The World in the Wardrobe

Hey guys! My name's Aubrey, and this is my dumpster for anything that happens to be on my mind. Fair warning: my mind is a weird and twisted place. Have fun! :)

Also, because it apparently needs to be said, I'm a woman.

This is a fandom blog, with some politics, soical issues, and personal views/rants mixed in. Prepare for a bombardment of Doctor Who, Avengers, Avatar: The Last Airbender and LoK, Harry Potter, Hunger Games, books in general, Disney, etc.

I reblog a ton of stuff, so if you can deal with it, I love you!

veronity: we-are-star-stuff: Who says North is up? Upside Down maps (also known as South-Up or Reversed maps) offer a completely different perspective of the world we live in. Technically speaking, even referring to the earth with words like “up” or “down” or comparing places with words “above” or “below” is flawed, considering that the earth is a spherical body (it’s actually slightly “fatter” at the equator) and flying through 3 dimensional space with no reference of up or down. However, the issue of “up” and “down” does become an issue when viewing the surface of the earth projected onto a flat piece of paper (a map). And the effect of the orientation of a map is more significant than you might realize. As all maps require orientation for reference, the issue of how to layout the map orientation is as old as maps themselves. As map orientation is completely arbitrary, it is not surprising that they differed throughout time periods and regions. The convention of North-up is usually attributed to the Egyptian astronomer Ptolemy (90-168 AD). Justifications for his north-up approach vary. In the middle ages, East was often placed at top. This is the origin of the term “The Orient” to refer to East Asia. During the age of exploration, European cartographers again followed the north-up convention…perhaps because the North Star was their fixed reference point for navigation, or because they wanted (subconsciously or otherwise) to ensure Europe’s claim at the top of the world. In modern times, reversed maps are made as a learning device or to illustrate Northern Hemisphere bias. Different from simply turning a north-up map upside down, a reversed map has the text oriented to be read with south up. The famous “Blue Marble” photograph of the Earth taken from on board Apollo 17 was originally oriented with the south pole at the top, with the island of Madagascar visible just left of center, and the continent of Africa at its right. However, the image was turned upside-down to fit the traditional view. While the orientation of a map might seem harmless, it can have a significant effect on one’s perception of the world, and the relative importance of the different place in it. In speech, we often refer to places being “above” or “below” others. Think of how you would say you’re about to travel to the state or country to your north or south (to go “down” to Kentucky from Indiana, or “up” to Canada from the US). Without even mentioning geography, ask any grade school student whether Mexico is “above” or “below” the United States. We’re all familiar with the “land down under”. As we often correlate importance to relative height (think how a citizens of a country will fly their flag higher than all other flags), the north-up convention reinforces the idea that northern bodies are more important than their southern neighbors. Suddenly, traveling “down” to the South might have an inference much deeper than geographic location. After looking at the map more closely, you may realize that the South-Up orientation may change your perception of the relative status of different places. For example, South America suddenly looks to have more prominence, and Africa and the Middle East completely dwarf Europe. Likewise, tucking Northern Europe, Canada, and Russia away at the bottom of the map, subconsciously takes away their status. To summarize, unconditionally accepting the north-up map convention without at least appreciating the effect stands at odds with viewing all people and places within the world equally. x x So there’s a really cool thing called magnetic poles. And gravity in space. …And the sun. …And rotation vs. revolution. …And the Coriolis effect. …And on Earth there is clear distinctions between up and down. North is always up.  …And the first maps were made my people living in the northern hemisphere, thereby producing north as the top. And north vs polar north are completely different, so questions like these can be confusing. Of course, in the vacuum of good ole’ space, there really isn’t an up or down. Every which way is down. Every which way is up. But on here on Earth, up is towards space and down is towards the inner core. So geographically, you could switch our maps around, but it wouldn’t be very useful. It wouldn’t be incorrect per say, but just not helpful. And if you’re wondering about the equator, it is where it is because of the magnetic fields and where they start— the farthest away from the sun happens to be where they lay. In general, in relation to the sun is where the north and south poles of a planet are. You wouldn’t find the north pole on Mars in the middle of the planet; its at the top. As for Mars’s magnetic field, I don’t know where it starts or if it even has one. ^^^^THIS Also: Pretty damn certain that north is ‘up’, guys. Magnetic poles are wonderful things, are they not?

veronity:

we-are-star-stuff:

Who says North is up?

