What You Did Today

Bartimaeus · June 15, 2016

All packed and organized for moving. My feet, my back, my arms getting everything into my garage ready to load up into the moving truck... More fun to follow over the next few days.

Edited June 15, 2016 by Bartimaeus

teknoman2 · June 16, 2016

tomorrow we will have no electricity for most of the day... at least they deigned to tell us this time, unlike the water situation.

Rosbjerg · June 16, 2016

Well see you in 4-5 days then

Agiel · June 16, 2016

Looked at our weather forecast, which shows us at a temperate 73 Fahrenheit high tomorrow... somehow jumping to 96 degrees on Monday. Really should get a window unit for my bedroom.

Gfted1 · June 16, 2016

Heh, I just experienced the opposite. 93 yesterday but only mid 70's today. I even gave the AC a break and opened all the windows before I left this morning.

Hiro Protagonist · June 17, 2016

Bought some carpet tiles today at lunch time. Week off from work next week and will do the home office again in the garage. We first moved in a couple of years ago and the home office wasn't done properly so will take next week off to pull everything out and do it again.

BruceVC · June 18, 2016

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/racistrant-woman-caught-on-video-2035782

Guys here is ANOTHER display of appalling racism from a white South African...and you wonder why I want to see real punitive legal measures against this small percentage of racist and ignorant white South Africans

Here is the video

http://www.enca.com/south-africa/womans-racist-rant-caught-on-film

Edited June 18, 2016 by BruceVC

Guard Dog · June 18, 2016

How long do you think someone deserves to go to prison for being an idiot? And, another thing to consider; locking her up won't change her being a racist. Perhaps she should be killed? After all it's the only way you can be absolutely sure she will not say bad things or think bad thoughts in the future.

Gromnir · June 18, 2016

'cause, y'know, criminalizing the racist for expressing themselves will make them less racist in the future, and less likely to raise their children as racists. silencing offensive viewpoints has always been the best way to make those extreme elements in society disappear... as 'posed to festering.

"those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. they did not fear political change. they did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. to courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. if there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence." --brandeis concurring, whitney v. ca, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

attempting to silence unpopular and offensive elements in a society only leads to further polarization and increases the likelihood o' extremist behavior. if the nutters can vent, they is less likely to do harm. furthermore, those elements that the State silences has a tendency to align so that extremist groups with very little in common (perhaps even natural enemies) become allies against their government oppressors. no long-term good comes from viewpoint-based restrictions and criminalization. in a democratic nation, such attempts to silence is, at best, impotent-- politically motivated handwringing meant to curry favor with the electorate. at worst, such misguided policies lead to greater social division and likely increase violence.

terrible.

post the video and her identity. let society punish her the way all such societies has done since time immemorial. don't hire her. treat her with scorn and ridicule. makes her feel like the pariah she is. no violence, please, but societies has always been adept at punishing offensive elements, even when those offensive elements don't deserve punishment. for chrissakes, let society actual do some good by exercising its traditionally petty (but effective) abuses on perceived ne'er do wells.

HA! Good Fun!

BruceVC · June 18, 2016

Did you watch the video? She wasn't just being an idiot, she said some of the most pathetic and ignorant things I have ever heard

But we have now started fining extreme racist comments

http://www.destinyconnect.com/2016/06/10/penny-sparrow-slapped-r150-000-fine/

No we dont need to kill anyone, once we see real legal consequences for these types of comments these types of public statements will stop

You think I'm being unreasonable but I'm not as its part of our legacy that this is addressed

Guard Dog · June 18, 2016

But they will still THINK them Bruce! Don't you see? It doesn't make a difference if they say them... they are THINKING them! Sooner or later a thought will slip out or they will bet mad and blurt it out and the cause of civil rights will be set all they way back to apartheid. Kill them... kill them all. That is the only way to be sure! The only other option will be to create a new government department and remand everyone who thinks racist thoughts over to them to be re-educated. Maybe after years of intense physical and psychological ~~torture~~, I mean therapy you can correct their thinking. You can even call that new agency "The Ministry of Love". Catchy isn't it?

