wanderingsickness – Page 156 – Zombies Uncensored

Politics in Star Trek

The NRO has a post that touched a nerve in me – Congratulations to Captain Picard!

This line is the one that set me off “Its (Star Trek) messages are unabashedly liberal ones of the early post-Cold War era – peace, tolerance, due process, progress (as opposed to skepticism about human perfectibility).”

Peace, tolerance, due process, and progress are not the sole possession of liberals. Peace, tolerance, due process, progress are essential for freedom to survive. These principles are very important for free markets to thrive. I’m putting this aside for now because it could easily turn into a book of quotes from the founding fathers supporting all these “liberal” messages.

The “touched a nerve” issue is that Star Trek somehow represents a Socialist or Communist utopia. This isn’t the first time I’ve heard a conservative poo-poo Star Trek as liberal propaganda.

Star Trek was centered on the Federation of Planets. The Federation is very similar to the Articles of Confederation of the United States of America because each member planet retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence. There are state-rights conservatives that would love to have the same rights as members of the Federation.

Star Trek had replicators, not socialism – A device which can produce anything you need would have a huge impact on any society. The concept of ownership wouldn’t have the same importance because everything could easily be replaced. Imagine someone walking up and pointing a phaser at someone in the Star Trek universe and demanding their shoes. The victim would probably say “Is your replicator broken? If it is, you can use mine.” Theft would probably be classified as a mental illness, because there would be no need to steal. Once there is a limitless supply of food and clothing, ownership becomes meaningless.

Star Treks biggest, nasty, evil villain was the Borg. The Borg are the embodiment of all things communist. To the Borg individuality was irrelevant and made each person alike. Under Borg control, there was no privacy at all–not even the privacy of your own thoughts. The Borg sought to enslave others and “improve” them by force into a regime of total control.

Star Trek has the Prime Directive – “As the right of each sentient species to live in accordance with its normal cultural evolution is considered sacred, no Starfleet personnel may interfere with the normal and healthy development of alien life and culture. This directive takes precedence over any and all other considerations, and carries with it the highest moral obligation.” I’m fed up with lawmakers interfering with my normal development and culture. I can only wish that some day the United States government adopts this attitude towards its own citizens. A form of governing with a Prime Directive of not meddling in the affairs of others; it seems only possible in science fiction.

Lil’ Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEd-0rSF2IsPresidents Obama’s approval ratings have been going down. There has been a flood of negative comments about the President on the social news sites. It might be time for Comedy Central to start working on a Lil’ Obama show.

There should be enough material to work with. I see a running joke with Lil’ Obama wanting to grow up to be the President of the United States. Others poking fun at Lil’ Obama for believing a black man could ever get elected as President “Lil’ Sarah has a better chance of becoming President.”

The opening clip of the show could start with Lil’ Obama running through fields in Kenya. The clouds parting for light to shine on Lil’ Obama as he runs home pulls out a box of crayons and makes his own birth certificate.

There is a big cast of characters to work with for this show. Lil’ Orly Taitz would be there trying to prove Obama doesn’t live in the school district. Lil’ Chris Matthews would always be following Lil’ Obama around with heart balloons popping from Lil’ Chris’s chest when Lil’ Obama speaks. Lil’ Bill Ayers trying to talk the kids into setting off stink bombs in the school. Lil’ Glenn Beck always questioning if Lil’ Obama was following the schools rules. Lil’ Alex Jones trying to get Lil’ Obama to play “the Joker” in a school play.

When a fight breaks out at school, Lil’ Obama asks the kids fighting to come to his house for a Kool-Aid summit. Lil’ Rush and Lil’ O’Reilly warn the kids not to drink Lil’ Obama’s Kool-Aid because its spiked with something that turns you into socialists.

Another running joke is Lil’ Obama continuously working on an eighteen-point plan to clean up his room. The room, of course, is a huge mess left by the previous occupant, Lil’ Bush. Lil’ Obama continuously tries explaining to his mom why the room isn’t getting cleaner. Lil’ Obama reminds his mom the mess is really Lil’ Bush’s fault, and comes up with new definitions of the word “clean.” In the end, his mom gives Lil’ Obama a gold medal for trying.

