's nothing but a war to see who can exploit this situation better to grab the most voters. No matter how it turns out, neither side loses. Politicians win; borrowers lose. Nothing changes.



Honey69
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2023
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,076
Location: Llareggub

03 Jun 2023, 9:47 pm



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8umrun ... rreHistory


_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah


Honey69
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2023
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,076
Location: Llareggub

08 Jun 2023, 12:01 pm

An interesting article about the life of Tina Turner, who was from Mississippi

https://andscape.com/features/america-l ... od-to-her/

And, it looks like Southern Black women were especially vulnerable to rape.

https://andscape.com/features/the-rape- ... ack-women/


_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,123
Location: Long Island, New York

08 Jun 2023, 11:27 pm

Honey69 wrote:
An interesting article about the life of Tina Turner, who was from Mississippi

https://andscape.com/features/america-l ... od-to-her/

In the old days they mocked people who "see a communist under every bed". I guess the updated version is people who see white supremacy under every bed.

Men who feel entitled to do with women what they want when they want have existed in every type of society in every era. I might be wrong but I don't believe Tina or Ike ever said white supremacy was a factor in Ike's abusing Tina. But the author just knows it was.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

18 Jun 2023, 11:44 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Honey69 wrote:
An interesting article about the life of Tina Turner, who was from Mississippi

https://andscape.com/features/america-l ... od-to-her/

In the old days they mocked people who "see a communist under every bed". I guess the updated version is people who see white supremacy under every bed.

Men who feel entitled to do with women what they want when they want have existed in every type of society in every era. I might be wrong but I don't believe Tina or Ike ever said white supremacy was a factor in Ike's abusing Tina. But the author just knows it was.

Well...yeah.

White supremacy is not the MAIN factor, but it's a big one. I'll get to the main problem shortly, and it won't take much text to cover.

The white supremacy thing is a holdover from institutional slavery. Slavery created castes within itself--house slaves verses field slaves. Slaves in the house were practically family members and enjoyed more freedom--basically just well-fed, well-dressed, well-maintained, but unpaid servants. But outside the house, slaves could be assigned leadership roles and exercised a high level of control over other slaves. There was a subjective sense of ownership of others, and violence was the norm. Given the circumstances, it made sense. If the guy in charge didn't get results, he got beaten by his master, or perhaps something worse. Beat or get beaten. And that forms a dichotomy--you are either strong and entitled to freedom or you are weak and consigned to manual labor. There's no in-between.

Also, I think a large part of it owes to being denied agency. You don't even belong to yourself, so there's a tendency to exercise total ownership over everything attached to you in some way. YOUR spouse, YOUR children. We still speak in those terms, so it's not inappropriate to say that a person belongs to you when you're describing a relationship with someone. MY teacher, MY student, MY doctor, MY auto mechanic. But those relationships do not indicate that ownership of those people is the same as usual material possession. I own a relationship with my dentist or with my wife, but that relationship does not negate the agency of those people. Those are individuals with their own agency, therefore I have no right to dispose of them any way I please. On the other hand, I own a car. If I wanted to drive it over a cliff, I'm free to do that.

What does that have to do with Ike Turner's white supremacy? Simple. Ike Turner is not HIMSELF a white supremacist. Rather, Ike Turner is a VICTIM of white supremacy. He learned his behavior from a string of violent behavior enabled by a plantation mentality. We are meant to pity Ike Turner, not hate him. He couldn't help what he did to Tina. As I've mentioned before regarding freed slaves, Ike Turner's predecessors were not born into freedom, didn't earn freedom, didn't ask for freedom. WHITE freedom was imposed upon them--freedom on everyone else's terms, NOT on black people's terms, and only freedom that suited WHITE people rather than the best interest of blacks. Ike Turner by asserting his *cough* white *cough* freedom subjects those working for him, particularly black women and not just Tina, to Ike's personal vision of agency and freedom--the ability to maintain his hold on power through chattel possession and ownership. He can only be free and exercise personal agency by enslaving others.

Ike Turner is not a white supremacist. But Ike Turner is both a victim and PRODUCT of white supremacy.

