by G!
I don't like it, that
Murderers are acquitted for murder,
Because of their mental illness.
I like it even less, that
A guilty man is made innocent,
Because himself he claimed unable to control.
I don't like it, that
These mentally ill murderers
Receive wasteful medical treatment.
I like it even less, that
These treatments don't often work
On broken machines that cannot be fixed.
I don't like it, that
In blind justice's eyes, I am
Judged equal to a thug, a drug dealer, a human trafficker.
I like it even less, that
The rights that protect me also
Protect murderers, rapists, psychopaths.
I don't like it, that
Right and freedom is one size
Fits all; one system for all.
I like it even less, that
My right to life is a murderer's
Right to life; fairness seems so unfair.
I don't like it, that
Life is granted equally to all,
Undetermined by the way we live it.
I like it even less, that
A corrupt life is not taken away
Sooner than a life lived well and just.
I don't like it, that
The world is divided equal
Between right and wrong, good and evil.
I like it even less, that
Because it has the same right
To life as good, evil goes unpunished.
I don't like it, because
While we are taught to make
The world a better place,
We cannot, because in this world,
Justice is not fair, it is merely equal.
I don't like it, because
Power is what I want, for good
To triumph over evil; equity is what I want,
Not equality, for in a world upheld
By equality, neither good or evil can prevail.
Everyone has the right to live, but does everyone deserve it?
Does anyone deserve the right to live, for that matter?
Better to say that the deranged gun-toting mass murderer does not deserve to live and neither do I, or to say I deserve to live and so does the deranged gun-toting mass murderer?
Friday, 29 March 2013
Thursday, 21 February 2013
Note On the Last Post
You might have noticed that for some time I've taken down the first chapter of the Assassinator Narratives and now it has reappeared. I've rewritten it in a slightly different approach and took out all the quotation marks so there's no obvious distinction between dialogue and description.
Writing without quotation marks is something quite a few authors do for some pretentious reason or other to frustrate the reader. Occasionally I find myself admiring these authors for disregarding grammatical and punctuation conventions (I wish I could do the same in English class). So here I've decided to exercise a bit of my pretentiousness and write this story without quotation marks.
My sincere apologies if you find me doing this pretentious and writing with selfishness just to please myself (I admit that's what I'm doing), pardon my excessive boasting, and if you have read this far, be my guest and just go on reading!
G!
Writing without quotation marks is something quite a few authors do for some pretentious reason or other to frustrate the reader. Occasionally I find myself admiring these authors for disregarding grammatical and punctuation conventions (I wish I could do the same in English class). So here I've decided to exercise a bit of my pretentiousness and write this story without quotation marks.
My sincere apologies if you find me doing this pretentious and writing with selfishness just to please myself (I admit that's what I'm doing), pardon my excessive boasting, and if you have read this far, be my guest and just go on reading!
G!
Thursday, 20 December 2012
The Assassinator Narratives - chapter 1
Mr. English
For one week in a district newspaper of the City, an advertisement appeared in the classified section that also advertised for hookers, drugs at reduced prices and black market merchandise. It's not like the newspaper is legally allowed to advertise these things, well, not the drugs at reduced prices part anyway, it's just that the Chief of Police Aaron Copland's police department is so understaffed, underfunded and underpaid that they can't possibly care about what's being advertised in the newspapers. These policemen, grizzled old veterans or rookies from out of Police Academy
For one week it was there, one little advertisement, two columns in width, written in Courier New, black and white, and one telephone number at the very bottom:
After one week, the advertisement disappeared. Not many people in the district where the newspaper ran answered to this advertisement despite the high unemployment rate; people were either indifferent to the sinister advertisement and the job it pertained, or they were instead seeking a job working directly for one of the many organized crime syndicates operating in this particular district, and had no interest in a job working for a wet work organization that works for the organized crime syndicates. On Monday evening following the week the advertisement came and disappeared, at one of the piers in the City harbor, Rebekah Wyler and her companion Miranda Isaacman were waiting for Mr. English to finish interviewing Gerard Narrator, the first candidate.
Nobody knows Mr. English’s first name. People usually assume it’s an ancient name in the likes of Archibald or Bartholomew or Ezekiel, names hardly anyone knows are names now days.