The time is now for Lil’ Obama!

Preschool Politics

This Build-A-Scare video might be just a tad bit overboard. Visions of sugar-plums soon to be replaced with “Christmas canceled because Global Warming will be melting the North Pole in two days.” Global warming debate aside–telling kids that Santa’s workshop will be gone in two days is not cool.

They say children are the first victims in any war. As technology has advanced, children are the first victims in the propaganda wars also. The video below is another example of using children to promote propaganda.

You might be a Aryan, Racist, Birther, Fanatic if…

This video reminds me of Jeff Foxworthy –”You might be a redneck if” jokes. If you are against government health care reform, you might be an Aryan, racist, birther, fanatic.

I’m against government health care reform/takeover and against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. So in Jeff Foxworthy speak – I might be: an isolationist, Aryan, pinko, racist, unpatriotic, birther, terrorist sympathizer, militia member.

The goal is simple; pile on the straw-man attacks until people are afraid to speak out for fear they’ll be labeled an extremist.

Sexual Dislikes are not Chosen

I watched a documentary about pornography – The Price of Pleasure Pornography, Sexuality & Relationships. The film makers claim the film is honest and non-judgmental; to me the main message was to point out that some people find pornography degrading to women. The film used similar arguments used by social conservatives to describe the homosexual agenda, in that cultural acceptance and normalcy of pornography is damaging perceptions about sex and several social problems can be attributed to pornography.

Both the anti-pornography and the anti-homosexual arguments say there is too much pornography or homosexuality promoted or viewed positively in popular culture. The underlying argument seems to be if a certain form of sexuality is promoted, then the sexuality will become more popular or at the least be seen as normal. Several questions come to mind – Who decides what a sexual perversion is? Why is it seen as a sexual perversion? Can sexual perversions be promoted?

I’m starting with the assumption that what people like sexually is not chosen–that sexual preference is biological. If what people like sexually is not chosen, then what people dislike sexually isn’t chosen either. Sexual dislikes can be equal biologically to likes. Example – the “two girls one cup” video was so distasteful that videos were made just showing viewers reaction to the movie. When there were several viewers watching together, usually one person became ill and left the room, while others just sat and watched unaffected by what they were seeing. People that enjoy scat are a very small portion of the population. I imagine they did not choose or seek out enjoying scat. I don’t think anyone who becomes ill upon seeing scat videos chose their physical reaction either.

Over the years, I’ve watched several documentaries about swingers and group sex. In several of the documentaries were statements that if what they were doing didn’t appeal to you, then you were sexually repressed or prudish. I thought calling someone prudish because they didn’t share the same sexual proclivities was unfair; it may not be their cup of tea. Repeating from what I said earlier, sexual likes as well as dislikes are not chosen.

Openly expressing sexual preferences often enough might cause some people to become numb or just not shocked or surprised by it. For others openly expressing sexuality in public might always create a feeling of repulsion. Back to the “two girls one cup” example – I don’t believe I will ever react differently than I do right now and that means with revulsion. I can’t control the urge to vomit; I’m not sexually repressed or prudish. If feces are present, my lunch will soon be present also.

I hope people will not judge others too harshly for their sexually likes and dislikes. As powerful as the media can be, it is not powerful enough to change human sexuality. Please don’t demonize sexual preferences you find repugnant for fear others will be persuaded to participate.

I would also ask you to keep in mind not everyone is comfortable with every form of sexual expression. Just because you can openly express sexuality in public doesn’t mean you should. I’d like to thank all with the scat fetish for keeping it private. I do not wish to see bowel movements become a social movement.

Animal Farm America Style

This commune is Twin Oaks Community. The video kinda implies the commune is something new, but its been around since 1967. Basically its a hippie commune that has survived 40+ years by firing non-productive members and becoming capitalist to keep it going. One of the founders, Kathleen ‘Kat’ Kinkade, died July 3rd, 2008. The Washington Post has an article about Kat’s life here. From that article – “Although she was involved in founding two other income-sharing communities — in Missouri and Virginia — she told The Post in 1998 that communal life had not measured up to her expectations.”

