No Room For Mr. Cock-up

[RPGPundit]

Things I hate:
 
The yokels who still send money to the "700 club".  This guy Robertson has advocated nuking a varied panoply of places, urged public prayer for the death of supreme court judges, and has now advocated the assasination of Hugo Chavez.  He and his ilk are about as Christian as the guy in the black robes with the wierd astrological symbols on them clutching the bloody ceremonial knife and chanting "Cthulhu Ftaughn!".
 
For that matter, anyone who thinks just calling themselves christians in a public context is enough to make them christians.  The stupid motherfuckers who go around supporting the death penalty, foreign wars, invasions, social repression, who hate the poor and despise those who are unlike them, and think there's no logical gap between supporting the bombing of abortion clinics and opposing abortion itself.  As american dad said, apparently abortion is the ONE and only way religious conservatives actually DON'T like killing people. Well, that and if the guy doing the killing isn't either white or wearing a uniform.
 
But these sick motherfuckers make me really feel sympathy for Jesus, I mean, if the guy knew that he'd end up being about THAT, I'm pretty sure he would have chosen to jump off a cliff in the desert and forget this whole freeing Israel from the romans thing.  It was a wash anyways...
 
And while I'm at it, Hugo Chavez. What a slick slimy opportunistic cunt. Let me first clarify some things for my American friends who have in many cases probably never even heard of this guy until he was mentioned in the Robertson thing; since, you know, if you're American you don't actually have to know about other countries and their politics unless they're your "allies in the war on terror", they're pissing you off in the U.N., or you've just invaded them.
 
First of all, Chavez is NOT a dictator.  He was elected democratically and has yet to suspend democracy or cheat on an election (according to Jimmy Carter and the election observers, anyways).  His opponents claim he rigged the election, but his opponents are a crooked gang of land-barons and social vampires who are worse bastards than he is. And anyways, Chavez doesn't need to rig elections. He's found a perfect way of maintaining his position and keeping democracy intact: he panders to the vast hordes of uneducated poor in Venezuela, and they buy it en masse.
 
And that's why he's a slimy piece of shit. He cares for the poor about as much as I care for the Hero system, which is to say not at all.  Well, he does "care" in the one and only sense that he cares about being able to continue manipulating them into maintaining him and his cronies in power.   He was a "man of the people" only in the sense that he clued into something that none of the other venezuelan parasites figured out, which is that if you manipulate the masses you win the election.
And while Chavez hasn't yet suspended democracy in Venezuela he certainly has strongarmed the opposition and shut down dissent, using rhetoric that some say comes from Fidel Castro, but that I personally find much closer to the Dubya-Bush manichean "with us or against us" mental games, where anyone who tries to criticize the Chavez government must be "an enemy of the people", unpatriotic, a tool of the great enemy. The only difference between Chavez and Bush is that for Bush's government the imaginary enemy is "terrorism", while for the Chavez regime the enemy is the United States, which may really have already tried to support a coup to illegally overthrow his government.
 
And then along comes Pat Robertson telling millions of TV viewers that the US Government should assasinate Chavez.  Chavez must be pissing his pants with joy. This is as good for him as any Al-Qaeda Fatwa is for the Bush gang, it lets him say "see? They hate me, they really are the enemy! Now you must continue to let me get away with all kinds of really apalling shit because some fucker who pretends to believe in god, and pretends to love america has called for my execution!". If I was truly cynical, I might even suggest that the Chavez gang actually PAID Robertson to make the statement.  It was that good for them.
 
Then there's the stupid fuckers on the left. Right wing shitheads are hateable, because they're constant machines of bile-spewing ignorance. But the left.. the left pisses me off in a way the right never could because THEY SHOULD FUCKING KNOW BETTER. At least, they think they do. Stupid motherfuckers who take pride in how wonderfully "liberal" they are and love to mock the right wing for its stupidity.
 
