True Story of the Day

[promethean75]

Speaking of hypersexualized... this new BlueChew thing. This is what happens when hypersexual culture degrades the possibility of genuine romantic intimacy by presenting human sexuality in such a gross commodified form, resulting in romantic desensitization. Men can no longer 'love' a girl. They just want to f***. f****** is everywhere. When was the last time you heard a commercial with a female narrator who talked normally and not like your girlfriend does right before you take her upstairs? Or you could even watch a youtube bikini haul so you can see some chick who's truly interested in sharing her interests in clothing styles and only accidentally makes sure the camera gets her camel toe.

So anyway, now that we're totally and irreversibly overstimulated by crude commodified sexual media and the superficial-ness of intimate relationships (especially true for gen z who were born into a romantically dead world) our brains are not rewarding us for gratuitous intimacy (pillow talk, french kissing, etc) and we can only have sex for twenty minutes before we're ready to move on. Well, the capitalists have a fix for this, too. They will sell you a secret pill that gives you back what you had before they destroyed authentic human intimacy, which tricks your brain into thinking you're in love and don't just wanna f*** real quick (while you imagine in your head the sexy chick in the Bluechew commercial and she patiently waits for you to finish... or, if taken care of well, will actually pretend to enjoy it, making all manner of sounds 'n shit 'cause she knows you like it) by artifically modifying your brain chemistry.

So that's where we're at, folks. Enter the age of designer sex drugs for oversexed zombies that don't really love each other.

[promethean75]

You wouldn't have to sexualize the advertisement of goods and services if a) you weren't taking a terrible financial risk marketing an unsure product so you used half-naked chicks in your commercials as emergency measures, and b) males aren't stressed tf out and horny af because in every direction they look are camel toes and commercials on TV without average looking chicks (they use Sports Illustrated chicks to advertise dish washing detergent even. Oh, and that one with that rechargeable tool brand. Summer time, gotta trim the hedges. Way above average looking starter home house wife with the white overalls and the dirt smudged all over her by the make-up crew folds her arms and gazes out over her lawn like it's an unruly jungle and she's resolved to finally tackle it. Well, they actually made sure she flexed her tricep when she walked triumphantly by the camera carrying the hedge trimmers when she was done. I'm sorry... carrying trimmers does not engage the triceps LIKE THAT. That was clearly a flex. Only a capitalist's advertisement team would do something that abominable, that cheesy. Proof that god is dead is everywhere, mates, i keep telling you. It's in the little vulgar details of human culture.)

Instead, the public would be informed of the product or service and make a decision to purchase it under no psycho-freudian subconscious duress.

[promethean75]

I'm in a city that's populated by a lotta black folks and hispanics, and i rarely see any nice-looking people. This takes a toll on a fellow. Today, i walked out of an Arby's and a Subway. There aren't words for it. It's a sight that sucks the life out of you and saps all hope. You look up and see Darwin hovering over you like an evil demon laughing. One enormous woman trying to put five orders together because they cut staff to save money. Cold french fries are squashed under her Nikes as she bounces frantically back and forth, trying to make sense of the order receipts and put the right burgers in the right bag. Three people in front of me. Nah, i can't do it.

Subway. She's restocking the entire vegetable bar as I'm standing there with my coupon, two people behind me, shifting from foot to foot. Clearly, there are enough veggies already present for at least ten subs... so you'd stock the veggies AFTER you get the three customers through the line.

How much different would these circumstances be in a world where capitalist imperialists didn't import africans for slavery and neighboring countries weren't so broke that natives rushed across the borders en masse to take low wage jobs and live on the shitty side of town and putz around their fastfood jobs unsupervised because the owner doesn't give a shit what they do long as the numbers are right at the end of the month?

Imagine a slower, more organized, and much less violent introduction of africans, free of any coercion, to ermerican soil... and mexicans that were happy in mexico, educated, and with gainful employment. I totally see it. Which means all the shit i see now is on the capitalist class. Which means if you are a capitalist, you endorse this shit. Which means you are now responsible for my nausea. "You make me sick" is not just a figure of speech here, mates.

[promethean75]

Omg the Hempies guy yesterday. So I'm in there giving the stoner kid behind the counter the short course on why pot is illegal and how this shit is fake and i used to get this much real weed for a quarter of this price and the owner dude comes walking out of the back. Don't know if he heard me, but he invited himself into the discussion. Now I'm arguing with him about how his weed is fake and percentages and conversion rates 'n all that shit and he continues to hold out. The stoner clerk kids now drawn into a suspenseful silence waiting to see who wins the argument.

