in leu of the fact that there doesn’t seem to be any type of moderation,
going on here, I would suggest that we simply ignore him as just being
another crazy person… if we just ignore him and don’t respond to him…
like other crazy people, he will simply move on to find other places to bother…
he is clearly batshit crazy and it doesn’t serve anyone to engage with him…
so… as a group, we get to decide what we want to do with him and as I pointed
out, simply ignoring him means he has no platform to engage with…
with his every single crazy post, let him hear the sound of
silence…for all he wants is some type of engagement…
even being called names will work for him because he is nothing more
then a crazed 2 year old demanding attention…so don’t give it to him…
To the best of my knowledge, the only reason he is here is because someone at KT deleted the Dungeon. And he posted there for weeks and weeks without anyone [or very, very, very few] actually responding to his posts.
Me, I’m only curious to explore with him how and why he came to post what he does. This part:
But he won’t go there. And I suspect with his “condition” that’s the last place he would ever want to go.
This thread conflicts me, on the one hand I don’t care for PolishYouth either but on the other I always feel compelled to do the exact opposite of Peter’s commands.
From my own frame of mind – and that’s all it is, my own subjective reaction – Joker is basically in the general vicinity of polishyouth. He fulminates about a world that pisses him off. He comes in here basically to rant. To vent.
He will even suggest from time to time that it’s really the upheaval and the chaos itself he wants to witness. One or another apocalyptic event in which out of the rubble will come whatever it is “here and now” he would like to see put in its place.
Ah, but what might that be in terms of, say, race and gender and sexual orientation? How about the Jews? What will be the fate of Wendy’s “libtards” in his own brave new world?
Let’s focus then not on what the fulminating fanatics here detest, but on what their own “best of all possible worlds” would look like.
One issue and one context at a time.
On the other hand, perhaps this – – is more an indication that he is actually just putting on an act here. He plays this character he calls Joker only in order to entertain himself.
Every different perception, ideology, or philosophical disposition especially in the political realm has its list of eternal enemies that need to be purged, for the liberals and Marxists it’s the conservatives, for the conservatives the exact opposite, for fascist totalitarian villains like myself it’s… Well, you see where I’m going with that Biggie. Truthfully, I care not about liberals, conservatives, or even Marxists, for my world order to be implemented would require wholesale scorched earth policy globally.[Total global destruction to rebuild new once again.] With any luck you will all wipe each other out to give my lofty ideals a real chance at opportunity. [I play all sides when I find it advantageous to.]
I am politically after all a third positionist, for now I make friendly with conservatives because I too despise the current global-homo establishment, but for me it is an alliance of convenience not because I believe in everything they do, no, quite the contrary.
For now at least, the enemy of my much greater enemy is my friend until I decide otherwise at a future date. Real politik and all that jazz…
Quite the contrary. From my own perspective, this is just another pompous and ponderous intellectual contraption begging for a context.
What is your point here in regard to this:
Or this:
Then back to this:
In other words, fuck all the terrible pain and suffering that will destroy the lives of millions. Including the lives of the truly innocent children. All that matters is your own satisfaction in seeing the world embroiled in a tumultuous cataclysm.
But, again, what would you put in its place?
And, what is of more interest to me is this: what in particular, given the life that you lived, brought you to what many would construe to be a rabid and a rancid frame of mind. The part of “I” that I explore on this thread: ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop … 1&t=194382
Then part that you still refuse to examine with me given my own areas of interest:
The part that, when I bring it up, often prompts you to come back as the Zero_Brains caricature of the philosopher.
It’s clear you’re so entirely mentally dense or deficient that you can’t read into ambiguities when I leave my trail of bread crumbs into my line of thinking Biggie, there is only so much I can say on the internet publicly without (((them))) watching and observing me along with charging me with all kinds of thought crimes. Your problem not mine Biggie.
You see, I try to relay what I think the best way I can that is acceptable for the internet thought police, if I truly said everything I think I would be locked up for good. But yes, under my world view implemented there would be tons of dead people overnight, not that it matters really, with the conflict on the horizon there’s going to be a lot of dead people there too if the current global establishment gets its way.
I find myself in a odd position, I hate all the modern political philosophies [rightfully so] in that I really don’t want to align with any of them, however, the current global establishment is making fast moves to control the entire world where I hate them the most out of everybody, so if there is any sense of rebellion against them I’ll join forces with it temporarily to achieve my own future agendas later on. I have many future plans and agendas too, but before I can act on them the current political establishment needs to die and so I’ll support anything that threatens it.
On the other hand, there is always the possibility that, as with Pedro, you are simply not intelligent enough to grasp that you ought be humiliated given crap like that. You’re not even able to recognize just how far in over your head you are with me!!
Ignore sources from ignorance. The ignore of persons predicated to show an opposing point of view , failsmisarably fof various reasons. These reasons ore-emp justifications to exclude such differing opinions, whether they be prejudiced one way or another.
The suppression of such can culminate in a general represdion, which, euro ically conflates tigether, albeit surreptitiously undef a guise of stefeotipy, that emerges in a typical fashion, usually disconnecting from the specific uniquely different ways that individual personal contextual differences could be recognized.
These basic mechanics pre-empt and general exclusive traits based on Polis, Jewish, Black , or any other traits that could be raised within general categories.