BruceVC · June 18, 2016

:biggrin: You funny

I need to explain something fundamental, I can imagine my suggestions must seem naive, misplaced and you think I'm pandering to some false sense of moral code. In most countries you would be right but SA is in a unique position due to out past

This is what I have never explained, what would you say if I told you that racial tension has the potential to undermine and collapse the new South Africa. Would that change your mind.....now this would be a unique perspective because this would never happen in the USA but please understand it does have the potential

Guard Dog · June 18, 2016

Not really. If the racist screed of one idiot who has no power to do anything but piss people off is enough to collapse a whole country into a race war I suggest you get out now because it is inevitable. If someone says something offensive the proper course is to criticize them, shame them, vilify them or ignore them. Not lock them up.

BruceVC · June 18, 2016

I not sure if I ever acknowledged this but what you and Gromnir have been saying is 100% correct and very relevant to any first world country and most countries for that matter...but please believe me due to Apartheid SA faces unique challengers which requires these unusual steps

I dont mean there will be a war, I mean a populist party could come to power and unintentionally destroy the economy through policies like nationalization

Gromnir · June 19, 2016

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/86008-what-you-did-today/?p=1808651

is same answer todays as before. sa ain't as unique as you suggest. common men, the majority, finally throwing off the oppression o' the nobles after centuries o' degradation and suffering. that is not a new or unique historical story. ill-treated masses, after centuries o' subjugation, sudden find themselves with freedom... and all too often, those freedmen created a new tyranny and a more brutal society than the one they left behind. "reign of terror" is a common stage following most such revolutions. in a majority o' the middle east and asia where european empire builders ruled over vast numbers of people and enormous tracts of land, the majority native populations and cultures frequent found themselves with a choice 'bout how to rule in the absence 'o western devils. the evils done by the liberated peoples in such places is at least partial to blame for why we now see so much violence in what were known as the third world.

in the united states, we got people preaching hate and vitriol every day. baptist minister in sacramento applauds orlando shooting. a minister in gainnsville burns quran and claims that all of the middle east should be added to the pyre. *snort* such stuff happens frequent enough, and it makes for fascinating tv, but 99% of americans is either revolted by the message, or they simple give a cursory eye roll at the news o' another fringe nutter speaking nonsense. the guy in sacramento? his church can't even seat the 49 people who died in orland. the church is in one o' those business parks where merchants common sell used auto parts or do cheap smog checks or whatnot. such stuff is news because is rare and... stoopid.

the US is diverse, and big and has a great deal o' income inequality. we got far too many have nots. relative homogenous societies such as japan and much o' europe got it easy compared to the US. even so, is the United States that remains dedicated to those ideals that john mill believed to be essential to a democracy. in recent years the conflicts in ferguson and baltimore were ugly, but we shudder to think how bloody and terrible woulda' been the long-term cost if either whites or black or anybody with an opinion were forced to remain silent. yes, when the situation in ferguson were at its worst, there were people o' all colors preaching hate. fine. we would much rather have such folks shouting for change rather than shooting their enemies.

sa is unique? sure it is. every nation on earth is unique. even so, certain truths is universal. guys such as mill and shakespeare weren't just talking to their fellow, centuries-old, englishmen.

such enduring truths is why christianity, buddhism, islam and hinduism has all thrived. unfortunately, the truths can be... perverted. we gets radical christians and islamic extremists. and we get democracies abandoning free speech for a false security. gonna choose liberty, or tyranny? is not as complex as bruce suggests.

HA! Good Fun!

BruceVC · June 19, 2016

I appreciate you input, I know you have a deep intellectual understanding of these matters but also you have you own personal journey however you also dont understand the whole SA narrative, no one who has not lived here and then been part of unpacking the Apartheid legacy will understand the nuances and reality. But let explain in a quick summary why we are different

For 50 years a system was enforced on all black South Africans that looked to rewire what makes people human, it was only allowed to continue for so long because of the Cold War
For those 50 years the majority of black people had no exposure to things like economics, history, science and had no knowledge of the outside world
When Apartheid ended most black South Africans started participating in the normal world but from a position where they had no experience or understanding of anything outside South Africa
This is the reality of SA where black South Africans are absolutely becoming more active and informed about things that matter but they are also susceptible and deeply impacted by what white South Africans say ...even uninformed white racists
White and Black people in SA are inextricably linked and depend on each other to transform the country
This is a unique social and political reality and most people dont understand it but we do

Edited June 19, 2016 by BruceVC

Gromnir · June 19, 2016

the british raj lasted more than 100 years. 1200 british civil servants running a nation o' more than 300 million.

want to talk horrors? we can recount ottoman empire rule in greece and armenia and various part o' the middle east. very frequent the turks were minorities in the nations they ruled.

spanish and portuguese conquests and rule of indigenous peoples in central and south america were long and bloody. cortés destroyed the aztecs with ~1000 spanish soldiers, yes? 1521. 300 years later, the mexican people free themselves from the yoke o' spanish oppression. elite ruling class brutalized the native population for centuries.

etc.

sa is different? sure. sadly, it ain't near as unique as bruce suggests.

