Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

"The poor": kill them

"The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 01:03:53 PM
It's time to stop the grandstanding about "the poor."

There is no "the poor." There are varying income levels which correlate with the degree to which you have your shit together.

It has never taken much to be moderately successful. Go to a job, do the job with attention, and avoid drinking and going to jail.

That's about it.

If you're poor in this country, it's because you're dumb as rocks and/or have impulse control issues. Slavery is better for you (and I'm not talking about any particular racial group here, either; clearly Marilyn Monroe and Anna Nicole Smith would have been happier as (anal) slaves.)

Politicians talk about "the poor" as a way to manipulate us. You can't vote against it if it will help The Sainted Poor, or you're an asshole. It's guilt manipulation like a Jewish grandmother or teenage girlfriend. Fuck that. Let the poor die so I don't have to deal with this.

Every stupid stay-at-home useless person likes to talk about the plight of the poor. Who are these poor? Well, fuck if they know, or care. They want some "cause" in their sofa-bound, self-pitying, weep-at-LMN movies kind of lives.

Kill the poor. End the drama. Move on. Some people fail and they're happier huffing gas.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 01:24:05 PM
Pure fantasy.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 02:16:45 PM
Why should we preserve the psychopathy on top though? Can we trim that off too?

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 02:19:56 PM
Modern social problems can only be solved from the top-down, as it were.  It would require the formation of an intellectual elite to alter the direction that the western world has taken, although even this is probably no longer possible.  All of the problems attributed to the 'proles' by many members of this site, only came into existence because the aristocracy became decadent and failed to carry out its duty.  1789 would never have happened if not for the fact that the French aristocracy was completely corrupted, although that does not mean it was in any way justified.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 02:27:26 PM
This is not a good thing to post on this site, but i doubt the poor are genetically inferior. I think one of the most contributing factors is  that on average they consume the absolute lowest caliber of food. Whenever i go by these fast food places i just think of crack/meth houses. that's essentially what they are. most of the supermarket is poison too.   

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 02:31:06 PM
This is not a good thing to post on this site, but i doubt the poor are genetically inferior. I think one of the most contributing factors is  that on average they consume the absolute lowest caliber of food. Whenever i go by these fast food places i just think of crack/meth houses. that's essentially what they are. most of the supermarket is poison too.   

This is patently false, if you cannot provide scientific evidence then it is simply a ridiculous statement.  Differences of caste have always existed and they correspond directly to the innate qualities of the human being.  You blame secondary causes, this is typical behavior of the worst kind of leftists, as if they could ever have occurred without a primary cause.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 02:59:22 PM
I make a lot of money off really stupid and gullible people. If you kill them all off, who will buy my useless junk?! You'll wreck my lifestyle dude!

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 04:57:49 PM
This is not a good thing to post on this site, but i doubt the poor are genetically inferior. I think one of the most contributing factors is  that on average they consume the absolute lowest caliber of food. Whenever i go by these fast food places i just think of crack/meth houses. that's essentially what they are. most of the supermarket is poison too.  

This is patently false, if you cannot provide scientific evidence then it is simply a ridiculous statement.  Differences of caste have always existed and they correspond directly to the innate qualities of the human being.  You blame secondary causes, this is typical behavior of the worst kind of leftists, as if they could ever have occurred without a primary cause.

Why would he need to provide scientific evidence to make a statement that begins with "I doubt"? If you're questioning the putridity of fast food, check this out:

http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/getnutrition/nutritionfacts.pdf

If you're questioning whether this contributes in any meaningful way to the plight of lower classes, I would implore you to research it, as I don't know either. In any event, I read diesel's post more as a suspicion than a statement, especially since he formulated it with "I think".

The only (well, not the only...) claim needing evidence here is yours. Differences of caste may always have existed, but to say that they correspond directly to the "innate qualities of the human being" does not follow. This would mean that in all instances of caste division (let alone a visible caste system) everyone behaved in the way prescribed to, predicted by, or expected of them by their caste, which you yourself proved incorrect in your previous post when you detailed how the French aristocratic class became "corrupted".

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 05:50:33 PM
It is still at the suspicion stage because I haven't had time to research it fully. Most of what the average shmuck knows about nutrition is the 4 food groups, which is just the FDA making recommendations based on which agricultural ties it has and what it would like to monetize most (dominantly the grains). Most people who haven't had any wake up calls like diabetes even ignore the less than ideal 4 food groups, especially in their formative years, so it's below medicrity like cheerios and butter and an apple a day. people are eating garbage. Health to most people is a matter of being fat or not being fat. This CAN'T be a good thing. All those years, from the placenta, early childhood, adolescence, then adulthood- think about how neglecting health could fuck that up, and the outcome on the efficiency of the brain. We  get human beings that are functional enough to be paper shuffling office drones, cashiers, and janitors but are somewhat docile and empty in nature who develop heart disease, diabetes, and hypertension by 45.  yet, theres fast food sprouting up on every street corner to soothe and comfort all lower class troubles, and also to employ these people. Warm and welcoming golden arches. this stuff is crack manipulated to trick our bodies into craving it.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 19, 2011, 08:07:35 PM
It's time to stop the grandstanding about "the poor."