Nobody also knows that Mr. English in his advanced age is still a virgin. Sure he experienced the brief flings with relationships in his teenage years like all teenagers do no matter what era human history is in, but none of those flings resulted in him ever losing his virginity. And after his teenage years of what could have been golden opportunity, he entered the very professional trade of the Assassinator and dedicated his full self to the trade, so he had neither time nor need for relationships, and thus remained a virgin all his life up to now.
Mr. English had given vague instructions to each of the callers. They were to arrive at the warehouse on their assigned time and wait for him. That was it. Rebekah was the second caller Mr. English received when the job listing was published. She had called on behalf of Miranda too since Miranda is her life-long companion and she always drags her life-long companion into whatever she was up to. That was the deal they made – to drag each other into whatever each one of them had gotten themselves into – when they were two kids in an orphanage. The deal stuck.
Gerard went into his interview known to Rebekah as Gerard, and came out as Narrato. According to him, no one’s ever called him by his first name and no one ever did call him that. Rebekah was already impatient that Narrator took too long and gave him a look that frightened and baffled him for the rest of their time knowing each other. Though Narrator was slow during the interview, he was hired on the spot, without him realizing it. Mr. English didn’t have to interview Rebekah for a long time. Miranda only had to wait two minutes before it was her turn. She didn’t have much to say, and the girls were hired on the spot, in five minutes flat, just as Arliss Stanton, the next candidate showed up after participating in a drunken bar fight.
Next, Howard Fast arrived, nervous and five minutes earlier than he should, and after him was Ruslan Brockovitch, five minutes later than instructed, and then the last candidate woke up from the garbage pile where he had been sleeping since Narrator’s interview and strolled into the warehouse. Homeless drifter Boris Krazynski was the final candidate.
Before they start working professionally, all Assassinators undergo a month of training to learn the way of the Assassinator, much like a modernized, commercialized version of the way of the Ninja.
Mr. English instructed the seven candidates he interviewed that evening at that warehouse at the same spot he had trained Assassinators at ever since he arrived at the city many years ago. At the end of that month, the last thing he had to tell now-professional Assassinators Rebekah, Miranda, Arliss, Howard, Ruslan, Boris and Narrator were the rules of the way of the Assassinator. There are five rules.
The first rule about being an assassinator, brief pause by Mr. English, speaking in his elegant monotone, is you don’t assassinate children.
Yeah, does that include teenagers? Said Rebekah, bored.
The second rule about being an assassinator, another brief pause, is you don’t assassinate women.
Pfft, he didn’t even answer my question. Rebekah said loudly, under her breath. Miranda shushed her. Miranda is a quiet, soft-spoken girl who rarely talks to anyone except Rebekah.
Aren’t you talking about every woman in the world? Arliss the ugly, tough-talking thug hollered gleefully.
Woah, don’t fight now, listen to the rules, Mr. English doesn’t repeat them, Gabriel O’Brien said, stepping between Arliss and Rebekah, who had both stepped out of line and were within an arm’s reach of each other’s neck. Gabriel is a neat, clean-shaven Assassinator veteran, but he usually helps out Mr. English and rarely goes out on a job.
The third rule about being an assassinator, brief pause as predicted, is you don’t assassinate a person you are not assigned to assassinate, in which case it will be considered murder and you will be charged for murder should you be arrested.
Rebekah and Arliss had stepped back in the line of the seven graduate Assassinators. Arliss was disappointed he didn’t get to fight Rebekh; he could even have tried to tear her top off which would have made his day or even his whole week. Arliss has a sick mind.
By the way, nobody had anything to say about rule number three.
Can’t he just shorten his sentences already? We don’t need the rules numbered for us. Rebekah interrupted and Mr. English stopped speaking. She signed dramatically. Miranda quietly shushed her again.
…is as an assassinator, you must accept all assignments from all clients, without exception, unless refusal to take part in the assignment is a directive from the Assassinator commissioner, who if you don’t already know is myself.
The seventh person in line, timid, rural runaway Howard was writing each of the given rules down in a small notepad. Arliss, who was standing next to him, thought it would be amusing to knock the notepad out of Howard’s hand, which he did.