BruceVC · June 19, 2016

Yes but those examples are from an era where Colonialism was real, my ancestors the British did believe the British empire was ordained to govern the world....the Europeans genuinely believed they were superior

Aparthied occurred after that time and SA was the last bastion of white control in the whole continent

And what is unique is you had 8 % of the country controlling 92% of the population.....then Apartheid ended and despite the 92 % being the actual ruling party they are dependent on maybe 3 % of the 8 % to run the economy and provide a framework for many things

What example in the world is similar?

Gromnir · June 19, 2016

we gave you multiple examples. 1200 civil servants controlling a nation of 300 million? the spanish had 1000 soldiers conquer the aztec empire, which were having a populace of millions. the number o' spaniards in mexico were relative small for most o' the 300 years. and why does colonialism make a difference? were no emerging democracies during the colonial period? mill wrote during the 1800s. is unique in the sense that sa took longer than the rest o' the western world to be embracing the notion that regardless o' race, all men and women deserve equal treatment by the State. even so, is any number o' nations that struggled with the exact same issues as did sa, but they did so in the 1800s through the early post ww ii era. am not sure why you think 1950s, when numerous nations were finally freeing themselves from colonial rule is making a fundamental difference compared to 1994 end o' apartheid. again, the real tragedy 'o south africa were not that it were unique, but that until relative recent in history, it were common.

regardless, if a fundamental human right such the freedom o' expression can be abridged 'cause o' sa's unique situation, then what personal liberty is truly protected? because o' due process rights, an otherwise guilty white criminal would get away with _____, which would inflame the black population o' south africa. so we got an excuse for suppressing due process in sa, yes? what freedom is free in sa if you genuine believe that your unique situation can lead to the abridgment o' that which mill and others knew were the most essential o' all rights: free speech.

democracy is dangerous. we have mentioned elsewhere, and to no avail, that democracy and liberty is actual antagonistic. the founders o' democracies invariably set certain liberty rights beyond the reach o' the majority will, because the majority can be fickle and vicious and stupid. everybody loves free speech, until the majority is offended by an utterance. everybody loves freedom of religion, until a religion makes most god fearing people uncomfortable. democracy has always been the greatest threat to liberty in modern western nations. for sa to prioritize the emotional well being o' the majority over individual fundamental liberty rights is a dangerous reversal o' philosophy.

HA! Good Fun!

BruceVC · June 19, 2016

regardless, if a fundamental human right such the freedom o' expression can be abridged 'cause o' sa's unique situation, then what personal liberty is truly protected? because o' due process rights, an otherwise guilty white criminal would get away with _____, which would inflame the black population o' south africa. so we got an excuse for suppressing due process in sa, yes? what freedom is free in sa if you genuine believe that your unique situation can lead to the abridgment o' that which mill and others knew were the most essential o' all rights: free speech.

I still dont think you get my reality but this paragraph has really resonated with me

Its weird you used certain words but I need to add something you have touched on

At the end of Apartheid we had this Truth and Reconciliation Commission

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_and_Reconciliation_Commission_(South_Africa)

where people in the Apartheid military and security services could come forward and be honest about military atrocities and things they had done during Apartheid because thousands of black people now wanted to know what had happened to there family members...some of them hadn't seen there sons or husbands for 10 years

/

One of the most notorious Apartheid soldiers was Eugene de kock who headed up a secretive Police unit called Vlakplaas and this place was where the clandestine Death Squads operated from, he ran Vlakplaas from 1983 and is credited with killing at least over 50 black people but he was charged for less. Anyway he was sentenced to 212 years

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_de_Kock

Anyway he should never have been released but after serving 22 years our new black government honestly somehow released because he agreed to tell the authorities where various bodies are buried so black families get closure

It doesnt seem right somehow ? In the USA would they release someone if he told people where the bodies are