Upside Down maps (also known as South-Up or Reversed maps) offer a completely different perspective of the world we live in.

Technically speaking, even referring to the earth with words like “up” or “down” or comparing places with words “above” or “below” is flawed, considering that the earth is a spherical body (it’s actually slightly “fatter” at the equator) and flying through 3 dimensional space with no reference of up or down. However, the issue of “up” and “down” does become an issue when viewing the surface of the earth projected onto a flat piece of paper (a map). And the effect of the orientation of a map is more significant than you might realize.

As all maps require orientation for reference, the issue of how to layout the map orientation is as old as maps themselves. As map orientation is completely arbitrary, it is not surprising that they differed throughout time periods and regions.

The convention of North-up is usually attributed to the Egyptian astronomer Ptolemy (90-168 AD). Justifications for his north-up approach vary. In the middle ages, East was often placed at top. This is the origin of the term “The Orient” to refer to East Asia. During the age of exploration, European cartographers again followed the north-up convention…perhaps because the North Star was their fixed reference point for navigation, or because they wanted (subconsciously or otherwise) to ensure Europe’s claim at the top of the world.

In modern times, reversed maps are made as a learning device or to illustrate Northern Hemisphere bias. Different from simply turning a north-up map upside down, a reversed map has the text oriented to be read with south up.

The famous “Blue Marble” photograph of the Earth taken from on board Apollo 17 was originally oriented with the south pole at the top, with the island of Madagascar visible just left of center, and the continent of Africa at its right. However, the image was turned upside-down to fit the traditional view.

While the orientation of a map might seem harmless, it can have a significant effect on one’s perception of the world, and the relative importance of the different place in it.

In speech, we often refer to places being “above” or “below” others. Think of how you would say you’re about to travel to the state or country to your north or south (to go “down” to Kentucky from Indiana, or “up” to Canada from the US). Without even mentioning geography, ask any grade school student whether Mexico is “above” or “below” the United States. We’re all familiar with the “land down under”. As we often correlate importance to relative height (think how a citizens of a country will fly their flag higher than all other flags), the north-up convention reinforces the idea that northern bodies are more important than their southern neighbors. Suddenly, traveling “down” to the South might have an inference much deeper than geographic location.

After looking at the map more closely, you may realize that the South-Up orientation may change your perception of the relative status of different places. For example, South America suddenly looks to have more prominence, and Africa and the Middle East completely dwarf Europe. Likewise, tucking Northern Europe, Canada, and Russia away at the bottom of the map, subconsciously takes away their status.

To summarize, unconditionally accepting the north-up map convention without at least appreciating the effect stands at odds with viewing all people and places within the world equally. x x

So there’s a really cool thing called magnetic poles. And gravity in space.

…And the sun.

…And rotation vs. revolution.

…And the Coriolis effect.

…And on Earth there is clear distinctions between up and down. North is always up. 

…And the first maps were made my people living in the northern hemisphere, thereby producing north as the top. And north vs polar north are completely different, so questions like these can be confusing.

Of course, in the vacuum of good ole’ space, there really isn’t an up or down. Every which way is down. Every which way is up. But on here on Earth, up is towards space and down is towards the inner core. So geographically, you could switch our maps around, but it wouldn’t be very useful. It wouldn’t be incorrect per say, but just not helpful. And if you’re wondering about the equator, it is where it is because of the magnetic fields and where they start— the farthest away from the sun happens to be where they lay.