There is no "the poor." There are varying income levels which correlate with the degree to which you have your shit together.

It has never taken much to be moderately successful. Go to a job, do the job with attention, and avoid drinking and going to jail.

That's about it.

If you're poor in this country, it's because you're dumb as rocks and/or have impulse control issues. Slavery is better for you (and I'm not talking about any particular racial group here, either; clearly Marilyn Monroe and Anna Nicole Smith would have been happier as (anal) slaves.)

Politicians talk about "the poor" as a way to manipulate us. You can't vote against it if it will help The Sainted Poor, or you're an asshole. It's guilt manipulation like a Jewish grandmother or teenage girlfriend. Fuck that. Let the poor die so I don't have to deal with this.

Every stupid stay-at-home useless person likes to talk about the plight of the poor. Who are these poor? Well, fuck if they know, or care. They want some "cause" in their sofa-bound, self-pitying, weep-at-LMN movies kind of lives.

Kill the poor. End the drama. Move on. Some people fail and they're happier huffing gas.

I'm reminded of that Dead Kennedy's song.

Your statements are mostly agreeable, but I should point out those who are poor because of situations beyond their control (foreclosure on a home that could not be prevented because of a low paying job, etc) - I see no reason to eliminate someone of good caliber simply because they have fallen upon hard times.

Otherwise, the correlation between the poor and a guilt trip is quite accurate. Charitable organizations do their best to make you feel like shit whenever you don't donate, whether actively or subtly. It's irritable. I'd rather donate to a museum or park so maybe my money will actually be of good use as opposed to feeding one bum one meal on one day which accomplishes nothing.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 20, 2011, 12:53:35 AM
Why should we preserve the psychopathy on top though? Can we trim that off too?

We should, but that is too Marxist for the right-wingers (ANUS included).

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 20, 2011, 12:58:35 AM
Conservationist, I make way more money than you and I'm dumb as a rock - even "rocks," being multiple in nature, have a higher IQ count than I. How now, brown cow?

Also, please refrain from using insensitive terminology when referring to the unfortunate. It's pronounced "the po'."

Otherwise, the correlation between the poor and a guilt trip is quite accurate. Charitable organizations do their best to make you feel like shit whenever you don't donate, whether actively or subtly. It's irritable. I'd rather donate to a museum or park so maybe my money will actually be of good use as opposed to feeding one bum one meal on one day which accomplishes nothing.
Have you tried actually saying any of this to their faces? Say, for example, the bell-ringing Santas in front of mall doorways, etc.? Great fun.

Health to most people is a matter of being fat or not being fat. This CAN'T be a good thing. All those years, from the placenta, early childhood, adolescence, then adulthood- think about how neglecting health could fuck that up, and the outcome on the efficiency of the brain. We  get human beings that are functional enough to be paper shuffling office drones, cashiers, and janitors but are somewhat docile and empty in nature who develop heart disease, diabetes, and hypertension by 45.  yet, theres fast food sprouting up on every street corner to soothe and comfort all lower class troubles, and also to employ these people. Warm and welcoming golden arches. this stuff is crack manipulated to trick our bodies into craving it.
It is fascinating how modern society has managed to make high-energy-value nutrition the easiest to acquire in effort. This idea, and the trule unbelievable impact it has on our species, doesn't seem to get much attention. And even when it does, people don't seem to realize just how huge of a change it is. It's a complete reversal of what we evolved for. Once upon a time, in order to get any significant amount of protein or fat, you had to spend a *lot* of time and effort making spears, setting traps, organizing hunting parties, and running. All finalized by the very real possibility of simply being trampled or gored after an ill-timed thrust. No brains or marrow for you. And now, well, just walk into a fucking grocery store. What more research do you need? You could feed yourself for a whole year on just a few bucks if all you ate was ramen noodles, which have what is probably the lowest nutrition-to-energy ratio of anything, ever. You'd probably get more micronutrients by swallowing radioactive isotopes. And by year's end you'd probably be in less pain, too.