But this dude had bleached white short cropped hair and a Hawaiian shirt on. Mid thirties, maybe. Straight out of Dorsey novel. Had to be up from Florida. Impossibly tan. He's going on and on without a clue. I'm wondering is he trying to deceive me or does he really believe this THCa 30% shit is the genuine article. But then how could you be a drug dealer and not know what the hell you're selling?

I shoulda got a picture of this guy. Bro totally crushed it. Text book dick. Prolly never worked a day in his life. Inheritance, insurance settlement, something. Something got him started, and it wasn't his own hands.

[promethean75]

Talked to the POleece again recently. I like to keep them updated on the gaslighting/stalking. They don't understand why i do this... thinking I'm just some random scumbag pervert sex offender whining about how hard his life is, etc., but it'll all make sense to em in the end (if they make it through).

This time, it's a guy named Keith Petty who was recently found deceased (murdered) who went missing weeks ago from a city in my area. In the ad, Keith Petty is aksed to return to playing the drums. A picture of a fellow (not the Keith Perry found dead) who's standing in front of a drum set.

I explain that this is supposed to be me and that, having been vandalized in the past by some unknown stalker, i am within my rights to suspect that i am being threatened again and that this may be the same stalker.

It was different cops this time, though... not the ones i talked to a year ago... so they didn't know what was going on. I explained the situation in brief again: wrongfully convicted twice of crimes i didn't commit (some sexual in nature), placed on the SO registry for life, my address broadcasted to the world and then I'm stalked and vandalized by vigilantes in the years that follow.

As I'm explaining all this, they're kinda sitting there wondering what my point is... what I'm asking them to do when there is nothing they can do, something the (other) cops made clear last year. So i cut to the chase.

Something along these lines i say (again): one day, i am going on the run because i feel safer doing so. When i do so, warrants will be put out for my arrest, and i will be actively pursued under the threat of violence (possibly fatal) by law enforcement. That being the case, i will not wait passively around to be apprehended but will strike first and very aggressively at my pursuers. I explain all the other stuff again: stuck living with a disgusting cat lady that saves bags of cat feces because nobody will rent to me. Struggling with unemployment because i can't advertise properly without risking a background check. Losing half of what jobs i do get because the customers have kids, and I'd be breaking the law by being around them. Having one of two mechanics incapacitate my work truck after i pay them over five thousand to rebuild my transmission and other repairs... having no legal recourse to sue either one of em. Not having a friend or any form of social life in almost twenty years. Homosexual stalkers sending me texts offering to 'deep throat' me (ask, and I'll send you a screenshot of the text in a PM). So on and so on.

I put my 'warning' as a hypothetical so not to be caught making direct threats and possibly charged. Again, they just kinda fold their hands in their laps and encourage me to call them if i have any more problems with the vandals.

In a strange twist of irony, i almost appreciate what my stalkers are doing because it gives me a solid excuse to do what I'm gonna do, see. My only disappointment will be that the State will not be able to experience its own humility by virtue of its incompetence. Instead of all men with badges spontaneously disintegrating where they stand, as they should, they will instead continue to exist there, picking their noses with one hand and scratching their head with the other.

I suppose i can say I'm happy a few geeks at a philo forum got to be witness to my work, but I'd much more enjoy those with some real rank to witness it. This is why i often call this my war with god. It's all proven to be incomprehensible to contemporary men, I'm afraid. I should have lived two hundred years ago. Aaah, whuddaya gonna do.

[promethean75]

Not the anecdotal significance (of some random joe's life... please spare me) but the ethical, political, and even metaphysical implications produced by these circumstances. Walking proof of the superior substance of anarchy and a complete Platonic collapse of the State. An additional book in The Republic... it could be like Book X (622a–721d): the noble anarchist and the myth of Prom or something.

Truly a work of profound philosophical value. One that professors and intellectuals will grapple with for years to come. Its mock-heroic depth and bathos... something only an Aristophanes or Aeschylus could produce. A tragedy infused with twisted irony so rich it can not avoid the comedic effect; "what was all this for?" as the actors (greek philosophers) walk across the stage... the scene of a battlefield littered with corpses. Smoke is fanned onto the stage by a greek slave standing off to the left out of sight who's waving a rug over a small fire. The greek townspeople audience gasps audibly, and silence falls over as one of the inspecting philosophers raises his robed arm, hesitates for effect, and then addresses Clemeteseus: "somebody saw Prom's penis fifty years ago... and now a great darkness has fallen over the land, Clemeteseus. Men have lost faith in the gods, have turned against the state, and even now march on Olympus as we speak."