“My mother was disappointed that Twin Oaks did not turn out to be the model for what the rest of our society would be,” said her daughter, Dr. Josie Kinkade of Louisa, Va. “When she found out that it was really just a nice place for some middle-class people to live, she was disappointed.”

This group reminds me of the polygamist communities that claim to be self-sufficient and yet receive state welfare. I didn’t find anything on their site about food stamps, but its a safe bet the residents qualify for government cheese. From Twin Oaks FAQ “Because of our income-sharing, our members often qualify for state-subsidized health care at medical facilities in the area.”

I imagine this commune’s revenues are down just as most business revenues are down. I wouldn’t be surprised to see some less-productive people asked to leave so a younger more productive person can take their place. If you are young and hardworking, they might have an opening on the slave-owned plantation.

Generous? What Have you Done that’s Generous?

The health care debate has brought the movie Labyrinth to my mind, especially the part where Jareth said to Sarah, “I ask for so little. Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave.”

The line did not make sense to me until recently. How could slaves be slaves to each other? Slaves can’t be slaves to each other because it’s a double negative. It gave me a headache just trying to make some sense of what Jareth meant. Now I see Jareth was just trying to trick Sarah into believing he would do just as Sarah asked, but in reality wanted to keep the baby and enslave Sarah.

The US government uses the “I’ll be your slave if you’ll be my slave” trick just as Jareth tried on Sarah. The federal version of this line is, “We are here to serve you; if you’ll just give up X amount of your income you’ll have freedom from the current need”.

The slave of a slave trick is not new; Franklin D. Roosevelt delivered a speech January 6, 1941 spelling out 4 freedoms. “The third is freedom from want–which, translated into universal terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants–everywhere in the world.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt left out the part of how to accomplish freedom from want. The US government does not manufacture anything. There is no government factory churning out medicine or food or houses. You have to be willing to give up another portion of income to receive any commodity. The only way a government can provide freedom from want is if you are willing to fear, love, and do as the they say.

Government doesn’t have a factory that produces freedom. Freedom is something we are born with and we are the only source of freedom. You have to be willing to sacrifice some freedom because you’ll be expected to follow the government rules to receive the benefits you want. If you choose not to follow the government rules, you’ll find out there are real consequences. Declare you are not a slave, that the government is your servant, and you’ll be banished to the Bog of Eternal Stench.

When anyone is offering to be your slave if you’ll be their slave, please remember Sarah’s response to Jareth: “For my will is as strong as yours, my kingdom as great…You have no power over me.”

I am Real and You are Not

When politicians and pundits use phrases like “real Americans,” “real voters,” “real people,” “everyone agrees,” or “vast majority,” there are two underlying arguments – if you share the same values you are real, and if you don’t share those values or don’t agree, you are not real.

On the flip side of there are these words – “manufactured, sheeple, robot, and zombie.” All these words are implying the people in question are not real or have no brains.

I’m setting aside the name calling for now and just focusing on the nullification of others.

This nullification works equally well for both the left and right. Example – At the tea party protests the phrase “real Americans” was used by the protesters, implying there were real and unreal Americans. People that disagreed with the protesters views were the unreal ones. When the tea parties were mentioned by politicians and pundits the tea party protesters were referred to as Astroturf.” Astroturf implies that the tea party protesters were fake or unreal.

This pattern of nullification repeats with every contentious issue.

Side 1 – If you don’t agree with us you aren’t real. “Real American”

Side 2 – How dare you say we aren’t real, when clearly you aren’t real? “Astroturf”

Side 1 – Side 2 has the audacity to say side 1 isn’t real. “That is un-American”

The ball bounces back to Side 2 and back and forth until everyone has been nullified.

Nullification allows the luxury of not bringing up or discussing opposing views. How could you have a serious discussion about something that doesn’t exist? Why waste time thinking about the unreal? People don’t have serious debates about the Easter bunny, so why should we bother to think about the opposing unreal views?