I don't see this as some sort of manipulation, though. Corporations only exist to give consumers what they want. Of course, once you actually SAY that out loud, everyone has to get up in arms and start camping out in city parks because they didn't get a complementary blank check from Macintosh upon graduation from their shitty community college with a degree in Pre-Surrealist Feminized Art Theory as Interpreted via Kerouac & Friends.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 20, 2011, 06:27:22 AM
Let me add to the discussion by saying that caste has never been proved by scientific evidence (at least not the kind of microscope-and-formulas that passes for science these days), but by the direct observation of human nature that anyone unprejudiced and with a healthy judgement can do. You don't need a bunch of statistics to prove everything under the sun.

In my view, the only "poor" that are toxic to society are those that are unable to stand on their own, and are constantly needful of the aid of others (people, organizations, capacitation programs, banks) in order to get on with their lives. To judge it by income is very relative. I bet most people here are either unemployed or at the struggling stage of their lives. I am of the second group, and if solely considered by income then I'm poor by my country's standards, and much more so by those of any first world country. And yet I can stand very well on my own two feet because I have needs that are easy and cheap to satisfy, I'm not a frivolous fool, and I save all the money I can, so that at the end of the month I'm always with cash in my pocket.

As for nutrition, I don't presume to be an expert on the subject, but I have designed my own diet based on my needs, and I have been doing quite well with it. And I buy my food, just like anyone else. The thing about healthy nutrition is that it takes a fair amount of will to persist in it and deny to oneself many foods that are tempting but won't do much good. And this the people don't want to know about, because most have no will, except to do what's absolutely necessary to sustain themselves, their families, and buy the crap that momentarily fills the void in their hearts.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 20, 2011, 01:43:06 PM
I cannot look at those in a worse state than me and think "they just didn't try hard enough". Who truly desires a life of destitute complacency? This is a view which I have seen only in those of youth and privilege; and American poor people for some reason. It is not easy, nor does it sound very noble to admit that your own successes may be a result of circumstance. How can I desire anything but to even out some of the worst injustices? Even in this thread, half-agreements abound... how can you point out circumstance on one hand and then agree with the point? Is it only circumstance in your anecdotes? If some are worthy, what then? Their lot is as the poor fools?

Evolution is not a benevolent positive force, we do not evolve towards what is "good", merely towards what suits continued existence in the environment. Embracing the "natural" is about as much a lie as blindly embracing any other system or ideology. With our intellect we transcend, at least partially, the bounds of our own evolution. It's so easy to speak in pseudo-scientific babble about what is healthy and what isn't; as has been demonstrated at least once, it is perfectly possible to have a healthy diet only eating McDonalds. And yet how can you blame those that subsist on energy dense trash because that's all they have? The answer is to hate/pity these people because they "can't stand on their own two feet"?

On a personal/offtopic note; I have been led here by Metal, by the DLA, by the only place and group of people that seem to appreciate Metal as art on the internet that I have been able to find. While there is a kernel of truth in everything, conclusions are reached which I cannot agree with. The overall picture is negative and distasteful. It doesn't make a statement, it doesn't do anything, it sits there and shooes away those that would embrace at least this art. Is this what is desired? Why do you preach to those whose eyes are open? I don't mean to snipe from the sidelines at whatever this website has achieved, but over the years of reading it (for the metal) and trying to introduce people to it, this has been a constant frustration. If there is an alternative that I've been missing, perhaps I could be pointed to that.

Re: "The poor": kill them
November 20, 2011, 03:23:27 PM
The only (well, not the only...) claim needing evidence here is yours. Differences of caste may always have existed, but to say that they correspond directly to the "innate qualities of the human being" does not follow. This would mean that in all instances of caste division (let alone a visible caste system) everyone behaved in the way prescribed to, predicted by, or expected of them by their caste, which you yourself proved incorrect in your previous post when you detailed how the French aristocratic class became "corrupted".

The caste system is the traditional (and best) model for describing qualitative difference between human beings.  It has existed in virtually all traditional civilisations in some form or another, suggesting that it possesses a degree of universality.  Of course there are exceptions, as there are with any system, but exceptions do not disprove rules and it is an extremely biased logic which claims otherwise.

And yet how can you blame those that subsist on energy dense trash because that's all they have? The answer is to hate/pity these people because they "can't stand on their own two feet"?

The inherent bias of your entire statement is revealed here, it's perfectly possible to eat reasonably well for very little money in Western countries, it is only lack of intelligence/impulse control which prevents people from doing so.  It's like people here have been trying to say, McDonalds doesn't make people stupid, it exists because it is demanded by idiots.

As a side note the people who provide such products are also imbeciles.  They are the 'false elites', lower quality human beings who were elevated to positions of power after the collapse of traditional institutions.