[promethean75]

https://youtu.be/cfAUbJgR0pE?is=Q0g2sBhPju3jOyl-

Why is Sam's optimism naive here? I betchu can guess. 'Conversation' can't be had between two classes of people that are at odds with each other. Check this out.

If none of the major world violence (war, enslavement, imperialism, etc) is ever perpetrated by or under the orders of a lower working class citizen without capital, property or political power (except for a meaningless vote) but instead caused by a higher non-working class citizen with capital, property and political power beyond his vote, and, this latter class obtains such capital, property and political power, necessarily, through the exploitation of the labor of the former class, without which it would have none of the things mentioned, then no conversation can be had between the actual two parties at odds with each other... the only two parties involved in the actual, real conflicts necessitating the very conversation in question.

Simply put, nobody BUT a very certain kind of citizen CAN create a problem worth having a conversation about in the first place. When has a man with less than a million dollars and/or some political office caused a major conflict anywhere on erf unless he was a soldier on a salary?

Sam even calls our capitalism a part of the democracy we are trying to salvage. This can only mean he's a bit naive or a capitalist himself.

[promethean75]

"Demand is High: When consumer demand exceeds supply, businesses may raise prices to capitalize on the increased willingness to pay."

Wroooong. Prices should be fixed regardless of the volume of sales. It's a dick thing to do... take advantage of a customer's eagerness to have something and raise a price higher than it previously was. It amounts to a capitalist giving himself an undeserved raise; he's already making it comfortably selling the burgers at $4.65 but decides to raise the price to $5.00

Now you get broad price increases that lead to overall inflation because across all sectors, capitalists are raising prices arbitrarily and not because of rising production costs, initially. But then, when a supplier does this and production costs are raised, the business will pass that cost onto the consumer after already raising the price arbitrarily prior to this when their own production costs weren't so high. It's a vicious reciprocal process that fucks the working class consumer and the value of the dollar by all that unecessary inflation. Furthermore, whatever gross amount of money that isn't invested somehow by the capitalist becomes dead capital. It's like aksing the feds to print you a billion dollars so you can stash it away and keep it inactive in the market. Now the feds gotta print more because some capitalist is hoarding all of the last batch of money they printed.

Somebody check my economics. I think John Maynard Keynes and Maynard James Keenan were both wrong.

[MikeNovack]

"Demand is High: When consumer demand exceeds supply, businesses may raise prices to capitalize on the increased willingness to pay."

Wroooong. Prices should be fixed regardless of the volume of sales. It's a dick thing to do... take advantage of a customer's eagerness to have something and raise a price higher than it previously was.

Somebody check my economics.

You do not understand the implications of "demand exceeds supply". That means at the (current price) there are more buyers than the suppliers can produce product for. At some higher price, the demand would be lower, matching what the suppliers can produce. ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT COIN. At the current price, there are only enough suppliers to produce an amount not enough to satisfy the demand. But were the price higher, more suppliers might be willing to produce product (or existing suppliers produce more under less efficient production).

That's the THEORY, but it works only under some very special conditions (how much of the total market share is the largest buyer or seller, how quickly can producers increase production, etc.). Often (in some cases usually) the conditions for a "free market" to work efficiently do not exist.

[FlashDangerpants]

"Demand is High: When consumer demand exceeds supply, businesses may raise prices to capitalize on the increased willingness to pay."

Wroooong. Prices should be fixed regardless of the volume of sales. It's a dick thing to do... take advantage of a customer's eagerness to have something and raise a price higher than it previously was. It amounts to a capitalist giving himself an undeserved raise; he's already making it comfortably selling the burgers at $4.65 but decides to raise the price to $5.00

Now you get broad price increases that lead to overall inflation because across all sectors, capitalists are raising prices arbitrarily and not because of rising production costs, initially. But then, when a supplier does this and production costs are raised, the business will pass that cost onto the consumer after already raising the price arbitrarily prior to this when their own production costs weren't so high. It's a vicious reciprocal process that fucks the working class consumer and the value of the dollar by all that unecessary inflation. Furthermore, whatever gross amount of money that isn't invested somehow by the capitalist becomes dead capital. It's like aksing the feds to print you a billion dollars so you can stash it away and keep it inactive in the market. Now the feds gotta print more because some capitalist is hoarding all of the last batch of money they printed.