But just as the blind spot of right is in thinking its more "good" than the left, the blind spot of the left is in thinking it's more "smart" than the right.  It isn't.  Its full of idiots. Idiots who take up contradictory causes, talking about civil rights but then supporting nanny-state laws that would strip us of all our rights, or engaging in blind support of causes or regimes (like Chavez's or Castro's) that they can see no wrong in because the cause or regime auto-identifies itself as "left-wing".
 
It is as absurd to think that Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro, or censorship of controversial thought in universities, or banning the right to smoke, or discrimination against the more qualified in mad favour of the mediocre, or the gradual stripping away of land rights are "liberal" ideas as it is to think that Pat Robertson or George Bush are good representatives of what Jesus would want or do.  And yet the supposedly oh-so-clever liberals continue to blindly support these causes. Its like the little fucking "ON switch" in their heads gets clicked off the moment they hear "liberal" so they lose all ability to make the same coherent criticism of the people in their own band that they do of the "enemy". And shit, with friends like those...
 
Finally, it really really REALLY pisses me off that some of the Swine on the forums go around claiming I'm an "objectivist".  Ayn Rand was an insane cunt who's ideas were as absurd and wicked as they were infantile. The idea that one should be void of compassion for your fellow human being, the sick social darwinist concept of hatred for the weak or the poor, her delusions about the nature of reality, the authoritarian and anti-democratic implications of her philosophy, would make her a prime candidate for the glass-shard-in-the-fucking-head club if she wasn't long dead from smoking crap cigarettes.  The fact that I believe in the importance of property rights and personal liberties trumping security, don't believe in the idea of institutional religion, and hate the idea of a nanny-state trying to tell me how to run my life doesn't mean I am in favour of recycling the homeless for their valuable fluids. Or that I think the poor should be regularly beaten for kicks.
 
Totally the opposite, I despise the government-programmer nanny-staters because they don't really give a shit about the poor, they just want to play their great social experiment-games and assume they know what's best for other human beings. Its the same mad arrogance you see in religious types, who think their god just happens by sheer chance to like everything they like and hate all the people they hate. Just like a religious fanatic thinks that NATURALLY god wants him to hate who he already hates, the nanny-stater thinks that NATURALLY everyone will be in agreement that he of all people on earth knows what is best for the rest of us, and that naturally we will agree to whatever moronic social experiment said nanny-stater came up with in between student union meetings in community college.  Helping the poor is oh-so-important, but actually fucking LISTENING to them? Why on earth would we do that? What could they possibly know about what's best for them? They don't have a community college degree, they aren't Licensed social workers, so they couldn't possibly know what they need. Leave that to the professionals with two-year degrees and a bloated sense of self-importance!
 
If you are perplexed because you can't easily define me as "liberal", "conservative", "objectivist", etc etc. then good.  Fuck your small definitions. I am above that. I am complex. I won't take one "for the team" and buy into a moronic concept just because its supposedly coming from "my side". My only "side" is humanity, the only race I'm running in is the human race, and there's no room for mr.cock-up in the human race if we want to come in first.  So whether its Robertson or Chavez, left-wing or right, I won't put up with the criminally stupid regardless of what self-righteous veil it wears.
 
Fuck them all.
 
RPGPundit August 25 2005

[Samarkand]

*raises a glass in salute*

     Just call yourself a "classic liberal", like I do on days I don't veer into minarchist territory.  My main political tenets are that use of government power has to be *very* carefully applied, that social justice means providing everyone equal judgement under the law, and that a state is better off at providing opportunity rather than social leveling when it must intervene in socio-economic matters.

     One thing about Chavez I find very ironic.  I believe he isn't completely cynical.  Very few politicians are unless they're total Tammany Hall types.  Chavez probably is sincere about the whole Bolivaran Revolution schtick.   That's somewhat funny in a dark way, considering that Simon de Bolivar himself concluded that his life's work was a colossal waste of time and effort.  It would serve Chavez right if he came to the same conclusions about "plowing the sea".