In general, in relation to the sun is where the north and south poles of a planet are. You wouldn’t find the north pole on Mars in the middle of the planet; its at the top. As for Mars’s magnetic field, I don’t know where it starts or if it even has one.

^^^^THIS

Also:

Pretty damn certain that north is ‘up’, guys. Magnetic poles are wonderful things, are they not?

breakingnews: Texas officials open criminal investigation into plant explosion Dallas Morning News: The Texas Department of Public Safety and the Texas Rangers announced they are launching a criminal investigation into the April fertilizer plant explosion in West.  In a statement released this morning, DPS Director Steven McCraw says, “This disaster has severely impacted the community of West, and we want to ensure that no stone goes unturned and that all the facts related to this incident are uncovered.” Earlier, authorities arrested a West paramedic for possession of destructive device. Officials haven’t said whether the arrest was related to the April 17 explosion.  Photo: An aerial view of the site of the West Fertilizer Company plant explosion in West, Texas. (Stephen Crowley/The New York Times via dallasnews.com) Texas is the perfect example of a study in de-regulation. The next time the anti-government anti-regulation people come up to talk with me, I’ll just say, “Texas. Explosion. And now we see how the lack of regulation works in action.”

breakingnews:

Texas officials open criminal investigation into plant explosion

Dallas Morning News: The Texas Department of Public Safety and the Texas Rangers announced they are launching a criminal investigation into the April fertilizer plant explosion in West. 

In a statement released this morning, DPS Director Steven McCraw says, “This disaster has severely impacted the community of West, and we want to ensure that no stone goes unturned and that all the facts related to this incident are uncovered.”

Earlier, authorities arrested a West paramedic for possession of destructive device. Officials haven’t said whether the arrest was related to the April 17 explosion. 

Photo: An aerial view of the site of the West Fertilizer Company plant explosion in West, Texas. (Stephen Crowley/The New York Times via dallasnews.com)

Texas is the perfect example of a study in de-regulation.

The next time the anti-government anti-regulation people come up to talk with me, I’ll just say, “Texas. Explosion. And now we see how the lack of regulation works in action.”

leftybegone: She deliberately denied requested security and then lied under oath about it (like a Clinton tends to do). Nothing in that is analogous to what Bush did. “He started a war!” No, Congress started a war by vote. Go suck an egg. M’kay…where to start, where to start… I guess I’ll start with the most obvious one. Uh…yeah, Bush DID start the war. Congress never declared war. In fact, the last war that we actually declared was WWII. Vietnam, Korea, and Iraq/Afghanistan were all decisions by the President and top officials at the time. Congress never declared war. Second, the Iraq war is so illegal under international law, it’s laughable. Pre-emptive self-defense (which is what happened in Iraq) is illegal under international law, specifically Article 2, Paragraph 4 and Article 51 of the UN Charter (Art. 51 states that self-defense is the only time you can use force-as the use of force is prohibited in 2(4)-, but pre-emptive self defense is still illegal). Bush (well, the Administration, but he had a huge part in it) actually tried to TWIST international law to suit his scheme. Ever heard of the Bush Doctrine? I’ll give it to you here. So, trying to expand and twist the Caroline standard (the premier standard when dealing with self-defense and international law), he attempted to to extend the criteria for self-defense (so he could legally attack Iraq/Afghanistan) to go beyond threats which are ‘instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation’ to include more distant and uncertain challenges. I’m not going to go into why this is total crap and thank god the international community didn’t respond to it well at all, but if you want to know more, read Michael Byer’s ‘War Law’ (Preemptive self-defense is Chapter 6). Second, the Bush Administration was in clear violation of international law of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and accelerated the US’s efforts to develop battlefield nuclear weapons designed to penetrate  deep bunkers and destroy dangerous chemicals and pathogens. And the Bush Administration actively opposed the International Criminal Court, which could prosecute individuals for using WMD (weapons of mass destruction). Basically, the Bush Administration violated so many international laws that if he steps foot outside the US, somebody’s going to arrest him and try to try him in international court for violation of international law, war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity. By contrast, what has Hilary Clinton done that gives her the ‘honor’ of getting a cell beside Bush? She’s lied and evaded questions about things (like every politician does). She’s been instrumental in some cover-up efforts (like loads of other politicians). She has done nothing that constitutes anything other than what loads and loads of other politicians have done: lie and try and cover up things. It’s what politicians are best at. Only difference is that she got caught. To the best of my knowledge, she herself has not done anything or made any decisions that would have her labeled as anything other than a domestic criminal. The world certainly doesn’t want HER head on the chopping block, that’s for sure.

