Man burned alive in LA street.

If kids with criminal records and juvy time can "graduate" from the agency I work at, go to Job Corps, and come back a year later telling us how great they're doing and all about the job they have at which they're making more money than I make, I'm not buying your garbage about "legitimate desperation."

The true unemployment numbers in the US ranges form 8-10% ( presuming European standards) and near 12% presuming the absence of a justice industry employees and their numerous victims. And yes, this is not hard to figure out if you did not choose to be so optimistic about this particular standard. It's funny that the moment someone wants to motivate why they think all the things you believe to be wrong with the world are in fact going wrong you attack it thus attempting to reduce the problem to 'human nature' or 'bad seeds' that 'cant be helped'. This is very much the result of reactionary propaganda to justify the horrid situation that have resulted from the social devastation resulting from corporate economic depravity.

Why are you so focused on what's going on in the US anyway? Isn't there enough trouble and violence in South Africa for you to be worried about without trying to tell Americans how to fix their social problems?

Yes, we have crime by the graveyard full but consider the economic and social history as well as current neoliberal economic destruction it's in fact not nearly as high as it could be. If i were subjected to such conditions i'm not sure what i would do but i can well imagine that what the owning class calls 'crime' might result from it. Then again if your born with little hope, few means and know that the owning class is heavily armed and well protected by security forces you will probably direct your anger and resentment against your fellows hence the far higher crime levels in poor communities all over the world including in the great U S of A.

Stellar

reply to post by StellarX


You must enjoy going around in these little circles with me, as you keep doing it. I don't understand why you've evolved such a dislike for me, but I regret it. I try to get along with everyone on here most of the time, even people I disagree with, and in spite of my opinionated and combative nature, I do my best not to let differences of opinion get personal. I'm tired already of going around in circles with you and I have more enjoyable things to do, like discussing issues with people who have agendas other than proving everything I say wrong. All you had to do was ask - I will freely and cheerfully admit that I'm probably wrong about lots of things and my opinions are no better or more valid than anyone else's.

You accuse me of getting all my information and ideas from public media and the government, and then you quote government statistics and give me a link to mass media (PBS). You accuse me of being a misanthrope with negative opinions of humanity, then shoot down every possible reason/excuse I come up with for violent behavior and yourself state that they probably did it "just because they can." Who's got the negative opinion of humanity here? You don't even know me but you give me analytical reasons for my own behavior and seem to think they prove something. You argue my points about media violence causing real violence, and then say "if those kids watched discovery channel and it's 'violent' bloody medical drama's and or documentaries..." You aren't making any sense overall and you don't seem to have any "point" other than trying to make me look bad.

I will not be so childish as to put you on ignore (I have never put anyone on ignore), but I will no longer respond to your posts as long as they remain so personally directed at me. Although I may at times defend my point of view or opinions, I am not here to defend myself.

(Sorry about going off topic OP, I promise I won't again)

Originally posted by Heike
You must enjoy going around in these little circles with me, as you keep doing it. I don't understand why you've evolved such a dislike for me, but I regret it. I try to get along with everyone on here most of the time, even people I disagree with, and in spite of my opinionated and combative nature, I do my best not to let differences of opinion get personal.

There is no joy for me in doing what i am doing here and i can assure you that this isn't any more personal than it has to be. If anything this is about personality types and more specifically about those methods of thinking that leads people so far astray. I do not try to get along ( that you can do in real life considering the consequences of making your every disagreement very public and disagreeable) here and i while i don't like people airing all their dirty laundry here it's certainly better than spreading this negativity and misinformation in real life. As for differences not getting personal where else are we going to get a bit more personal if not here?

I'm tired already of going around in circles with you and I have more enjoyable things to do, like discussing issues with people who have agendas other than proving everything I say wrong.

Well if your here for enjoyable things you in my opinion missed the point any ways. What people do here can be called many things i'm not sure it should have much to do about joy considering the people and actions we are trying to expose. As for trying to prove everything you say wrong that's impossible if much of what you claimed where not demonstrably wrong in the first place. Your misrepresentations of crime statistics ( not your fault; that's the perception one gets from talking to other misinformed people) goes a long way towards pointing out why you can indulge in your particular manner of questioning the very cooperative nature of human interaction.

All you had to do was ask - I will freely and cheerfully admit that I'm probably wrong about lots of things and my opinions are no better or more valid than anyone else's.