Look what you did. Now he isn’t going to hear all the rules, Gabriel said, shaking his head in disappointment. He stood on the right side of Mr. English, dressed in the same impeccable attires. In his pockets he always keeps packets of hand sanitizer and a spray tin of breath freshener.
Ooh, what a tongue-twister, the suave, courageous, handsome Ruslan remarked in his suave, courageous, handsome accent. He winked at Rebekah, who replied with a smirk.
I’ll be taking you to our lodgings. Gabriel spoke up, follow me to the van.
When Narrator looked back to where Mr. English had been standing a moment before, he had vanished. Narrator scratched his head in puzzlement.
The other Assassinators were leaving the lot. Narrator hurried to catch up. Gabriel’s van was parked beneath the power lines far out in the marshlands to the west. They were at the outskirts of the City’s industrial zone.
This was the graduation of the assassinators-in-training; they were now assassinators-in-working. The unceremonious ceremony took place on the vast overgrown lot of a factory that once manufactured automobiles residing abandoned in the industrial section of the City on a fine, cloudless day. The sun was shining, and a light breeze accompanied the cooling weather, stirring up trash and fallen leaves in the City’s roads, announcing the coming of winter (always a source of sorrow for the City’s large homeless population; an average of two percent of them freeze to death in the streets each winter).
For one week it was there, one little advertisement, two columns in width, written in Courier New, black and white, and one telephone number at the very bottom:
Are you skilled with a firearm or weapon of melee?
Do you have a special set of skills that make you dangerous?
Have you an amoral or immoral conscience?
Have you ever killed a person?
If not, are you willing to kill a person?
Do you want to be an employed “Assassinator”?
If your answer is yes to any of the above questions, please contact Mr. English by pay phone at the number below…
Nobody knows Mr. English’s first name. People usually assume it’s an ancient name in the likes of Archibald or Bartholomew or Ezekiel, names hardly anyone knows are names now days.
Nobody also knows that Mr. English in his advanced age is still a virgin. Sure he experienced the brief flings with relationships in his teenage years like all teenagers do no matter what era human history is in, but none of those flings resulted in him ever losing his virginity. And after his teenage years of what could have been golden opportunity, he entered the very professional trade of the Assassinator and dedicated his full self to the trade, so he had neither time nor need for relationships, and thus remained a virgin all his life up to now.
Mr. English had given vague instructions to each of the callers. They were to arrive at the warehouse on their assigned time and wait for him. That was it. Rebekah was the second caller Mr. English received when the job listing was published. She had called on behalf of Miranda too since Miranda is her life-long companion and she always drags her life-long companion into whatever she was up to. That was the deal they made – to drag each other into whatever each one of them had gotten themselves into – when they were two kids in an orphanage. The deal stuck.
Gerard went into his interview known to Rebekah as Gerard, and came out as Narrato. According to him, no one’s ever called him by his first name and no one ever did call him that. Rebekah was already impatient that Narrator took too long and gave him a look that frightened and baffled him for the rest of their time knowing each other. Though Narrator was slow during the interview, he was hired on the spot, without him realizing it. Mr. English didn’t have to interview Rebekah for a long time. Miranda only had to wait two minutes before it was her turn. She didn’t have much to say, and the girls were hired on the spot, in five minutes flat, just as Arliss Stanton, the next candidate showed up after participating in a drunken bar fight.
Next, Howard Fast arrived, nervous and five minutes earlier than he should, and after him was Ruslan Brockovitch, five minutes later than instructed, and then the last candidate woke up from the garbage pile where he had been sleeping since Narrator’s interview and strolled into the warehouse. Homeless drifter Boris Krazynski was the final candidate.
Before they start working professionally, all Assassinators undergo a month of training to learn the way of the Assassinator, much like a modernized, commercialized version of the way of the Ninja.
Mr. English instructed the seven candidates he interviewed that evening at that warehouse at the same spot he had trained Assassinators at ever since he arrived at the city many years ago. At the end of that month, the last thing he had to tell now-professional Assassinators Rebekah, Miranda, Arliss, Howard, Ruslan, Boris and Narrator were the rules of the way of the Assassinator. There are five rules.