leftybegone:

She deliberately denied requested security and then lied under oath about it (like a Clinton tends to do). Nothing in that is analogous to what Bush did. “He started a war!” No, Congress started a war by vote. Go suck an egg.

M’kay…where to start, where to start…

I guess I’ll start with the most obvious one. Uh…yeah, Bush DID start the war. Congress never declared war. In fact, the last war that we actually declared was WWII. Vietnam, Korea, and Iraq/Afghanistan were all decisions by the President and top officials at the time. Congress never declared war.

Second, the Iraq war is so illegal under international law, it’s laughable. Pre-emptive self-defense (which is what happened in Iraq) is illegal under international law, specifically Article 2, Paragraph 4 and Article 51 of the UN Charter (Art. 51 states that self-defense is the only time you can use force-as the use of force is prohibited in 2(4)-, but pre-emptive self defense is still illegal). Bush (well, the Administration, but he had a huge part in it) actually tried to TWIST international law to suit his scheme. Ever heard of the Bush Doctrine?

I’ll give it to you here. So, trying to expand and twist the Caroline standard (the premier standard when dealing with self-defense and international law), he attempted to to extend the criteria for self-defense (so he could legally attack Iraq/Afghanistan) to go beyond threats which are ‘instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation’ to include more distant and uncertain challenges.

I’m not going to go into why this is total crap and thank god the international community didn’t respond to it well at all, but if you want to know more, read Michael Byer’s ‘War Law’ (Preemptive self-defense is Chapter 6).

Second, the Bush Administration was in clear violation of international law of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and accelerated the US’s efforts to develop battlefield nuclear weapons designed to penetrate  deep bunkers and destroy dangerous chemicals and pathogens. And the Bush Administration actively opposed the International Criminal Court, which could prosecute individuals for using WMD (weapons of mass destruction).

Basically, the Bush Administration violated so many international laws that if he steps foot outside the US, somebody’s going to arrest him and try to try him in international court for violation of international law, war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity.

By contrast, what has Hilary Clinton done that gives her the ‘honor’ of getting a cell beside Bush? She’s lied and evaded questions about things (like every politician does). She’s been instrumental in some cover-up efforts (like loads of other politicians). She has done nothing that constitutes anything other than what loads and loads of other politicians have done: lie and try and cover up things. It’s what politicians are best at. Only difference is that she got caught. To the best of my knowledge, she herself has not done anything or made any decisions that would have her labeled as anything other than a domestic criminal. The world certainly doesn’t want HER head on the chopping block, that’s for sure.

Just saying

zoann:

missybees:

noahskape:

Boston Marathon bombing on Monday… Envelopes sent to politician with Ricin on it on Tuesday…. And now a massive explosion in Waco, almost 20 years to the day of the Waco seige, happens this evening.

Great week to be a batshit crazy conspiracy theorist!!

I’m not the one for conspiracy theories, but these all seem to happening a little too close together. 

I wonder if there are any connections. 

OH MY MOTHER FUCKING GOD.

It’s a fertilizer plant. It’s loaded with chemicals. Coincidence in timing to Boston and ricin…
Most fertilizer consists of Nitrogen, Potassium and Phosphorus. These are chemicals. In the right combination and in the right conditions, this can be a dangerous mix. Then there is organic fertilizer which is basically manure. Pig manure produces methane gas, another explosive chemical.