I didn't have to ask as it was rather clear from the start. I value the fact that you can admit to the human condition we are all subject to when so many invest so much effort in pretending or believing otherwise. As for your opinions not being better or more valid they wont be more accurate or of more use if they are not based on better information is widely propagated by the MSM or society in general.

You accuse me of getting all my information and ideas from public media and the government, and then you quote government statistics and give me a link to mass media (PBS).

I accused you of believing the sentiments and 'facts' as spread by the MSM and then used MSM media sources to point out that more accurate information is in fact available if one does more than listen to soundbites and popular mythology. I am sorry that the distinction isn't obvious but it must admit that the difference is lost on most of those that don't do much introspection and instead seek to lay blame elsewhere. I would be the first to admit that people could be far better informed despite current MSM efforts to misinform IF people understood that such was in fact the aim and were not long ago propagandized widely off course. The truth IS out there but why would those who believe they got it figured out search for it?

You accuse me of being a misanthrope with negative opinions of humanity, then shoot down every possible reason/excuse I come up with for violent behavior and yourself state that they probably did it "just because they can."

Well the 'reasons' you provided in my opinion mostly rests on false ideas of what motivates human interaction and are thus in themselves misrepresentations and of little use to do anything other than engender distrust and elitist behaviour and thinking. I suggested that they did it 'because they can' because a very small fraction of human beings have been so misguided ( or have some kind of 'chemical imbalance' ; environmental toxins if you will) that their actions are guided by more primitive hindbrain 'reasoning' ( or shall we say instinctive behaviour) which in large power comes down to power. Those few who have relatively persistently tried to control world affairs are certainly motivated largely by what they can they can get away with hence their reactionary means and methods.

Who's got the negative opinion of humanity here?

Well i feel that a distinction can be made between what motivates me and you and what motivates those few who seek power at all costs. I don't think it's just a question of morality as they clearly do not have them or have found methods to disregard them where the rest of us can not do so without risking serious mental health consequences. If anything i am saying that the actions taken by the very few should not be taken as whip to humanity in general. If everyone behaved in such a way there would not have been many people left....

You don't even know me but you give me analytical reasons for my own behavior and seem to think they prove something.

And obviously i might be wrong with you not really being in the best position to judge my judgement of you. You are obviously free to contest it if you feel i am breaking rules or misrepresenting your beliefs as i have long ago decided to subject myself to moderation ( here and elsewhere) i don't always agree with.

You argue my points about media violence causing real violence, and then say "if those kids watched discovery channel and it's 'violent' bloody medical drama's and or documentaries..." You aren't making any sense overall and you don't seem to have any "point" other than trying to make me look bad.

Sure there is a great deal of violence on TV but as with gaming it has been shown that there is no direct correlation between violence observed and violence enacted as much as there is a correlation between misinformation and misdirected action; basically if we had TV where people defended their homes by bloodily shooting to death multiple attackers society might not be worse off for it but if what we keep seeing is soldiers 'spreading democracy' by violent means then it's revealed that context is as always preeminent in determining if our world becomes more or less violent. If anything it provides a mostly harmless way for some of us to to get the voyeuristic ( and sometimes twisted; slasher/torture movies for sure) excitement a even smaller percentage might have attempted enacting in the real world.

I will not be so childish as to put you on ignore (I have never put anyone on ignore), but I will no longer respond to your posts as long as they remain so personally directed at me.

You mean as long as you can anonymously condemn humanity in general and aren't confronted as your motivations and reasoning it's all fine and dandy? Why is it that people don't inspect themselves for the flaws they so quickly wish to condemn the rest of humanity over? Where has introspection gone? As for putting me on ignore that would prove more about my doubts about your sincerity and motivations than i could ever accomplish on my own. Like you i have never plan on compromising myself so horrendously by blatantly admitting that i don't care to see that which i disagree with.

Although I may at times defend my point of view or opinions, I am not here to defend myself.

(Sorry about going off topic OP, I promise I won't again)

Right, online it's much easier to pretend that we can separate the personal motivations and beliefs from the views and opinions we hold. It IS useful to do so but obviously there has never been and isn't now any way to do so formally hence the fact that arguments always get heated and personal as the participants learn more about each other be it online or anywhere else. That's why arguments are always personal in human relationships and that's why we are likely to go ever further 'off-topic' as we think we learn more of the other person.

But maybe that's just plainly off topic. Good luck moderators.

Stellar


[edit on 19-10-2008 by StellarX]

reply to post by StellarX


Okay, fine, we’ll try it your way and see if it gets us anywhere - once.

Note: All quotes are from posts by StelIarX in this thread.