The MAIN problem with Ike Turner isn't that. Ike did display a strong tendency to exercise power and ownership over other people, women in particular, but that is a result of himself being a victim of white oppressors. The REAL problem is that he was a MAN. He was inherently part of the patriarchy and driven by the inherent male desire to oppress women. So he was simultaneously a victim and oppressor. CRT/Wokeness draws attention to intersectionality, which is important to keep in mind here regarding Ike Turner. Ike Turner was an evil MAN, but being a BLACK man frames him as someone who to a large extent couldn't help it. There's no excuse for abusing women--that's not what I mean. I just mean that while being an abuser of women is a bad thing, you have to have a little compassion towards Ike Turner understanding that his behavior was largely the result of experiencing abuse from childhood--much of which would not have occurred had Ike grown up with white privilege. It would have been more egregious if Ike Turner had been a white man because you expect white men to dominate other people, especially women.

That's the narrative, anyway. I think probably there's a lot of childhood abuse issues and a legit sense that Ike Turner lacked personal agency. But all that is compounded by schizophrenia and later drug/alcohol addiction, the latter likely a result of dealing with mental health issues.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

18 Jun 2023, 1:11 pm

mrpieceofwork wrote:
The only Peopl... people who are truly free are the ones in the "Leisure Class" AKA "The Ruling Class" AKA "The Capital Class" AKA "The 1%"... all others are literally subservient to this class.

"Literally" false. There are different kinds of freedom, the most important being freedom under the law and freedom within reason. In the USA, everyone is regarded as "equal under the law." Free market capitalism depends on that kind of freedom and equality. Beyond that, there is no equality, nor is it in anyone's rational self interest for equality to exist outside of law.

You'd hate it if all things and people were equal. Equality means, for example, that ALL potato chips are the same. You don't get a choice of buying nacho cheese flavored corn chips, because having nacho cheese corn chips means something is better than potato chips. And you can't have flavored potato chips, either, because now you have to consider whether French onion, ranch, or barbecue are better than plain. You would HATE living in a world were equality exists--even if you don't eat any kind of chips, everyone has preferences or some talent they excel at relative to others. Equality means everyone must have the same taste and ability. I'm good at music. But if all musicians were equal, I couldn't live up to my potential because I'd be too preoccupied with trying not to sound better than someone else. True equality is a bad, bad, bad idea.

Isn't that just an excuse for white supremacy? No, because racial oppression violates the oppressor's rational self-interest. Rational people look beyond skin color to value the IDEAS of others and the things they can bring to life. It does no good in free society to say white people are better at ___ or black people are better at ___. It always comes down to what individuals are capable of. While I'm a better musician than most others, I'm totally clueless about how cars work. I mean, I've got the basics, but I can't change a tire much less oil and fluids. But there are people who are great at that. I can't weld things. There are gifted welders working in construction and other industries. If I worked as a welder, there's no guaranteeing the safety or quality of my work. We are NOT equals. I'm fine with that. The imposition of equality is nothing more than the tyranny of mediocrity.

Quote:
There is no real "freedom" nor "democracy" in the US, as well as in many other western regimes (though there are quite a few liberal countries which are relatively "progressive" compared to the US... though it can be argued that this is by design)

*screa...

Freedom has to be earned for it to be truly be free. That's the problem we have in the USA, that people increasingly and overwhelmingly believe they are entitled to freedom. That's simply not the case. I have a history of pushing mod/admin buttons, though I honestly try to keep myself in check. I'm not free to just post whatever I want here. This isn't my website. I understand and accept that. This website is made to reflect and serve the interests of the guy who created it. So I'm free to debate controversial things like abortion, CRT/wokeness, LGBTQ+ issues and openly disagree with members on here about some things, but I'm not free to create the perception that I'm attacking trans people or POC or women. For someone to be free in the truest sense, freedom has to be earned. Either you earn it or you deserve it. Inherited freedom isn't QUITE the best measure of freedom since it depends on something--birthright. If you do productive work and receive a reward for it, you are as free as the reward you get. You are free to keep doing what you're doing that you're being rewarded for.

