Democratic leaders are neither "demo-" nor "-cratic"

Stop referring to politicians as "leaders." The concept of a leader contradicts the concept of a democracy... they have nothing to do with each other. The whole essence of the democratic system is the absence of leaders. The entire system was invented by the Greeks so they could finally get rid of their "leaders." In the words "monarchy" and "oligarchy", the second element arche (ἀρχή) means "rule", or "to lead." Hey, you wouldn't happen to know who was the leader of Athens around 500 b.c, would you? Of course not, because there was none! Because they were a democracy! That's right, they didn't have presidents, nor prime ministers. True democracy is direct, not representative. 

There are only three activities in which you can have leaders, in sports, religion and in battle. So unless your democratic "leader" is holding a rugby ball, a lightning bolt or an AK47 then stop wasting my time with this bullshit and try to pay attention to the language we've all agreed on.

9 common expressions we use to bullshit each other - Part 2/5

3) "Free market..."

Barack Obama - "Contrary to the claims of some of my critics and some of the editorial pages, I am an ardent believer in the free market." 

That's great Mr. Obama, the only problem is that...there is no such thing as a "free" market. 

There are two possible definitions of the word "free." a) At no cost, and b) Not under the control or in the power of another. We can easily exclude the first definition cause you can use many adjectives to describe a market in which everything is up for sale, but "free" is obviously not one of them.

As for the second definition, I'd really like a Ferrari right now, but unfortunately I can't afford it Mr.Obama. You see, many goods within this "free" market have a certain price tag on them that are directed towards SPECIFIC classes and people...freedom which is the privilege of a few is not freedom at all, you should know this better than anyone, the black community has suffered long enough under these "exclusive liberties." Basically, this market is not free due to the fact that it's a slave of monetary inflation, corporate ownership and because normal middle-class people can only afford the bullshit left-overs. Free market only exists for corporations and upper-class individuals. So please, use the right words next time... what you are an ardent believer in is the "corporate market." Not the "free" one. Free market is the market in which all resources are available and affordable to everyone. A market in which anyone can sell AND buy anything...and it's non existent.

 

4) "My God is the Alpha and the Omega..."

 

...then who the f#@k created the alphabet?!!

 

Don't rush to conclusions, I'm not an atheist...I'm a gnostic, meaning that I follow the gnosis (knowledge) to whatever conclusion it leads me. And I can see many valid evidence apparent in nature which support the possibility of an intelligent designer. But my personal beliefs are not the topic here. One thing is for sure, religious people need to start moving away from their ancient scriptures and start finding more intelligent ways to express their faith in a divine being if they don't want to sound palaeolithic. Most expressions in these scriptures do not hold their ground in the 21st century simply because people are extremely more intelligent and educative now than what they were 2000 years ago... It has certainly worked back then, but you cannot get away with quotes like that in the modern era. The same way you cannot get away with stuff like "God created the earth, light, darkness, dry land, the seas and vegetation BEFORE creating the sun, the moon and the stars." You simply cannot say that in this day and age, when we already know through science that the stars, the sun (which is a star on its own) and the cosmos are billions of years older than the earth its self. So religious people, do your God a favour and stop quoting from the book of Genesis. There's a huge difference between believing in "God" and believing in a "book about a God."

Part 1/5 can be found by clicking here

...and justice for some

When you kill a man, premeditated or by accident, you go to jail for murder. If the man you killed raped and killed your wife and daughter, you will still go to jail for murder. The justice system does not consider any act of vengeance or retribution as justifiable and the judge will simply not care if your victim deserved it...

...unless you're the president of that country of course.

The United States government has hunted down and killed Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Housein for obvious reasons. Was it murder? Yes...they did not exactly die of natural causes. Was it an act of vengeance and retribution? Of course...these two individuals have been enemies of the United States government for quite some time now. Did they deserve it? Of course they did! they were the poster boys for every heartless, mass murdering socio-path in the planet. Should the justice system care that they deserved it?...