The problem being that a few centuries ago tens of thousands of women were burned for being 'witches'. How many are being burnt to death today and aren't their crimes at least more often 'real'? Did they have violent games and or entertainment back then too?

I do not agree that it was “tens of thousands.” Where are you getting these figures from? In any case, they were burned due to fear and religious beliefs. I do not believe that a homeless man was burned alive because someone was afraid of him, or because a religious leader told someone to do it.

Some people apparently think sitting your child down in front of the TV is 'good stimulation' and it's nor surprising given the fact that they are both at work and far too tired and worn out to care.

I should have used a better word than stimulation, but the only one I can come up with is entertainment, and that’s not quite right either. But nevertheless, when I was a child we went out to play. We made up our own games, used our imaginations, rode our bikes, etc. Most of the children I have reason to interact with today, including family as well as the clients of the agency I work at, are confused if you tell them to “go out and play.” They will say there’s nothing to do, meaning that the only things they can think of to do involve Television, video games, cell phones, myspace, and so forth. They can’t entertain themselves, they need to BE entertained. Neither can most of them sit down and enjoy reading a book; that’s “boring.”

But why would a capitalist society provide kids with that? Isn't the aim to have them constantly busy earning profits for their masters?

What? Not very long ago a lot of kids had to WORK to help support their families. Children working on their family farms is the reason for the long “summer break” of American schools. Nowadays most American children are asked to do NOTHING in the way of work, labor, or even chores until they are into their late teens, all they are supposed to do is get an education, and many aren’t even held accountable to do that. The goal of the “system” is for the children to be able to be their own “masters,” and I don’t understand what “masters” you are referring to.

Pop culture logic in action. Violent video games = the invasion of Iraq.

No. I never said anything even close to that. I do know that at least some children (teenagers) get bored after beating all the video games they can get their hands on that have them stealing cars, knocking down women and stealing their purses, running over people with cars, shooting all manner of people and “monsters,” and evading the cops, and then switch to doing those things in real life to get the “thrill” back. I know this because they have told me their stories of how they ended up in trouble with the law.

How about keeping your negativity and general unhappy relationship with humanity to yourself?.. Is it really too much to ask you not to participate in this culture of negativity about those 'others' that populate other continents and places?

I have made no comments about any others. I have spoken strictly about what I know of the people in the country and area that I currently live in. Furthermore, I don’t believe that suggesting that modern technology, the modern world, and stress of types that the human brain was never designed or evolved to deal with (depending on your beliefs) is causing people to have more problems, is negative.

Basically you work from the mistaken assumption that people are 'overstimulated' ( instead of possibly claiming that they are becoming misinformed or distracted ) to move to the illogical ( and according to my knowledge plainly incorrect) conclusion that this causing a escalation in random violence. What increase in random violence are we talking about here?

Here’s what I do know. When I was a kid, we didn’t worry about carjackings or home invasions. We didn’t worry about being snatched off the street or shot in our own schools, and neither did our parents. All the places I lived and went to school as a military dependent, all over the country, I never knew even one child who was a victim of violence.
Who can say that today?

... senseless violence and immoral behaviour based on not having your 'needs' met has far more to do with American national security states interventionist policies and propaganda ( you can do what you want to others) than it has to do overstimulation or high expectations. This is made obvious by the fact that violence isn't anything near as prevalent in other industrialized western societies.

I’ve read this statement like 10 times and it still doesn’t make much sense to me. Besides which, there’s another thread going here on ATS that has proven several times over that per-capita violence is higher in other countries than it is in America. Actually, it sounds like you’re just US-bashing.

By presuming that having higher expectations and stimulation levels leads to random violence as if our brains are too primitive to handle all that input without resulting in a chaotic response. Fact is that Swedish, Swiss, French, Germans, Japanese and Korean children and young adults are all subjected to the same levels of stimulation without these alleged violent responses so maybe you can try again and ask what's wrong with American brains/culture?

As I’ve said before, our brains were not designed or evolved to deal with the complexity or stresses of modern living. We’ve advanced technologically much faster than our brains can physiologically change. We have essentially the same brain now that we did when we were living in caves and surviving by hunting and gathering. I also do not believe that children in all these other countries are the same level of spoiled (technologically) that American children are or that they also spend equivalent hours in fron of the TV. I have relatives in Germany with children, and their children do not have video games, iPods, or the leisure time to watch hours and hours of TV every week.

Why would anyone be insensible enough to attempt extrapolation in this instance when violence against others ( with or without 'proper' motivation; self defense etc) is certainly not a evil in itself?