[mattormeg]

And while I'm at it, Hugo Chavez. What a slick slimy opportunistic cunt. Let me first clarify some things for my American friends who have in many cases probably never even heard of this guy until he was mentioned in the Robertson thing; since, you know, if you're American you don't actually have to know about other countries and their politics unless they're your "allies in the war on terror", they're pissing you off in the U.N., or you've just invaded them.

What?

[mattormeg]

I'm an American. I know who Chavez is, and how he runs his country, and I think that Pat Robertson is not even worthy of a minute of my time.

Let's not get into drawing big ugly conclusions about individual people based on their country of origin, ok? I'm not talking about our respective governments and the policies of our leaders, I'm talking about us. You and I. Let's be above that.

I had never imagined that you were assuming I was uninformed or just stupid based on my nationality during my time at this site. That's upsetting.

Matt

[David R]

I had never imagined that you were assuming I was uninformed or just stupid based on my nationality during my time at this site. That's upsetting.

Matt

Hey man, the Pundit makes judgements (disparaging ones at that) about people on the kind of games they play and how they play it - surely you knew this

Regards,
David R

[RPGPundit]

One thing about Chavez I find very ironic.  I believe he isn't completely cynical.  Very few politicians are unless they're total Tammany Hall types.  Chavez probably is sincere about the whole Bolivaran Revolution schtick.  

I strongly doubt it, he completely switched political affiliations in his career; he's nothing but the most rank kind of opportunist. The Tammany Hall gang were more principled than he is.  Hugo Chavez believes in exactly one thing: Hugo Chavez.

RPGpundit

[RPGPundit]

I'm an American. I know who Chavez is, and how he runs his country, and I think that Pat Robertson is not even worthy of a minute of my time.

Let's not get into drawing big ugly conclusions about individual people based on their country of origin, ok? I'm not talking about our respective governments and the policies of our leaders, I'm talking about us. You and I. Let's be above that.

I had never imagined that you were assuming I was uninformed or just stupid based on my nationality during my time at this site. That's upsetting.

Matt

Note that I did say "in many cases".  I also said "if you're American you don't actually have to know about other countries and their politics unless they're your "allies in the war on terror", they're pissing you off in the U.N., or you've just invaded them."

Surely, as a thinking american, you will agree with me that you do not "have" to know these things, in the sense that most americans are dreadfully ill-informed about these things.

RPGPundit

[mattormeg]

In each and every case, it is simple for me, or for you or for anyone else to only know what they have to know to get by. I've met my share of selfish, duplicitous, ignorant and hateful non-Americans. Enough, in fact, to confirm my belief that people are the same all over: there's good ones, bad ones, all kinds.

Ultimately, it is your choice, but I would ask for you to give the citizenry of my nation the same benefit of a doubt that would be appropriate for any large and diverse group of people.

[RPGPundit]

You do not deserve that same benefit of the doubt, because you, of all nations, should be so much more than what you are.

RPGPundit

[mattormeg]

I am not a nation, I am an individual. My sole request is that you don't trot out the assumption that each and every American is ignorant or stupid. I would like to think that I've not given you any reason to feel that way, and I don't think I'm any better, smarter, or well-educated than any of my fellows.

Feel free to criticize my country's political leaders. I do that quite a bit myself. As a matter of fact, you and I might hold a surprising number of political opinions in common.

Judging all Americans as part of an easily-managed stereotype will only lead to misunderstanding. It would be like me assuming each and every Middle Easterner I see is a blood-crazed murderer or suicide bomber, simply because some of their political leaders espouse such a sentiment.

Yes, some of the people in my nation do hold such stereotypes, by the way. But let's not do that. You and I, let's give individual people the benefit of a doubt. It's difficult, I know, but if we (collectively) are going to get along in this world we've got to try.

I'm a Mississippian, and have grown up in the shadow of the civil rights movement, by the way. I know about prejudice, and the seductive allure of reducing individuals to caricatures, both monsterous and humorous. It isn't fun to be the subject of such thinking, and it's poisonous to fall into doing it yourself.