So I’ll go between the horns and agree with both sides; I am real and you are not.

Putting Homophobia in the Closet

Scott Brison, a member of the Canadian Parliament, sent out a Christmas card to his constituents. The card shows Brison and his husband, Maxime St. Pierre.

The Globe and Mail posted the card on line and then shut down their comments section over what they called “an overwhelming number of hateful and homophobic remarks,” explaining “we can’t allow our site to become a platform for intolerance.”

I would like to welcomeThe Globe and Mail to the internet. They opened up a comment section to find out what people thought about the card. A good rule in life and internet communication is “Don’t ask questions when you really don’t want to know the answer”.

This intolerance of intolerance only serves up more intolerance. The only way to get rid of a bad idea is by openly exposing the idea to ridicule. Now that the comments have been censored, I have no way of deciding for myself if the remarks were hateful or homophobic. If I had a disagreement with a statement, the opportunity to disagree has been removed.

Fighting homophobia with censorship only feeds the hatred. The comments on the internet about the homophobic views are littered with dehumanizing adjectives such as troglodytes and trolls. Homophobes can now claim they are being persecuted for their views because only popular views are allowed to be expressed.

Putting unpopular views in the closet doesn’t make the views go away because you can’t confront what you can’t see.

Zombies Angry About Being Drawn into Global Warming Debate

I’ve received many complaints from zombies that they do not wish to be compared to mindless humans. The comparisons are most prevalent in the global warming debate. Statements such as “skeptics are brainwashed mindless zombies” or “AGW believers are alarmist’s cult of zombies” are fueling zombie resentment towards humans.

As one zombie put it – “We have no brains to wash! We are zombies; we don’t know how to organize. Where do humans get off calling us a cult?! The only thing zombies are alarmed about is a brain shortage.”

I asked a zombie for his take on the global warming debate and was surprised by the candid answers.

When asked about graphs showing a rapid increase in global temperatures the zombie had some passionate and unexpected responses.

“Hockey stick bad, hockey stick hurt, hockey stick should be baaaaaaaaanned.”

I then showed graphs showing no change or temperature drops.

“Looks like broken glass. Urgh. Hurts to look; take away.”

Graphs indicating climate change supporting man made climate change or graphs disputing climate change were met with similar pained expressions.

“Make it stop, all look the same. No more graphs, you sadist. I’m just a zombie. How the Hell should I know if the planet is warming?”

I was still curious to find out the zombie perspective on the global warming debate, so I pushed the zombie for more information by threatening to bring the graphs back out if he didn’t answer.

The consensus among humans is that climate change is real and man-made. Is there a consensus among zombies?

“Zombies like humans to argue about climate change because it makes their brains tender. Zombies don’t spend time deciding if something is popular or not, because zombies have never been popular.”

The zombie was very optimistic about climate change based upon the possible scenarios.

If climate change real and man-made

Human leaders develop plan to change human behavior.

Human leaders all agree on same plan. (Zombie chuckles)

All Humans follow the plan. (Zombie laughs up a lung)

Zombies rule!

If climate change real and some man-made

Humans argue and argue about what to do.

Climate warms, more humans die, zombies rule!

If climate change real and not man-made

Most humans not thinking about this. Some humans talk about it; zombies plan to eat their brains.

Zombies rule!

Climate change unknown

If all humans die…zombies die.

“Humans worry more about possibility than probability. There is a possibility life on earth could be destroyed by global warning while the probability over time that life on earth will be wiped out by an asteroid is near 100%.

“Humans could learn from zombie behavior. Once humans discover we have taken over an area, they band together and attack the local zombie hangout. They always forget the natural behavior of zombies is to wander; they forget to look in the cellars and abandoned factories which inevitably leads to a sequel.”

I began to feel a bit sorry after inflicting pain upon the zombie and decided to stop displaying the graphs. There is a strong consensus on the dangers of listening to mindless zombies, so I decided it was time to end the zombie’s pain and cut off his head with a chainsaw.

Stupid mindless zombie won’t get my brain!