The first rule about being an assassinator, brief pause by Mr. English, speaking in his elegant monotone, is you don’t assassinate children.
Yeah, does that include teenagers? Said Rebekah, bored.
The second rule about being an assassinator, another brief pause, is you don’t assassinate women.
Pfft, he didn’t even answer my question. Rebekah said loudly, under her breath. Miranda shushed her. Miranda is a quiet, soft-spoken girl who rarely talks to anyone except Rebekah.
Aren’t you talking about every woman in the world? Arliss the ugly, tough-talking thug hollered gleefully.
Woah, don’t fight now, listen to the rules, Mr. English doesn’t repeat them, Gabriel O’Brien said, stepping between Arliss and Rebekah, who had both stepped out of line and were within an arm’s reach of each other’s neck. Gabriel is a neat, clean-shaven Assassinator veteran, but he usually helps out Mr. English and rarely goes out on a job.
The third rule about being an assassinator, brief pause as predicted, is you don’t assassinate a person you are not assigned to assassinate, in which case it will be considered murder and you will be charged for murder should you be arrested.
Rebekah and Arliss had stepped back in the line of the seven graduate Assassinators. Arliss was disappointed he didn’t get to fight Rebekh; he could even have tried to tear her top off which would have made his day or even his whole week. Arliss has a sick mind.
By the way, nobody had anything to say about rule number three.
Can’t he just shorten his sentences already? We don’t need the rules numbered for us. Rebekah interrupted and Mr. English stopped speaking. She signed dramatically. Miranda quietly shushed her again.
…is as an assassinator, you must accept all assignments from all clients, without exception, unless refusal to take part in the assignment is a directive from the Assassinator commissioner, who if you don’t already know is myself.
The seventh person in line, timid, rural runaway Howard was writing each of the given rules down in a small notepad. Arliss, who was standing next to him, thought it would be amusing to knock the notepad out of Howard’s hand, which he did.
Look what you did. Now he isn’t going to hear all the rules, Gabriel said, shaking his head in disappointment. He stood on the right side of Mr. English, dressed in the same impeccable attires. In his pockets he always keeps packets of hand sanitizer and a spray tin of breath freshener.
Ooh, what a tongue-twister, the suave, courageous, handsome Ruslan remarked in his suave, courageous, handsome accent. He winked at Rebekah, who replied with a smirk.
I’ll be taking you to our lodgings. Gabriel spoke up, follow me to the van.
When Narrator looked back to where Mr. English had been standing a moment before, he had vanished. Narrator scratched his head in puzzlement.
The other Assassinators were leaving the lot. Narrator hurried to catch up. Gabriel’s van was parked beneath the power lines far out in the marshlands to the west. They were at the outskirts of the City’s industrial zone.
This was the graduation of the assassinators-in-training; they were now assassinators-in-working. The unceremonious ceremony took place on the vast overgrown lot of a factory that once manufactured automobiles residing abandoned in the industrial section of the City on a fine, cloudless day. The sun was shining, and a light breeze accompanied the cooling weather, stirring up trash and fallen leaves in the City’s roads, announcing the coming of winter (always a source of sorrow for the City’s large homeless population; an average of two percent of them freeze to death in the streets each winter).
Sunday, 16 December 2012
A Something New
Here is a little bit of a spark of creativity I had around two weeks ago after watching some clips from the Sin City movie and thought, "Gee, it would be cool if I could write something like that." So I did, and what I wrote probably doesn't make any sense to you right now.
After that spark of inspiration, I've gotten around to jotting down some ideas for an extremely complex narrative that has something to do with what I wrote that day, here it is:
The room is black and white and completely square. The whitest part of the room is the single light blub dangling from the ceiling, right center of the black and white room. Technically, this is the brightest part of the room, but for the sake of a graphical novel setting, we’ll reduce the colors to simply black and white and all the gray areas in between. The blackest part of the room are the dark corners of the room, which, for some reason of trick lighting, aren’t illuminated by the bare light bulb even though nothing really obscured them from the light source. The second blackest part of the room is the suave young man with the shiny white sunglasses sitting comfortably, or as comfortably as he can in an old, five-dollar plastic lawn chair (this is indoors; the lawn chair is not in its correct setting). His entire form, shrouded in pitch black (this is despite him sitting right under the light of the bare light bulb) except the glowing white lenses of his sunglasses, is relaxed, leaned into the backrest of the plastic lawn chair, his heads pillowing the back of his head of neatly trimmed black hair. The lighting in the room is so ridiculous and defying of the laws of science that nothing of this young man’s features (which are presumably handsome enough to charm members of both sexes) can be distinguished under the darn lighting; he is simply a shadow of himself, his form only slightly blacker than his background, one of the four walls of the room.
