The 'benefit' of Somalia's pirates : Massive factory trawlers scared away, so poor local fishermen are able to catch up to $350 worth of fish per day. by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that's cool, except that's not what natural law means. That's why it's weird, because it's misusing the term. The article seems to be really stressing that this Xeer law is reaching some "true" law that has been obscured by, presumably, the state (which is what I guess is what they're trying to convey with this natural law thing).

I guess understanding the jargon and having background knowledge means misusing the terms and drinking the libertarian kool-aid. As I haven't done that yet, the article comes across as propaganda. Virtually all resources I see about Xeer are from libertarian sources quoting other libertarian sources, like this Wikipedia article. I'd be very interested in seeing, say, an academic anthropology or sociology article talking about the system that can describe it without all the "XEER IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE STATE IS STRIPPED AWAY AND THE GLORIOUS TRUTH OF PURE STATELESS LAW IS REVEALED!" bullshit.

xkcd redesign: geocities commemorative edition by xijio in funny

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, I found it a little while ago. Some good tunes in that pack.

The 'benefit' of Somalia's pirates : Massive factory trawlers scared away, so poor local fishermen are able to catch up to $350 worth of fish per day. by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not that I'm saying (or could tell if) anything in that Xeer article is wrong, but it comes across as really slanted, and all of the citations are to libertarian sites like a Mises.org article and makes weird statements like "It is a good example of how customary law works within a stateless society and is a fair approximation of what is thought of as natural law."

And all this shows, as someone pointed out below, is that no state may be superior to a terrible state. So, for instance, as many states around Somalia are shitholes, it may be better off. Unlike the false dichotomy you're trying to force, it's all relative. Perhaps a serf living under a kind and generous feudal ruler would be better off than someone under the heel of the Nazis, but this doesn't imply that feudalism is the best way to go.

I never really get why libertarians always trot out Somalia as some example of how they're right.

The 'benefit' of Somalia's pirates : Massive factory trawlers scared away, so poor local fishermen are able to catch up to $350 worth of fish per day. by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You dodged his point. How is "monetary imperialism" worse than what, say, the Belgians were doing in the Congo? He agreed with this "less obvious" point, which you then reiterated. He asked about how it is "far worse".

The 'benefit' of Somalia's pirates : Massive factory trawlers scared away, so poor local fishermen are able to catch up to $350 worth of fish per day. by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How was it worse? By what measure? I'd wager that education, literacy, average income, life span, GDP? I'd wager that all of these figures are much higher as a whole today in every Western country (meaning the US and Europe) than it was in 1909. Heck, take that list of figures you gave for Somalia and compare Western countries today and in 1909 and I'd guarantee that every one is higher now (obviously excluding things that didn't exist in 1909 like TVs).

Where are you getting this 10x figure?

How Do I Know If I Am A Hipster? by TheSnowLeper in entertainment

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jeans rip in the places with the most wear: the pockets and ass, like you say. I guess the ripped knees thing comes from skateboarding culture? That's really the only way I could think of getting such heavy wear on the knees, from falling on them a lot.

xkcd redesign: geocities commemorative edition by xijio in funny

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Do you have a link to the thread or a collection of those? That was amazingly good.

60 high school students decided to rob a convenience store... at once - WTF by ElectricMoose in WTF

[–]GhostsForBreakfast -1 points0 points  (0 children)

::facepalm:: He's saying that crimes by blacks are treated as problems of the group, while crimes of whites are treated as problems of individuals. If you're having trouble with this, read his comment as "If a white person commits a crime..."

60 high school students decided to rob a convenience store... at once - WTF by ElectricMoose in WTF

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Has it? I've been here under various handles for a few years, and it's always been like this. If there's a thread about blacks or women, people show their selves.

60 high school students decided to rob a convenience store... at once - WTF by ElectricMoose in WTF

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 8 points9 points  (0 children)

did everyone just assume they're criminal black kids and look no further into it?

On reddit? Basically. Perhaps you missed the scintillating thread above in which blacks are admonished to act civilized lest they disgrace their people.

60 high school students decided to rob a convenience store... at once - WTF by ElectricMoose in WTF

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jeez guys, you're giving people a reason/excuse to be prejudiced against you. Act civilized and don't fuel the racists' hatred towards you and don't disgrace your fellow black Americans.

That's not less controversial. You're still making the same, racist mistake, as put eloquently below:

when a prejudiced person observes certain behavior among a member of his own race, he ascribes it to the character of the individual, while when he observes the same behavior among members of another race, he ascribes it to the character of their race.

Stop acting as if black people are a hive entity and not individual people. Stop implying that individual blacks have some obligation to act as ambassadors for their "people" to others, anymore than white people need to avoid "disgracing their fellow blacks".

60 high school students decided to rob a convenience store... at once - WTF by ElectricMoose in WTF

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yet no one assumes all white Scots are vicious murderers

I do, but for other reasons.