The highest freedom under capitalism isn't really having wealth, though it's related to wealth. The highest freedom is being returned value for your own values. Having a large amount of wealth indicates that your values align with the values of a large amount of people. People highly value having a platform by which they can reach people with goods and services, therefore social media giants earn insane amounts of revenue from ads. I believe that there remains a need for competitors to Facebook and Twitter and that I could become extremely wealthy if I went for it. But I'm a musician, not a developer. And the commitment to making something that would compete with already well-established social media platforms would mean having to give up on music. And since I'd rather make music than commit to being a billionaire, attempting something like the next Facebook would mean a LOSS of freedom, not a gain of freedom. I'm free to work on my platform, not what I WANT to work on. And that makes me a slave to money rather than making money my servant.

That's why capitalism isn't really about wealth because there is no freedom in generating wealth from things you don't value. Wealth is a consequence of the rewards from SHARED values. I love music. I play music. I get paid to make music. If I couldn't make money doing what I value, I would work to earn the freedom to do what I DO value. I need a place to live along with all the other basics. If flipping burgers empowers me to do that, then I can use my leisure time to make music all I want. Flipping burgers, while not a passion of mine, could reward me with the ability to engage in things that ARE of value. The value is in doing productive work, trading value for value. And THAT translates to freedom.

When it comes to that in the USA, assuming free market capitalism, nobody stands in your way. As it happens, this is not how things are actually done. There are numerous rules and regulations that tend to favor corporations sometimes at the expense of entire industries, so you can't fully realize the kind of freedom I'm talking about even if you tried. You're always at the whim of some regulator or bureau, and how much power they exercise over what you do will all depend on which political party holds the must legislative and judicial power. For example, a Republican majority will heavily discourage the development of renewable energy and deepen our dependence on fossil fuels--because oil/coal/steel/auto means JOBS, while a Democratic majority will symbolically support development in energy innovation by awarding government contracts to unproven startups that will waste the money on corrupt execs and substandard workmanship. I believe that the energy sector could be completely upended if both parties left exceptional minds alone to do what they do naturally--to freely innovate, problem-solve, and create entirely new products, strategies, and industries beyond the capabilities of any fossil fuel, solar, wind, or other currently-utilized energy production. And that's what our politicians are afraid of most--change. Losing jobs. Extinction of the industries that form their voter base. Telling people that the world is changing and that they have to adapt to survive. Convincing people this leads to a better world for them. Getting rid of unrealistic ideas of what "equality" and "freedom" mean--equality apart from the law is not good, and freedom is never free but must must be earned.



mrpieceofwork
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2023
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 717
Location: Texas aka hell

18 Jun 2023, 1:26 pm

OMG!! !

I just want a world where each and every one of us is given access to the same BASIC NEEDS, and THEN we go from there "deciding" who gets "more", AS WELL, a world where there is NO one class of people (the "ruling class/1%/ghouls) who EXPLOIT the other, the ones who DO ALL THE WORK.


_________________
EAT THE RICH
WPs Three Word Story (WIP)
http://mrpieceofwork.byethost33.com/wp3/
My text only website
https://rawtext.club/~mrpieceofwork/
"Imagine Life Without Money"


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 45,456
Location: Abbottistan

18 Jun 2023, 1:31 pm

The problem is that many people still hold on to the 1950s red scare mentality, and think it was some magical, golden age where nothing bad ever happened--where nobody drank, used drugs, fornicated, no LGBT, no pedophilia.

But all the problems they complain about now existed back then. They're trying to hold on to an illusion.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!

Now proficient in ChatGPT!


Honey69
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2023
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,076
Location: Llareggub

18 Jun 2023, 4:48 pm

Happy Juneteenth, Everyone! How will you be celebrating?


_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

18 Jun 2023, 6:38 pm

mrpieceofwork wrote:
OMG!! !

I just want a world where each and every one of us is given

It's the "given" part that's the problem. The kind of world in which people can choose their own outcomes within reason already exists. The only one who should decide who gets more should be YOU--deciding on whether YOU should have more. You don't decide for other people, you don't define anyone else's existence. Just your own. Decide what it is you want for yourself, and then take on creative, productive work to bring that into reality.

