Hobbes had the right of it.

Some people’s optimism for humanity never ceases to amaze me. Personally, I find it extremely hard to muster the kind of sanguinity (or apathy, depending on how you look at it.) that many people seem to display.

I can feel my cynicism and jadedness increase exponentially the more I learn about human history, psychology and the like. “Humanity” is beginning to disgust me. Our hypocrisy, our egos, our… propensity for sheer evil. Of course, I am aware of my own hypocrisy as I write this post, but still.

We’re doing human rights in school, and I was just reading about the failure of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda. About how the endless diplomatic pussy-footing caused the lives of countless Rwandans, and about how Bill Clinton (whom I do still greatly respect and admire), was so concerned about losing face in the aftermath of Mogadishu that he opposed any overt intervention by the UN. And we all know that US backing is just about all that’s needed for any venture to succeed.

Over the course of 100 days, around 800,000 Rwandans were murdered. That’s about one person dead every 12 seconds. 5 dead every minute. Bloody hell, EVERY MINUTE spent impotently discussing questions of policy means another 5 people dead. And, guess what they were arguing about? Nit-picking over the vagueness of the UN Mandate, and whether troops should be allowed to use force to protect civilians. And as a result, UN Peacekeepers stand by the roadside watching the rape and slaughter, powerless to do anything for fear of a court martial. Oh and let’s not forget the Belgian Paramilitaries who were murdered after their battalion commander told them to surrender their weapons to the Hutus because he wasn’t clear on the mandate. Human stupidity at it’s finest.

I don’t understand why people seem to have a problem with using force to stop genocide. Might makes right. Thus it has always be, thus it is, and thus it will always be. Then again, some people might ask, what exactly is right? In this case, I say fuck philosophy. I sure as hell might not know what’s right, but it’s kinda horribly obvious what’s wrong, innit? You have rapists, killers, running lose with machetes and a huge libido, and you wonder, hey, maybe it’s wrong to protect their would-be victims if it involves hurting these people. They don’t deserve your pity. They have none, so none should be wasted on them. Kill them all, if it will save more lives. I hope to god that Darfur doesn’t end this way. Intervention is needed, and force is the only thing these thugs respect. Might. Makes. Right. So please, make it right. Don’t let there be a failure of courage, a failure of humanity.

Next up is our propensity for evil. The Ghanaian UN contingent handed over the Chief Justice to Hutu death squads, and then stood around while the Hutus assaulted his wife and two young daughters. Again, a failure of humanity. I doubt there’s any excuse for this, yes? And of course, we have the Nazi’s, the Taliban, the Interhamwe, the list goes on and on.

As each day goes by, my mood gets darker. Every newspaper I read, the more the cynic in me cries out. I just don’t have any faith left in, well, in us. Religion is beginning to look appealing.

A failure of Humanity is a terrible thing.

Attack of the Clones, baby.

http://narcissist-asshole.blogspot.com/

Yeah. About being ‘unnatural’.

Our abhorrence of cloning is mainly due to the stigma of ‘playing god’ that comes attached to it.

What do we consider natural? Simply put, we consider cloning unnatural because the process of artificial creation of an organic being has never really been explored in our history. When talking about living in buildings, for example, humans have ALWAYS needed shelter. From the cold, for protection, whatever. Same with animals.

In regards to our building of artificial shelters, or cooking of food, it’s mainly an extension and further adaptation of previous activities known to man. But the essence of the process is still there. Seek shelter for safety, comfort, eat for survival. Adaptation and evolution of our processes and actions is a natural thing. Ask Darwin.

Cloning, is a perversion, not an adaptation.

For the record, though, I’m pro-cloning. I can’t help but play the theme song from Attack of the Clones in my head every time I hear the term ‘cloning’. ‘dundundun DUNDUNDUN DUNDUNDUN… DUNDUNDUN DUNDUNDUNDUNDUNDUN.’

That was an awesome movie. PEWPEWPEW.

I'm addicted to Mass Effect. Horribly, horribly addicted.