After that spark of inspiration, I've gotten around to jotting down some ideas for an extremely complex narrative that has something to do with what I wrote that day, here it is:
The room is black and white and completely square. The whitest part of the room is the single light blub dangling from the ceiling, right center of the black and white room. Technically, this is the brightest part of the room, but for the sake of a graphical novel setting, we’ll reduce the colors to simply black and white and all the gray areas in between. The blackest part of the room are the dark corners of the room, which, for some reason of trick lighting, aren’t illuminated by the bare light bulb even though nothing really obscured them from the light source. The second blackest part of the room is the suave young man with the shiny white sunglasses sitting comfortably, or as comfortably as he can in an old, five-dollar plastic lawn chair (this is indoors; the lawn chair is not in its correct setting). His entire form, shrouded in pitch black (this is despite him sitting right under the light of the bare light bulb) except the glowing white lenses of his sunglasses, is relaxed, leaned into the backrest of the plastic lawn chair, his heads pillowing the back of his head of neatly trimmed black hair. The lighting in the room is so ridiculous and defying of the laws of science that nothing of this young man’s features (which are presumably handsome enough to charm members of both sexes) can be distinguished under the darn lighting; he is simply a shadow of himself, his form only slightly blacker than his background, one of the four walls of the room.
For Stanton, he is having a lot of trouble trying to separate the shadow of the young man from the shadow of the background, since he is shortsighted. Stanton is also a young man, albeit a less handsome looking one, and somehow that warranted him the favor of the room’s lighting, unfortunately. Since his form is not completely shrouded in blackness, he can actually be described; he has quite a mean face, narrow beady eyes, a buzz-cut, and no small quantity of knife/glass/fingernail scars all across his visage. The only damper on this mean street-fighter’s face has to the explosion of acne stretching diagonally from Stanton’s right temple to his left cheek, concentrated around his nose area which made the face extremely undesirable for any parts of the body of anyone else to touch. Even hookers didn’t want to kiss Stanton’s face unless he pays them a bonus. People either get acne or they get freckles, rarely both; Stanton always envied people who get freckles, freckles can be attractive, acne, however, cannot.
I've always wanted to write something in the style of Catch-22, a book I read and admired greatly for the density of its narrative and its endlessly broad vocabulary. I'm no Joseph Heller, and I'll never be Joseph Heller, but I've finally been inspired with an idea that has enough characters to write a story that will make even my own head swim (exactly what Catch-22 did). If you want to see more on this story, or if you have suggestions about where I can take this story to, by all means tell me. Thanks!
G!
I've always wanted to write something in the style of Catch-22, a book I read and admired greatly for the density of its narrative and its endlessly broad vocabulary. I'm no Joseph Heller, and I'll never be Joseph Heller, but I've finally been inspired with an idea that has enough characters to write a story that will make even my own head swim (exactly what Catch-22 did). If you want to see more on this story, or if you have suggestions about where I can take this story to, by all means tell me. Thanks!
G!
Saturday, 15 December 2012
Time For Some Uplift
In the wake of bad things happening,
I like to listen to sad music,
And think sad thoughts,
Because it's easy to become pessimistic,
When bad things happen.
After the gloom and the negativity,
I like to dream that one day,
Everyone will have a share of happiness,
Everyone will have fulfillment,
And no one will feel pain,
Then everyone will say to everyone else,
"It's wonderful to be human."
This dream, I'm sure,
Is dreamed by many,
And it's an unlikely dream,
If there ever is one.
But I like to keep dreaming,
And believe in the unlikely,
Because some dreams,
Even pipe dreams,
Are worth believing in.
I like to listen to sad music,
And think sad thoughts,
Because it's easy to become pessimistic,
When bad things happen.