If you create for yourself the kind of world where the 1% takes everything and exploits you, then you will be exploited. That's a choice you make for yourself. However, I think the world you're creating for yourself is a world of fiction. I promise you there's no mystical 1% controlling my life.

Example: I do not hate trans people. I just don't sympathize with them, and I especially don't want trans activist messaging in my house. I enjoyed drinking Bud Light. It was cheap beer. Not the best ever, but it didn't suck, and respectable beer for the price point. Bud Light politicized trans issues by putting Mulvaney on their cans. I'd already switched to Yuengling for something different before all that went down, but Bud Light's attempt at reaching me on a political matter didn't win any points. It certainly didn't entice me to switch back. I'm not likely to go back to Bud Light. And Yuengling is just a better beer anyway.

I'm also hearing a lot from other people who switched to Yuengling and aren't going back. I've even heard there's a trend towards people switching to Modelo--full-bodied, great-tasting, mass-produced beer from Mexico but "tastes American" and is NOT Corona.

I mean...here's the thing: You're not going to get beer that's more 1% than Anheuser-Busch. If A-B exploited me to do ANYTHING it was to stop buying their products.

I'll grant this much--let's say there IS a 1% controlling everything. The only explanation as to why AB and Target (I don't feel the same way about Target as Bud Light, apples and oranges) have catastrophically suffered as they have, given the silly 1% theory, is someone in the upper echelons committed some grave, egregious error to offend some Grand Wizard Whatever and were coerced/forced/blackmailed into doing what they did with SOMEONE knowing full well the backlash that would happen. That would mean I'm under some form of mystical mind control that's making me prefer Yuengling and Modelo to AB beers. If you are correct, then you must concede that you are under their control as well and that even complaining about the 1% makes you nothing but a pawn in their scheme to control the masses.

I think that's just silly. Control your own life. Forget about the 1%. All the power they have over you is the power you give them.

Now...if any 1%er adds value to my life, heck yeah, I'll give them whatever money I have. I almost exclusively use Apple computers. I'm on a MacBook Pro right now. Why? Superior music production software, runs Python faster than my Raspberry Pi, is reliable, and also compatible with PureData. It's a solid audio workhorse, allows me to test programs quickly, and allows me the freedom to work across platforms. And with the democratization of technology with single-board computers, open-source and customizable operating systems like Linux, and easy access to scripting languages and nothing you can't learn on YouTube, no question too dumb for Reddit or StackOverflow, you really do control your own destiny--and that's with the 1%er tech companies making all these resources open and readily available.

I do think there are industries that have openly engaged in gatekeeping, and these are areas that have suffered for what they've done. I've been in music and worship ministry in different churches as an instrumentalist. When I was doing really well and things were going in a positive direction at my first BIG gig, I got to go conferences where I was exposed to other musicians and exchanged war stories--because being a church insider is not always a lot of fun. I went to a lot of LifeWay events where I began to notice the darker side of the business. In a nutshell, LifeWay was having all these workshops where they gave constructive criticism for emerging songwriters aaaaannnndddd...pretty much told songwriters to go f*** themselves instead of trying to break into publishing, which is what LifeWay does. I quit going to these conferences when one of their execs in front of hundreds of worship leaders said that worship leaders shouldn't write songs for church--there's plenty of good stuff already available. Translation: Worship leaders are writing new songs and leading their churches away from buying LifeWay products. LifeWay is losing money because people are creating their own music. The internet, along with easy access to affordable arranger/workstation keyboards and DAWs like GarageBand, Logic, Ableton, Digital Performer, and performance software like MainStage, has also broken down barriers that Christian music producers traditionally held in their role as gatekeepers. Producers and publishers, they complained, no longer have the ability to control what songs congregations sing. People don't purchase performance tracks anymore because it's so easy to make loops on keyboards and computers.

So in the area of church music, the 1% has been turned firmly on its ear. This is an industry that saw its role as eliminating competition and controlling what media consumers were exposed to. In reality, this tight control over competition and creative freedom has cost people their careers while new creatives have emerged. And why has that happened? Because music production tools are more available now than ever before while communication has vastly increased among people working in Christian music. They recognize the LifeWay music people for the frauds and hypocrites that they are. And they've made it clear that they don't need them.