Somebody check my economics. I think John Maynard Keynes and Maynard James Keenan were both wrong.

What you are describing there looks like a homespun version of what is usually called "Keynesian demand-pull inflation" so why you are calling him out I couldn't possibly say. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand-pull_inflation

I am unfamiliar with the economic principles espoused by the wider nu-metal school or this MJK fellow in particular. I am told that Limp Bizkit adhere to the theory that inflation is at all times and in all places a mere monetary phenomenon though.

[FlashDangerpants]

"Demand is High: When consumer demand exceeds supply, businesses may raise prices to capitalize on the increased willingness to pay."

Wroooong. Prices should be fixed regardless of the volume of sales. It's a dick thing to do... take advantage of a customer's eagerness to have something and raise a price higher than it previously was.

Somebody check my economics.

You do not understand the implications of "demand exceeds supply".

Pretty sure he gets it tbh. But he's a Marxist of some sort and so you have to factor in the Labour Theory of Value.

[promethean75]

"so why you are calling him out I couldn't possibly say"

I reckon what I'm sayin' is unless there is something more than just a whim causing a seller to raise prices when there is a demand, and the market/economy isn't effected in some negative way if he keeps prices as they were before the sudden demand increase, the chain reaction that starts the inflation - the price of goods in demand going up and these additional costs capitalists (between each other) are spending being passed down to the consumer - would seem to never start, would it?

If the price of something i buy goes up, either it's on a whim or it's necessary to balance out the additional costs the seller had to pay when buying the stuff that made the thing i just bought at a price higher than it was yesterday.

If all sellers are raising prices across the board, the loss is taken by the relative spending power of the consumers, which becomes less much faster than it should.

Now, if you remove the capitalist from any ownership of business and his capital is going to the workers in that field/industry instead... and this is happening across the board... what's to cause one industry to raise its prices when there's a demand? Just 'cause... or to make up for higher costs? But if nobody started a price increase during any demand, there would be no unusually higher cost.

Are the workers of industry x just wanting more money, so they spike up the price of the G9x7 holoboard right when everybody wants one? But i thought they were pretty well paid. Remember, each worker has a significant fraction of more capital now that the capitalist doesn't own the means of production and all profits are distributed among the workers.

These ideas are from the Promstrian school of economics, btw. Ricardo called us impossibly reductionist and said that our understanding of market dynamics was like that of a Russian tenth grade communist whose being taught a half-baked controlled market theory that would never work.

[promethean75]

They're sayin' approximately 67% of billionaires worldwide are considered self-made, but that this is misleading because they're getting equity grants and favorable policies. The rest of those fuckers inherit their starting capital.

What good is an argument about the advantages of a free market if I've not the means to compete? Not me... i do... i mean the little guy.

Now listen. If there is no difference in a worker being paid by a private employer and being paid by a government, then there's no incentive for him to be conservative. If he would get the same kind of pay and wage increases, why would he instead want to keep the free market, pay outrageous rent, outrageous insurances, outrageous prices of goods, etc.?

It makes no sense for a worker without ever the means to become a business owner to want to work in a free market. That's why there are communists at all. You figure this out either by being smaht or by being a worker, going through it, and then having it dawn on you how unfounded and ridiculous your situation is. Unless you are one of these, you are a zombie or a masochist.

The laborer is the egoist par excellence. He's more of a Randian than you conservatards will ever be. It's called conserving your labor, bro. By god if that's not conservatism i dunno what is. Y'all nigg*z got it backward. I tolt 'chall i'ma marxist conservative, didn't I?

[Wizard22]

The laborer is the egoist par excellence.

...No, they're not. Just because you may take great pride in your craft, doesn't mean Juan and Julio do. How many plumbers are perfectionists? How many road workers are? To 95% of the Proletariat, the job is just a job. They turn their brain off and think nothing of it as soon as they clock out.

They're not Egoists, YOU are! This is why you false idealize the Prole underclass for more than what they actually are. You presume too much from the underlings. Just because you push Sisyphus boulder up and down, and are aware, doesn't mean that most the proles are, or that they are discontent.

It's not toil that causes discontent among the lower classes. This is also why the Bourgeois will never accept your Socialist attitudes. It outs you, among the upper-class. It's your black flag. You haven't yet even begun to understand the mindset of the Bourge.