I really don't want to provoke you, or "stir the pot" on this topic. I've said my piece, and suspect you'll either listen to it or won't. I'll get back to talking gaming now, and I appreciate your time.

With great respect,
Matt

[RPGPundit]

Well, the thing is Matt, I wasn't talking specifically about you, Matt, in that thread.  I was talking about "american ignorance" in general. The fact that half the americans I talk to about Chavez appear to be under the impression that he's a dictator. I have in fact had arguments with americans who utterly refused to believe otherwise no matter how much evidence was shown to them, because they were so set by their perception of Chavez based on how american media sources choose to portray him in such a way that he could be mistaken for a dictator, and based on stereotypes they have about latinamerica in general.  They generally seem to base all of their opinions about foreign events on vague things they saw in 80s action movies or something...

I'm glad that you aren't like that, Matt. And please don't mistake my statements like the one above for anti-americanism; its not, its just the opposite, its a deep and intense disappointment with a group of people who are collectively (regardless of the individuals who are exceptions to this)  willingly pissing away the greatest system of governance and model for a society ever created, because its easier to be ignorant sheep than to govern yourself.

RPGPundit

[Samarkand]

I myself admit that I used to make analogies between Chavez's political career and a certain funnily-named Austrian.  There are some creepy parallels--both came to national attention through unsuccessful putsches or coups, for one thing.  I currently rate Chavez as one step down on the autocrat scale from "dictator" to "demagogue using the machinery of democracy to maintain his power".  He's a neo-Peron or (for an American example) Huey Long, using a combination of bread-and-circuses and stoking the outrage of the poor to keep down his opponents.

   Of course, my pessimism in these matter leans towards him getting more autocratic and being an actual caudillo as power becomes ever more attractive.  He has already done some classic dictatorial tricks--the entire "an offense to slander the Presidency" law--which do not bode well for him giving up power easily/  The real irritating thing is his attempts to export the Bolivarian/socialist revolution.  At least Che was attractive in a roguish sort of way when he tried to export commie BS past the confines of Cuba.

    That's the bloody problem with lefty revolutionaries in general.  Great at blowing up the blocked-up privy, usually terrible at installing new plumbing.

Andrew

[mattormeg]

Well, the thing is Matt, I wasn't talking specifically about you, Matt, in that thread.  I was talking about "american ignorance" in general. The fact that half the americans I talk to about Chavez appear to be under the impression that he's a dictator. I have in fact had arguments with americans who utterly refused to believe otherwise no matter how much evidence was shown to them, because they were so set by their perception of Chavez based on how american media sources choose to portray him in such a way that he could be mistaken for a dictator, and based on stereotypes they have about latinamerica in general.  They generally seem to base all of their opinions about foreign events on vague things they saw in 80s action movies or something...

I'm glad that you aren't like that, Matt. And please don't mistake my statements like the one above for anti-americanism; its not, its just the opposite, its a deep and intense disappointment with a group of people who are collectively (regardless of the individuals who are exceptions to this)  willingly pissing away the greatest system of governance and model for a society ever created, because its easier to be ignorant sheep than to govern yourself.

RPGPundit

Fair enough.

[Nicephorus]

I'm beginning to think that the American neocons have secret pacts with the Chavez and the leaders of countries such as iran - "we'll publicly hate each other to help prop each other up."  The U.S. provides the rhetoric of external threat that allows regimes to repress in the name of security and causes them to band together under their leaders.  

Either that or the neocons are hamfisted idiots who don't know how to fine tune a message to it plays well both home and abroad.

[fonkaygarry]

I would say that neoconservatism is the lovechild of political realism and isolationism.  On the one hand you have a love affair with the big stick, on the other you have a myopic view of your own nation's capabilites and limitations.

The two, taken together, would mean you don't give a fuck how your actions are perceived.