Oh, I know. Just a coincidence this happened.

They actually said why it happened. Like, it started out as a small fire, and then they sprayed water on…ammonia nitrate or something, and it blew up. Nothing suspicious about it. Just a mistake…a very very big and costly mistake.

The other two though…are just the least bit suspicious.

Why is it so difficult a concept that if the government spends more money, they need to increase taxes?

Taxes are the only source of income our government has. THE ONLY soucre, unless you want us to keep borrowing from other countries and getting even more in debt.

You know that the only war that’s completely paid for is WWI? And you want to know how that happened? Wilson issued bonds and RAISED THE FREAKING TAXES!

Yes, taxes are awful and they take money out of our pockets, but I’d rather pay an extra thousand or two than have our government and key services COLLASPE due to lack of money, or huge budget cuts effectively make everything impossible.

ohokaybien: girljanitor: bashi-bazouk: peppercyanide: sisterwolf: via I never even c wow How did they get away with that AH I LOVE THIS What do you mean how did they get away with it? History isn’t one straight line progressing towards a liberal society. Look how much Americans attitudes have changed between 1980 and today. 1980 was the first time most very religious people voted, they abstained before that at the behest of their churches. Now they dictate policy at every election. In my family photo album there are pictures from the 20s of a woman called ‘uncle bob’. She dressed in men’s clothing, and had a ‘companion’. This was a rough industrial town, they were working class, nobody cared. It was her business. This is why politics is important - the moment you think everything is better today than it was in the past, you let other people take control of the direction society goes in - with you sitting back presuming we’re going forwards. reblogging for the commentary ^^

ohokaybien:

girljanitor:

bashi-bazouk:

peppercyanide:

sisterwolf:

via

I never even

c

wow

How did they get away with that

AH

I LOVE THIS

What do you mean how did they get away with it?

History isn’t one straight line progressing towards a liberal society.

Look how much Americans attitudes have changed between 1980 and today. 1980 was the first time most very religious people voted, they abstained before that at the behest of their churches. Now they dictate policy at every election.

In my family photo album there are pictures from the 20s of a woman called ‘uncle bob’. She dressed in men’s clothing, and had a ‘companion’. This was a rough industrial town, they were working class, nobody cared. It was her business.

This is why politics is important - the moment you think everything is better today than it was in the past, you let other people take control of the direction society goes in - with you sitting back presuming we’re going forwards.

reblogging for the commentary

^^

I’m too tired right now and just trying to reblog all the tabs I have open so I can go to bed…

but someone remind me tomorrow to do my post on morality and politics and why being racist/sexist/homophobic/whatever does not negate the good things you’ve done for society.

Aka, why each of your actions should be viewed independently from each other.

Someone remind me, because I’ll forget.

(also why being ethical does not equal being moral, and why morality and ethics are NOT the same thing. I’ve been wanting to use my lawyer analogy for some time.)