Gromnir · June 19, 2016

all kinda deals is made with defendants and prisoners. give relaxed sentences for testifying 'gainst ______ or describing where is stolen loot or buried bodies or to convey expertise 'bout how a high-tech crime were committed. 'course somebody gotta approve such deals, such as a judge. roman polanski's deal with the da, for example, were rejected by the judge in his case. even so, am not certain o' your actual question. do criminals in the US get early release for cooperating with the State? is not all that common, but sure. would the US release a guy such as kock under similar circumstances? dunno. doesn't strike us as likely.

however, am thinking we is missing your point if you suggest that the kock scenario is related to our previous discussion 'bout denial o' free speech when that speech might tend to anger the majority population o' south africa. our comment 'bout due process rights is not actual analogous to kock. kock were tried and found guilt and sentenced, presumably all with authority o' law. did the south african courts treat kock different just to get a conviction that would satisfy the south african majority? would you be offended if the south african courts had treated kock different just to insure a conviction? if such prosecutorial shenanigans do offend your sensibilities, then we see a serious problem, 'cause you is clear supporting the diminution o' free speech rights when a speaker is tending to offend the majority population.

HA! Good Fun!

BruceVC · June 19, 2016

Okay you have asked some good questions, I need to explain my point better

kock was sentenced fairly to 212 years but he should never have been released. Many members of my family and there friends fought for South Africa but they werent racist, most of them came from Rhodesia and they fought Communism...the Cold War was on and Communism was a real threat. So the distinction is important so you understand that most people who fought for South Africa didnt fight for Apartheid, I'm sure you dont care but it matters to me as its the principle

But kock killed people within the boarders of SA, he headed an assassins team....like in the movies

We were told as white people " of course there are no death squads, what do you take us for. We are Christians and the enemy is Communism "

So when it was exposed at the TRC it made many soldiers realize they hadn't been fighting for a legitimate reason

So after serving 22 years only he " agrees " to help black families find there relatives he had killed and they released just for that ....does that seem reasonable ?

teknoman2 · June 19, 2016

my father was really pissed yesterday. it rained hard a few days ago and the field where he planted the trees that will grow to be firewood was flooded... the smaller trees literally drowned and their roots rotted. bigger trees survived and by watching their mud covered leaves we could tell that the water level in the field rose to at least 30cm above the ground (13-14 inches)

Gromnir · June 19, 2016

am honest not sure what is bruce's point, unless you is attempting to give us additional proof that the post apartheid government in sa is having difficulty with the concept o' justice. is ok to criminalize folks for shooting their mouth off in public, but actual criminals who has been sentenced to long prison terms for multiple murders and crimes 'gainst humanity will be released just so long as they offer up some kind token to the State? am complete honest that we do not see how the kock example helps you explain sa free speech limits.

we will note that we is mildly curious as to how you feel 'bout our due process conundrum: do you believe that due process rights should be abridged in cases where the majority population is particular offended by the defendant's alleged crimes? if the answer is no, then why do you feel different 'bout due process than free speech? if sensitivity towards the majority and its history at the hands o' an oppressive former regime is a rationale for criminalizing free speech, then why not do the same when is due process?

HA! Good Fun!

ps happy father's day to all the American fathers on board. and to stay on-topic, today we used our impulse buy watermelon slicer for the firstest time. *chuckle* kinda nifty little tool.

Top-Rated-Premium-Stainless-Steel-Waterm

weird looking, eh? am suspecting that Gromnir were the last person in the free world to hear o' these things, and we don't typical bother with gadgets, but it did work surprisingly well for us today. shock.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Gromnir

BruceVC · June 19, 2016

Oh sorry I meant to tell you, yes I did change the topic but you caused it when you said

" an otherwise guilty white criminal would get away with _____, which would inflame the black population o' south africa."

So realize the grandiloquence the grandeur and inimical, insidious , influence of your sagacity :biggrin:

Edited June 19, 2016 by BruceVC

What You Did Today

Recommended Posts

Bartimaeus

teknoman2

Rosbjerg

Agiel

Gfted1

Hiro Protagonist

BruceVC

Guard Dog

Gromnir

BruceVC

Guard Dog

BruceVC

Guard Dog

BruceVC

Gromnir

BruceVC

Gromnir

BruceVC

Gromnir

BruceVC

Gromnir

BruceVC

teknoman2

Gromnir

BruceVC

Forums

Activity