After the gloom and the negativity,
I like to dream that one day,
Everyone will have a share of happiness,
Everyone will have fulfillment,
And no one will feel pain,
Then everyone will say to everyone else,
"It's wonderful to be human."
This dream, I'm sure,
Is dreamed by many,
And it's an unlikely dream,
If there ever is one.
But I like to keep dreaming,
And believe in the unlikely,
Because some dreams,
Even pipe dreams,
Are worth believing in.
Friday, 5 October 2012
Facebook Smackdown
Transcribed by G!
As a Facebook user, I have come across numerous arguments taking place on the comment section of wall posts, here is a long example of one such arguments regarding a current event. All names have been changed because I did not ask for the consent of the participants of this argument to publish their comments, and therefore do not have the right to use their real names (I wouldn't have done that anyway).
The participants are represented by letters A through I, in-text reference to any of the participants by other participants are are enclosed in [], as well as third persons mentioned who did not participate in the argument
Insults that may reveal the occupation of any participants are generalized and stated as [insult]
Spelling and grammar are not changed from their original text.
I am posting this as an experimentation in short story writing, no ill intent whatsoever.
Overview:
The first argument occurs between participants B and D, the second the major argument occurs between A (the creator of the post) and F. E and G are frequent commentators to the argument and E briefly argues against A in a developing third argument before the post is terminated. C, H and I are onlooking commentators.
Original post:
A: If anyone wants some good debate practice, I recommend the first electoral debate which airs tonight between Romney and Obama.
Comments:
B: I call Romney
C: As of 10:09 pm on CBC, 75% for Obama, 19% for Romney, 6% unsure.
B: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...well there goes america's economy
D: [B] ur a racist
B: how, just because I don't support Obama I'm a racist?
D: wanna debate whether ur a racist or not?
E: Hm....That will be a great debate for sure. I'm for Obama,but wouldn't debate on it.
C: "Republican", not "racist", would be a better adjective, now that you can debate about.
B: Obama had a 1.3 billion dollar debt for 2011...thats bad leadership
D: were not talking about whether obamas bad or not, were talking about whether ur a racist or not. [B] get ur head in the game
B: Im not a racist
D: u support hitler, your argument is invalid
B: I do NOT support hitler
D: i clearly remember what u said last year
E: Oh,yes. I do,and I bet at least 5 people could remember what he said about Hitler in our maths class,[makes a joke about B's name]
D: ^[E]'s killer chirps
B: I said hitler was a good leader not a good person and i have never once in my life said i support him
D: does a good leader cause millions of deaths?
B: no a good leader is able to take a country from a depression to ruling half of europe. A bad person kills millions of people. The two statements are not intertwined...plus when stalin took over he killed anyone that did not support him, does that make him a bad leader? NOPE. Stalin like hitler is a bad person but a good and effective leader.
D: so theyre proficient leaders. not good. good means pleasing and approved of. do u find hitler pleasing? u probably do, coz ur a racist
E: Um. From what I see, A trait for great leader, in many cases, is the leader who achieve those by avoiding as much deaths and disadvantages(that are handed down to the minority or disadvantaged) and achieve greatness to his/her nation.
A: [B], you told me and [other person] we were Hitler's mistakes. I'm not even Jewish asshole.
E: [A]. Which [other person]?[#1] [#2] or [#3]?
A: [#1]
E: Oh,I see.
F: I am 100% advocating the Chicago School of Economics, but Romney is obviously the worst of two evils in this case.
E: Support your reason why Romney is obviously the worse of the two evils.
F: Look, as a basic principle, the best government in a modern, liberal state is a limited government. While some intervention can be beneficial in the case of an oligarchical market, socially intrusive policies are almost guaranteed to backfire by a) coercing people to adopt certain mindsets or b) inciting insurgence. Alas, Romney's social policy is too invested in wombs to not be coercive and morally patronising...the role of the government is not to impose moral agendas. Romney wants to metamorphose it into some male-privilegesque, white-supremacist, non-secular vision of his personal ethics.
E: I see why. So,if that's so,then would Romney's conservative policies will try to force people into certain moral agendas that he (or the Tea Party) likes/believes in,which would basically force the people to follow and leave the others who are deprived and disadvantaged?