Oh my god. I’m burning in the flames of pissed-off-ness right now. See I was watching the arena just now. And there was this NYGH girl who went “Hey if you ask women to do NS, it’s taking away their right of choice, and perpetuates the gender stereotype.” Let’s address the first half of this absolutely disgusting statement. Right of choice. Since fucking WHEN do women and men get different gender rights? What about the MALE gender’s right to fucking choice? For someone who certainly speaks like high-powered feminist, she certainly doesn’t do a very good job of promoting ‘gender equality’, which, incidentally, is more an argument that indulges our penchant for Leidensfreude than truly promoting equality for the sake of a more productive society. Basically, you want to take the good in ‘equality’ and leave the bad. Now, I won’t deny that both genders are guilty of this, but as a male I’m undoubtedly horribly biased against feminists.

I have no beef with true feminists. The type who actually believes that equality in all things is necessary (however idealistic and un-pragmatic this is). Hell, I find that hot. And I won’t deny that women are being sexually objectified in our society. I do, however hate it when ‘feminists’ start throwing the term ‘gender equality’ everywhere. And I hate feminists who overreact about everything. Let’s take the song ‘Irreplaceable’ for example. Someone sent in a letter to ST complaining about how it demeans, women, as their value is determined by how irreplaceable they are.

That’s stupid.

The value of EVERYONE and EVERYTHING is determined by their relative difficulty to replace, and how hard to find their respective talents are. Whether singing voice, *size*, or beauty. By they way, women have been sexually objectified for CENTURIES. This is as good as it gets.

Women are seen as sexual objects, valued for their sexuality. True? Yeah. But that doesn’t mean intelligence in a woman isn’t valued either.

Hell, MEN are seen as sexual objects and are valued for THEIR sexuality too. Here’s lookin’ at George Clooney. Granted, women are held to higher standards, but, again, at least your beauty is worth something in this day and age. As good as it gets, baby.

Anyone taking issue with this is welcome to add me at : isildurs_bane2720@hotmail.com, though chances are if you read this you probably know me already. (shamless self-advertising)

My posts are a bit disjointed and confusing, but I prefer to post my stuff as I think of ‘em, instead of editing and re-editing.

Yeah.

Thought for the day : Firmness > Volume?

This is probably more than a little offensive.

WARNING IF YOU HAVE REFINED SENSIBILITIES DON'T READ THIS I DON'T WANT TO GET SUED ANYMORE THAN YOU DO.

___________________________________________________________






Okay here goes.

Whenever I read the newspapers, I get pissed off. It’s been getting worse, really. See, recently I’m sure we’ve all heard about that “bufan-esque” old man who kept his daughter locked up for 24 years, and has sex with her so she has, what, 9 children? Hmm. Come to think of it, it should be “tang-esque”, what with all the incest and shit. Then, today I read that his daughter has suffered, and I quote “multiple organ failure, and might not recover from her coma”. “Should she die, prosecuters plan to charge Mr Fritz (Tang) with murder.” Let’s see. Anyone know what’s the maximum sentence for murder in Austria? Anyone?

15 years.

Hardly enough. The guy shouldn’t even get life in prison. Hell, he shouldn’t get the death sentence. He should be locked up in solitary confinement for 24 years minimum, with his only visitors being homosexual prison wardens who violate him at least once everyday.

Quid pro quo. That’s the principle I believe our judicial system should be based on. The problem with our judicial system is that it tries too hard to be fair, to be humane, almost. But justice, as it is with most things, is never, ever fair. In that case, shouldn’t it be unfair against the criminals, rather than their victims? Quid pro quo, you kill, you get killed, you lock someone up, you get locked up, you gang rape someone, you get gang raped by a bunch of sex-starved prison wardens with Tang-esque lengths.

Some may argue, what about the sanctity of human life? The sanctity that god, in his wisdom so espouses? First off, God has no problems killing people when he feels like they deserve it. For those of you who read the bible, remember Sodom and Gomorrah? God nuked those two cities, because he felt they were “immoral”. Nothing says justice like your city getting destroyed because you decided to whack off to some porn, motherfucker. And what ABOUT the sanctity of human life? If someone decides to violate the rights of another person, hell, his should be taken away from him in return. Who gives a fuck if it involves stooping to his level? If you can’t beat them, join them, and with our current soft approach to justice, we’re never going to reduce the number of these atrocities to an acceptable level, if any amount is acceptable at all.

The problem is, 1 out of 7 convicts are innocent. You know what? That’s a price I’m willing to pay. After all, (nerd quote, don’t sue me GW), there is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

/rant off.