caladri: fantastic-nonsense: Provisional Rites for Same-Sex Blessings in the Episcopal Church. Note: This is not a marriage rite, because clergy are agents of the state, and therefore cannot legalize what is not legal. So this is a blessing of a covenantal relationship instead. (Basically the same concept, but different language and a different rite.) That is a ridiculous apology for it, and wrong; if that were the case, it would have been approved to be used as a marriage rite in locales where there are no such restrictions on marriage. In part, it is being used as leverage by those on the religious side who have no particular sacramental theology, and view the sacrament of marriage as just a matter of blessing.  They want to cede the idea of ‘marriage’ to the state, and bless committed relationships.  A sort of mirror image of those who want to have the state recognize civil unions, but defer to religious groups for ‘marriage’ as understood sacramentally. That was perhaps not the primary agenda of the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, but it certainly being embraced proudly by those who want the Church to stop viewing marriage as a sacrament.  And then there’s many people who are happily offering up all kinds of crappy reasons why we should in the interim bless couples that the Church doesn’t recognize as one man and one woman, and should marry couples otherwise.  It isn’t a distinction without a difference, and it isn’t just about what is legally-permitted.  Anyone who tells you it’s exactly the same as sacramental marriage is selling you either bullshit or a change to the sacramental theology of the Church (what little still exists.) Uh…what? Of course it’s not the same as ‘marriage.’ That’s why it’s not called ‘marriage.’ No one is attempting to label it as gay marriage. It’s a ‘covenental relationship’. It’s a PROVISIONAL rite; it’s not final. It won’t BE final until the next General Convention in three years, where they’ll review what works and what doesn’t, revise it, and put it in the books. By that time, it may very well BE gay marriage, if the United States can get its act together. There are ten states that currently recognize ‘gay marriage.’ The Episcopal Church as a whole cannot use marriage to marry gay people because the majority does not recognize it. The Church has to be unified in what they do; they cannot do one thing in some places and another in others. They have to choose. So they devised a way around current politics. Marriage is still a sacrament, and as far as I know, anyone that actually wants marriage off the sacraments list is a radical WAY far out there. You’d have MUCH more luck convincing me that people are trying to get Confirmation off the books (which, they are). There’s a reason there are seven: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Marriage, Reconciliation, Anointing of the Sick (Unction), and Holy Orders. There is absolutely no way they’re going to remove marriage from the Sacraments list, and anyone who thinks so is crazy. Frankly, the ‘covenental relationship’ liturgy is much more beautiful and meaningful (in my opinion) than the actual marriage rite. We went over it in Adult Inquirer’s class. We actually talked about the possibility of them integrating the marriage rite with the covenental relationship liturgy to make a revised marriage liturgy. And there are ways for the church to marry people otherwise. Blessing of a relationship (for people that went and got married by a keeper of the peace and then wanted that marriage blessed by the church), etc. This is not being used as ‘leverage.’ It’s a provisional rite written so that the Episcopal church could recognize and bless same-sex couples without being in violation of the state law. IT’S POLITICS. You are a conspiracy theorist, aren’t you?

caladri:

fantastic-nonsense:

Provisional Rites for Same-Sex Blessings in the Episcopal Church.

Note: This is not a marriage rite, because clergy are agents of the state, and therefore cannot legalize what is not legal. So this is a blessing of a covenantal relationship instead. (Basically the same concept, but different language and a different rite.)

That is a ridiculous apology for it, and wrong; if that were the case, it would have been approved to be used as a marriage rite in locales where there are no such restrictions on marriage.

In part, it is being used as leverage by those on the religious side who have no particular sacramental theology, and view the sacrament of marriage as just a matter of blessing.  They want to cede the idea of ‘marriage’ to the state, and bless committed relationships.  A sort of mirror image of those who want to have the state recognize civil unions, but defer to religious groups for ‘marriage’ as understood sacramentally.

That was perhaps not the primary agenda of the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, but it certainly being embraced proudly by those who want the Church to stop viewing marriage as a sacrament.  And then there’s many people who are happily offering up all kinds of crappy reasons why we should in the interim bless couples that the Church doesn’t recognize as one man and one woman, and should marry couples otherwise.  It isn’t a distinction without a difference, and it isn’t just about what is legally-permitted.  Anyone who tells you it’s exactly the same as sacramental marriage is selling you either bullshit or a change to the sacramental theology of the Church (what little still exists.)

Uh…what?

Of course it’s not the same as ‘marriage.’ That’s why it’s not called ‘marriage.’ No one is attempting to label it as gay marriage. It’s a ‘covenental relationship’. It’s a PROVISIONAL rite; it’s not final. It won’t BE final until the next General Convention in three years, where they’ll review what works and what doesn’t, revise it, and put it in the books. By that time, it may very well BE gay marriage, if the United States can get its act together.