If I'm a 1% guy and I want to remain competitive in the industry, I'm going to look for ways to adapt to changes in the business environment. The music distributor JW Pepper, famous among band and choral directors, has an affordable service that allows independent composers and arrangers to self-publish on their website. Pepper has very high standards for the quality of the work that they publish, of course, and if you submit work that doesn't meet their guidelines your work will be rejected. Basically, it just means that your sheet music has to fit certain paper dimensions, that there's a certain number of pages, etc. etc. etc. Besides that, the content is entirely your own. It's up to you to promote your work and sell it, but JW Pepper will take care of the rest to make sure you have an affordable platform to self-publish.

What if LifeWay had opted to give independent songwriters a space to self-publish? It certainly would have kept them more relevant and MADE them a little money instead of treating worship leaders like worthless, talentless trash. JW Pepper "exploits" independent composers, if you want to see it that way. But the way I see it, Pepper found a way to form symbiotic relationships with independents. They take a cut, yes, because it's a valuable service. Nothing worth having is free (Python's worth was destroyed by its creator by making it freely available. However, IDEAS realized by Python are powerful and highly valuable. The creator of Python made an investment--his "real" money came from working for 1% types like Google, DropBox, and more recently Microsoft. These days entire careers are made off Python programming). But if composers can help support Pepper by keeping them from losing money while taking responsibility for marketing both their work and the website, EVERYONE wins.

I'm also into experimental music--and there's no real money in that since the nature of experimental music is such that its value is only recognized by those making it and a niche audience. The cool thing about the tools used by experimental musicians is keeping a mindset that literally anything is possible. In the Christian music world, there are software packages and apps like ProPresenter, MainStage, and Ableton Live (just to name a few). ProPresenter is basically PowerPoint on steroids and cocaine, a total one-stop application to organize music, sermons, graphics, etc. It is also crazy expensive and carries a heavy learning curve. I once led worship as a guest at a Baptist church where I sent a text file to the regular WL to put all my media into ProPresenter. It didn't happen because the WL there (who was kinda old) didn't have my particular song. Well...it was because it was music I'd specially arranged and couldn't be found just anywhere. So I spend the better part of a soundcheck on setting the house computer up for my worship service. It was painful, but I got it done. There were also problems with sound--lack of stage monitoring, my piano rig with MainStage got lost on the house mixer even though it was working perfectly fine 15 minutes before the service started... It was a wreck.

Well, I've been enjoying some much needed time off, so I'm getting back to my more experimental roots. Anything is possible, and all that. So I'm using PureData to create my own version of ProPresenter, something that will integrate presentations/graphics, song lyrics, instrumental loops and orchestrations, etc. into a single application. In fact, I could easily expand my program to include custom synth programs, FX processing, and even networking multiple instances of PureData on multiple devices across a WiFi network to be used for personal monitoring, digital mixing, recording audio...I mean, the sky is the limit. And I'm out no more money than what it cost me to buy a computer. PureData is free.

The same guy who created PureData also made the commercially available Max, which recently has been included with an Ableton upgrade known as Max for Live. It's essentially the same things but with improved stability and a much better GUI. PureData is as bare bones as they come, whereas Max is like the Bentley of experimental music software. But the beauty of PureData is its open source and not terribly difficult to use. Maybe not as easy as Max, but still amazingly powerful. And did I mention PureData is free? There's nothing 1% about it.


Seriously...there are so many things out there that cost nothing, are open source and mod-able, and easy to learn that you have no need to depend on the mystic 1%. You can't honestly make the argument about the 1% exploiting people and controlling everything. That's a myth. The TRUTH about the 1% is they don't know you and don't care about you. You are nameless and faceless to them. They certainly don't have the ability to exploit and control you. If ANYTHING, the 1% provide us with highly valuable ideas along with goods and services that vastly enhance our quality of life. If ANYTHING, we're the ones exploiting them, not the other way around.

I say just chill and enjoy life. Don't worry about the rest of it. Drive your own destiny. Be creative. Seek synergy with other creatives. If anything, the 1% people are cheering you on.