Violence against others without justifiable motivation (self defense) is not evil? I’m completely flabbergasted. If that’s not evil, then what is?

Why would burning concern you so when not so long ago the 'governments' ( usually unelected) of various nations publicly tortured individuals in ways that doesn't make immolation seem very strange? Why will our society ( now that we have gained so much more control over public affairs) go after these criminals with everything we have? Because society is more immoral or more just? So much for that argument.

I can’t recall hearing in my lifetime of the US government publicly torturing anyone. You’ll have to educate me. And as regards the actions of other governments, I don’t see what that has to do with a homeless man being burned alive in America, possibly according to witnesses by a group of teenagers, for no apparent reason.

children today have the same weak impulse control of two decades ago while having easier access to weapons.

Why do you think children have easier access to weapons today? I knew where my Dad’s gun was and knew how to shoot it from age 8. With my parents both working I could have taken that gun any time I wanted to, and I’m sure I’m not alone.

(continued next post)

Note: all quotes are from posts by StellarX in this thread.

When we take into account the destruction of the American economy, the longer work hours and other societal pressures

Longer work hours? That’s the opposite of the truth. People used to have to work on their farms from dawn til dusk, and until unions and labor laws kicked in most work weeks were far longer than the current 40 hours.

youth offenders have become better armed and thus more 'efficient' in causing intentional or unintentional harm.

Yes, I suppose that much is more or less true. Guns have benefited from technological advancements as much as everything else, so everyone - including youthful offenders - is “better armed.”

As for the criminals statistics indicating a far, far higher arrest rates this is hardly surprising given the explosion in policing presence and things such as the 'war on drugs'; what can you expect in a police state?

I can’t agree that America is a police state. I’ve lived here for 47 years and I’ve had less than half a dozen encounters with police. And pardon me, but I happen to think the “war on drugs” is a GOOD thing. Legal and illegal drugs are responsible for more deaths and violence than probably anything else.

that's what happens when bullies reduce one's self esteem to levels where you, for lack of confidence, don't even consider a violent and or disproportionate response.

Whether or not I lacked self-confidence is irrelevant, I never considered a violent response simply because I’m a non-violent person. I’ve never hit or physically harmed another human except in self-defense, twice, and even then I did only enough to get out of the situation.

This is very much the result of reactionary propaganda to justify the horrid situation that have resulted from the social devastation resulting from corporate economic depravity.

Reactionary propaganda? Corporate economic depravity? Social devastation? Where are you getting this stuff? In another thread people are disgusted with Americans who claim to be “poor” in spite of having two cars, a satellite dish, cell phones, and home internet, and here you are claiming we have social devastation and a horrid situation? All I can really do here is laugh.

You seem to have a serious problem with America and Americans. I’m not entirely thrilled with everything going on in America either, especially not right now, but I can think of a lot worse places to live and and I’m not personally responsible for any of the negativity you’re spewing. I’ve worked in the nonprofit sector for a respectable charitable agency for many years now. I work for an agency that tries to help kids - specifically teenagers - and am not part of your so-called “corporate economic depravity.”

Well the 'reasons' you provided in my opinion mostly rests on false ideas of what motivates human interaction and are thus in themselves misrepresentations and of little use to do anything other than engender distrust and elitist behaviour and thinking.

Elitist? me? Nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve never gotten out of the “lower middle class” in my life; I’m one of the working peons and always have been. I get my ideas of what motivates human interactions from what motivates my OWN actions, and from talking to people and taking university classes in human relations and psychology. I don’t agree or accept that they can all be “false.”

Those few who have relatively persistently tried to control world affairs are certainly motivated largely by what they can they can get away with hence their reactionary means and methods.

And what do these few powermongers at the top have to do with someone burning a homeless man alive? And actually, I think they are motivated by a need for power and control rather than “what they can get away with.” They don’t care about breaking the rules, they make the rules.

You mean as long as you can anonymously condemn humanity in general and aren't confronted as your motivations and reasoning it's all fine and dandy? Why is it that people don't inspect themselves for the flaws they so quickly wish to condemn the rest of humanity over?

I’m hardly anonymous here. My first name is so unusual in America that with the combination of that and the state I live in, anyone could find me with google if they wanted to. I don’t condemn humanity or pass judgment. I simply don’t like people in general and therefore limit my personal (real life) interactions with the “general public.” And I’m quite aware of my own flaws, but I’ve never burned anyone alive.

(edit to fix quotes)

[edit on 20-10-2008 by Heike]