There are ten states that currently recognize ‘gay marriage.’ The Episcopal Church as a whole cannot use marriage to marry gay people because the majority does not recognize it. The Church has to be unified in what they do; they cannot do one thing in some places and another in others. They have to choose. So they devised a way around current politics.

Marriage is still a sacrament, and as far as I know, anyone that actually wants marriage off the sacraments list is a radical WAY far out there. You’d have MUCH more luck convincing me that people are trying to get Confirmation off the books (which, they are). There’s a reason there are seven: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Marriage, Reconciliation, Anointing of the Sick (Unction), and Holy Orders. There is absolutely no way they’re going to remove marriage from the Sacraments list, and anyone who thinks so is crazy.

Frankly, the ‘covenental relationship’ liturgy is much more beautiful and meaningful (in my opinion) than the actual marriage rite. We went over it in Adult Inquirer’s class. We actually talked about the possibility of them integrating the marriage rite with the covenental relationship liturgy to make a revised marriage liturgy.

And there are ways for the church to marry people otherwise. Blessing of a relationship (for people that went and got married by a keeper of the peace and then wanted that marriage blessed by the church), etc.

This is not being used as ‘leverage.’ It’s a provisional rite written so that the Episcopal church could recognize and bless same-sex couples without being in violation of the state law. IT’S POLITICS.

You are a conspiracy theorist, aren’t you?

i-r-cruisin-toyota-fj: heroinfriday: i-r-cruisin-toyota-fj: weiss-the-immaculate: conservawhat: canadian-liberal: conservawhat: vxxcenothing: And even if it were, it would still create unending suffering.But you know this. anybody who doesnt think capitalism works is an idiot Anyone who isn’t open to other ideas is a conservative im open to anything you wanna tell me, you just havnt given me any good ideas. good try with the propaganda though Have these “green” people seen the percentages of famous forests used for logging? It’s like 2% logging, 65% cattle ranching. Or the fact that capitalist innovation has replaced lots of paper with ultra-thin monitors? Do you want to carry around slides, charts and CVs/resumes? No. You hand someone a tablet or bust out an ultrabook. Also, I’d LOVE to see central planning handle resources better than a price system. Not to mention the fact that the price system for natural resources in America has been badly mangled by subsidies and “initiatives” so it’s no wonder that justice is being avoided. Information is key. The fact that, due to property and investment, people are able to transport goods long distances via battery-powered cars instead of roping up a load of donkeys - is that for the worse? And I suppose we’re going to ignore technological innovations only feasible in advanced, modern societies such as synthetic trees and actual solutions - instead of a sense of collective guilt. But I’m guessing all this will go ignored, because it’s much easier to just say “DA CORPORASHUNS WANT TO KILL EVERY1 AND POISON THE WORLD” Hurr anyone who isn’t open to other ideas is a conservative hurr hurr. >Isn’t open to capitalism. Seems legit. HOLY FUCK SO TRUE MY HEAD IS SPINNING. Capitalism ravages, capitalism pillages, polutes, hacks, slashes, devours, burns, poisons, poaches, fences off, constricts and paves over everything we need on this planet to survive, It also built the laptop This typed on, But the short term pros, are drops incomparison to the ocean of cons it has inflicted on this planet. -Morgan And in other news, communism has killed over a hundred million people, and has failed everywhere it was implemented.  Capitalism built the computer you are bitching from.  Now, excuse me while I answer a text from my evil greedy capitalist iPhone and take a bite from my evil greedy capitalist milky way bar.  Have a nice day and God bless. And here we go again. Alright, let me explain something. A lot of people confuse socialism and communism. Socialism is an economic system, while communism is a social/political system. True communism has never existed. You’re thinking of Russian Communism (which is what it’s called). SOCIALISM is the economic system that has actually been incredibly successful. Communism is a social system twisted to include an economic system. Most of the modern world is actually socialist, mixed with democratic governments and tendencies. That computer? Unless you have an Apple, a Dell, or a HP, not American. Europe, while it has capitalist tendencies, is socialist/democratic mix. Ask anyone who lives in Scandinavia. Or anywhere with free education and standardized health care and a buttload of other things we don’t have because every single time America hears ‘socialist’, it goes ‘EVIL! COMMUNIST! DIE!’ Our ‘awesome capitalism’? Yeah, it’s good and all, and worked awesomely once upon a time, but our country is kinda DYING right now, and the only way to save it is going to get out of our xenophobia and try something NEW, because what we’re doing OBVIOUSLY isn’t working.