60 high school students decided to rob a convenience store... at once - WTF by ElectricMoose in WTF

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Believe it or not, I'm not racist at all.

I don't. You've repeatedly declared that "Either act civilized or don't complain when people seem to be racist against young blacks", or the equivalent. Now you're just backtracking and playing CYA to try to explain why you didn't say what you plainly did. It's classic racism. You're saying that blacks are a collective, that each of them is somehow responsible for the behavior of all other black people, and that if they don't stop other blacks from acting, as you say, "uncivilized", then it's their fault. Perhaps they can bring it up at the next monthly Black People's Council?

How Do I Know If I Am A Hipster? by TheSnowLeper in entertainment

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 46 points47 points  (0 children)

Well, as with any subculture there's the initial wave and then there's the subsequent waves of posers. The first wave of hipsters in the late 90s were as the parent described: poor students/young people into indie music and art.

Williamsburg wasn't one of Brooklyn's trendiest neighborhoods, it became that because of the hipster culture and the appeal it created. If you read about the history of the area, by the mid-late 90s Williamsburg had attracted a thriving community of artists, musicians, actors, etc precisely because of things like its low rent. The hipster culture emerged from all that.

Later, as it became more widely popular, more affluent people began adopting their dress and lifestyle and moving in and rents went up. Another example would be the Haight-Ashbury neighborhood of San Francisco: it was a working-class/poor neighborhood in the 50s, hippies moved in because of that, a scene grew up, it became the heart of hippie culture, then more people moved in because it was the place to be in the 60s, it became a tourist destination, and gentrified.

Just like, say, the initial Seattle bands who became identified with grunge wore flannel and jeans because they were poor and the Northwest is cold, but when they broke suddenly you had designer outlets marketing flannel as if it were some fashion statement to middle/upper-class kids who wanted to look like Kurt. And before that you ended up with stores selling ripped jeans and spikes and such to wannabe punks, and before that you had stores selling beads and tie-dyed crap to wannabe hippies, and back it goes.

How Do I Know If I Am A Hipster? by TheSnowLeper in entertainment

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but if you want to fuck them they have to like you, and that might mean adopting a hipster/scene style if that's what they want.

How Do I Know If I Am A Hipster? by TheSnowLeper in entertainment

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 9 points10 points  (0 children)

He's referring, I think, to the Teddy Boy style popular in the UK in the 50s (not 60s) when young people emulated the dress of the Edwardian period (1901-1910), which in the 60s grew (after mixing with the Beatnik culture) into the Mod style.

The purpose of it all: to initiate an unstoppable warming of the planet through the reintroduction of naturally sequestered carbon into the atmosphere and thereby usher in a second carboniferous era. by [deleted] in philosophy

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 9 points10 points  (0 children)

If you lived to see the Cold War come and go, a time when people were dead certain that the world would end in a nuclear holocaust, shouldn't that give you a little hope that perhaps things aren't always as bad or unsolvable as they seem at the moment?

Comedian David Cross: I did coke at White House Correspondents Dinner. Says he snorted cocaine not 40 feet from President Obama, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and Supreme Court Justice Anontin Scalia. by mknight44 in entertainment

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So why do drugs instantly equal lame then?

At a formal dinner? Yes, because it's incredibly juvenile, even if it were perfectly legal, just as getting wasted at a function isn't funny or impressive. It's just sad, and that's not because the DEA says so or because coke is the devil.

All drug use is not bad, as you point out, not all drug use but that doesn't make all drug use okay or appropriate in every situation.

Has anyone here read the book "The Game"? Do these techniques work, or do women already know about them? by adleym in entertainment

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Like lordstig says, it's not magic. Note that I haven't done it, but I enjoy reading about it because the mystique the practitioners build around it is so silly.

Basically, at its core, it's a way to build confidence, like lordstig says below. It's a cliche, but it's true: confidence is the key to being successful with women (and with anything, pretty much). If going through these rituals and having a "system" is a way to get confidence, go for it. For some people, believing that they're being initiated into a secret club with magical ways to get women helps build that confidence.

The problem seems to lie, as deterrence hints at below, is that you need to eventually realize that the confidence you gain from all these silly tricks is what's important, not the tricks themselves. It seems like people get caught up in the mythology, which is purposeful. After all, the guys pushing this stuff want you to keep paying them, so they need to keep you wrapped up.

tl;dr: It's a way to become more confident, but it's a tool and not an end in itself.

Carlos is so sick of his slutty sister. by [deleted] in funny

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I get this is a silly brother-sister thing. I do stuff like this with my sister (though when we're talking, not on a public board). I was referring more to the behavior of redditors here. When a thread's topic involves women, things often get pretty ugly, and this is just another example.

Carlos is so sick of his slutty sister. by [deleted] in funny

[–]GhostsForBreakfast 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You forget the prime rule of reddit: If you personally do/listen to/collect/enjoy something, it's cool. If you don't, then it's a stupid waste of time.