...No! If you have the right to send me, a citizen, to rot in jail because I killed out of vengeance the murderer of my wife and child, then I don't see why the United States government should get away with the hunting and killing of Bin Laden, which was an act of vengeance for the 9/11 catastrophe. Did they both deserve to be killed? Yes. Were they both murdered? Yes. Does justice serve both of us?... No. The justice system will punish the citizen, while it will pardon everyone involved with the assassination of Bin Laden, even though they both conducted the SAME action.

I am a firm believer of justifiable homicide...and so is nature. I approve the ridding of cold-hearted, mass-murdering maniacs. But I am also a greater admirer of consistency, fairness and rationality. You being sentenced to jail for a justifiable homicide while your government is allowed to kill off all its enemies with no consequences (and we all know that these type of murders are not always justifiable) is the absolute definition of  injustice and social discrimination! If there is one thing we've learned so far, after hearing so many excuses by presidents of so many countries, for killing off entire populations in acts of retribution, national profit-making and plain old fashion greed, it's this:

...There is no closer connection 

than the one between politics and nonsense!

Reality is the strongest drug

The biggest mistake we can make...as individuals, as members of small social groups, but also as an entire species...is to become so much accustomed to misfortune, pain, exploitation, scarcity and irrationality... that we begin to see it as "the natural way." What we so foolishly call as the "reality of things..." 

You've probably heard this expression a thousand times by now...and not just from the reporters, the politicians and the wall street business men who credit all their own wrong-doings to the "reality of things." No... You've probably heard your own parents tell you the exact same thing. "You have to study hard and go to college if you want to be successful son, that's the reality of things." And I'm almost positive you hear teachers saying that to you every single day at school. "You have to be successful in life, make money and have a career or else you're going to die poor and lonely."

That is not the reality of things...that is not the real world.

But what really worries me, is when this same false mentality is applied to matters of social injustice, war-profiteering and especially when it comes to people's well-being. "You have to pay ridiculous amounts of money for drugs and doctors if you want to be healthy, that's the reality of things." "Countries will always control and exploit the smaller, weaker countries, it's natural." "There's millions of people starving to death as we speak, it's sad of course but what can you do? That's just how the world is..."

There is nothing  "natural" about exploiting people's sufferings!

Letting people starve to death will never be the "reality" of things!

I live in the real world!

And in my world...

Fake smiles...

and real smiles...

don't mix!

Fake promises...

and REAL promises...

in the REAL world...

don't mix!

Fake peacekeepers...

and REAL peacekeepers...

in the REAL world...

can't mix!

                  Fake men!                                                                         And REAL men!

in the REAL world...

...will never mix!!

Neo-Nothing

I don't understand the logic behind the term "neo-nazi." First of all...there's nothing "neo" about them. It's the same bankrupt, Mussolini-founded, Nietzsche-influenced, 100 year old ideology served in the exact same manor with nothing new to offer other than what it has already offered...which is mostly death, destruction, racism, genocide, hatred and stupidity.

Second of all, the word "neo" actually derives from the Greek word "neos..." which means "new" or "recent." Isn't it ironic when, the people who support an ideology which strives for world domination of their own, specific race in the expense of all the other "lower" races, can't even speak adequately without using other "lower" languages?

Stop calling these guys "neo-nazis." It's their pathetic attempt to make their ideology sound contemporary and to exclude themselves from having to take responsibility for all the pain and suffering their "daddies" brought upon the world not so long ago. "No, it wasn't us who were responsible for the holocaust, it was the nazis...we're not nazis, we're neo-nazis." As if placing a "neo" in front of a big Mac would make it anything other than a big Mac...

Don't let them get away with it that easily. If they want to preserve Hitler's little masterpiece, fine...but let's cut the bullshit and call it what it is...it's called Nazism...and there's nothing "neo" about it.

All the wrong questions

It's funny how people seem to avoid all the right questions at the worst time imaginable...

Obama declares that even though he is against it, he was forced to sign a law that allows the detention of any citizen suspected of terrorist act indefinitely, without the right to a lawyer or trial and everybody asked "why?" Though the right question would be...

"Who is forcing you to sign it?" 

The same way when a bank or nation goes bankrupt and all the media seem to ask and care about is "how did it come to this?" or "who is responsible for this?" When the real question should be...

"To whom you got bankrupt to?"