i-r-cruisin-toyota-fj:

heroinfriday:

i-r-cruisin-toyota-fj:

weiss-the-immaculate:

conservawhat:

canadian-liberal:

conservawhat:

vxxcenothing:

And even if it were, it would still create unending suffering.

But you know this.

anybody who doesnt think capitalism works is an idiot

Anyone who isn’t open to other ideas is a conservative

im open to anything you wanna tell me, you just havnt given me any good ideas. good try with the propaganda though

Have these “green” people seen the percentages of famous forests used for logging? It’s like 2% logging, 65% cattle ranching. Or the fact that capitalist innovation has replaced lots of paper with ultra-thin monitors? Do you want to carry around slides, charts and CVs/resumes? No. You hand someone a tablet or bust out an ultrabook.

Also, I’d LOVE to see central planning handle resources better than a price system. Not to mention the fact that the price system for natural resources in America has been badly mangled by subsidies and “initiatives” so it’s no wonder that justice is being avoided. Information is key.

The fact that, due to property and investment, people are able to transport goods long distances via battery-powered cars instead of roping up a load of donkeys - is that for the worse?

And I suppose we’re going to ignore technological innovations only feasible in advanced, modern societies such as synthetic trees and actual solutions - instead of a sense of collective guilt.

But I’m guessing all this will go ignored, because it’s much easier to just say “DA CORPORASHUNS WANT TO KILL EVERY1 AND POISON THE WORLD”

Hurr anyone who isn’t open to other ideas is a conservative hurr hurr.

>Isn’t open to capitalism.

Seems legit.

HOLY FUCK SO TRUE MY HEAD IS SPINNING. Capitalism ravages, capitalism pillages, polutes, hacks, slashes, devours, burns, poisons, poaches, fences off, constricts and paves over everything we need on this planet to survive, It also built the laptop This typed on, But the short term pros, are drops incomparison to the ocean of cons it has inflicted on this planet.

-Morgan

And in other news, communism has killed over a hundred million people, and has failed everywhere it was implemented.  Capitalism built the computer you are bitching from.  Now, excuse me while I answer a text from my evil greedy capitalist iPhone and take a bite from my evil greedy capitalist milky way bar.  Have a nice day and God bless.

And here we go again. Alright, let me explain something.

A lot of people confuse socialism and communism. Socialism is an economic system, while communism is a social/political system. True communism has never existed. You’re thinking of Russian Communism (which is what it’s called). SOCIALISM is the economic system that has actually been incredibly successful. Communism is a social system twisted to include an economic system.

Most of the modern world is actually socialist, mixed with democratic governments and tendencies.

That computer? Unless you have an Apple, a Dell, or a HP, not American. Europe, while it has capitalist tendencies, is socialist/democratic mix. Ask anyone who lives in Scandinavia. Or anywhere with free education and standardized health care and a buttload of other things we don’t have because every single time America hears ‘socialist’, it goes ‘EVIL! COMMUNIST! DIE!’

Our ‘awesome capitalism’? Yeah, it’s good and all, and worked awesomely once upon a time, but our country is kinda DYING right now, and the only way to save it is going to get out of our xenophobia and try something NEW, because what we’re doing OBVIOUSLY isn’t working.

(Source: wont-die-wondering)