E: *believes in,and will force the people
F: Since he is planning to enforce some of his beliefs legally, yes...there's so many factors into why limiting freedoms is wrong, ranging from justice, to role of the gvt, to homogenisation and its sociopolitical repercussions to potential civil disobedience.
E: Absolutely. Those will,from what see, threaten the nation and its people indirectly or directly,as well as dividing and oppressing the different social and racial groups.
From what I've read from a French novelist,diversity and speciality is an integral part of survival.
A: But [F], you speak of why government needs to have a smaller and less apparent role. yet, are you not aware it is a traditionally republican standpoint for less government?
G: clearly Romney was better prepared
A: Also [E], are you actually using Voltaire? Also, diversity and specialty are not exactly Voltaire's key focus. Have you actually read his works...also [F] are you not aware that Romney isn't allowed to just go off and force his beliefs because he wants too? They have this thing called the constitution and this other thing called congress.
G: the country is ran by congress, not presidents
A: Exactly
F: No, a republican government is in fact more socially intrusive than a liberal one, which is a point I raised a few comments before. Additionally, knowing that Romney's legislation is potentially going to get congress seats in the prospect of his election, his proposed laws that restrict abortion (coercive: fact) and grant rapists parental rights (coercive: fact) become a looming possibility...Romney's economic policy is also not centred around the actual principle of a free market but, in fact, aims to fortify this gross misrepresentation of actual skill in the face of wealth. Whoever thinks investing money in coprorations in an attempt to generate jobs in an economy that is home to some of the world's most profitable businesses will change the market landscape, rather than aggrandise this fabricated inequality is a contemptible thinker. Markets create jobs and those are fired mostly by the average consumer, rather than corporations.
G: unlike Canada, in the US, presidential election is separate from the house and the senate...personally, i think neither Obama nor Romney should be the president
F: House and Senate members of the same political party basically follow the same agenda, so my point stands.
G: what do you mean? obama is a democrat and yet there are more republicans in the house of reps
E: [A]. It wasn't from Voltaire.
A: Well actually no they don't [F]. If you had any understanding of American politics
F: Please enlighten me on how they never ,IN PRACTICE, have followed a common agenda.
A: Ahhh I see. So basically you are generalizing. If you had ANY knowledge of American politics you would realize that congressmen do not necesarilly vote on party agenda, instead on Lobbyist intervention, and personal beliefs. It isnt like Canada where everyone follows a straight line. Also how can you tell what happens at the next congressional election? Also your insinuation that all Republicans are for legal rape, and religious intolerance, is exceptionally offensive to me. As I am a republican who is for abortion, religious tolerance, and a free enterprise based economy...and one more point, Fay you may be a great debater. There is no doubt about it. But you know nothing about how the world works, and yet you like to pretend you do.
F: If you had any idea of how the world works, or the guile behind it, you would not be disregarding the past practical manifestations of this example. Nobody mandates that party members have a shared agenda, yet they do - because there are political forces such as donations driving politicians' actions and because THE MAIN STATES THAT WOULD ELECT MITT ROMNEY ALSO CONTRIBUTE THE MAJORITY OF CONSERVATIVES IN THE CONGRESS & SENATE, HENCE ENSURING THAT THE MAJORITY HAVE SIMILAR AGENDAS. When you learn how to differentiate between how things theoretically and practically work please comment on my knowledge of not just how a tiny pocket of politics called "American Politics", but also THE WORLD works...you sound libertarian, NOT CONSERVATIVE to me. I am also a libertarian, which is why I am not a Republican.
A: No [F], I am a Republican through and through. I am simply stating that you should not go on pretending you have an actual understand of American Politics, and do not call then a "tiny pocket". If you had any world knowledge you would understand that what will be happening in America is one of the single most important elections in the coming decade. Now here is the thing. You have an exceptionally large vocabulary, which it appears you attempt to hide behind. As anyone who can understand what your are saying would understand that it is senseless gibberish that is basically repeating the same thing over and over again...you are a drone, If I may say. You have no understanding of what you are actually saying, you only understand how to convey your ever impressive vocabulary. Which in life, as much as you may hope, will get you 0 friends
F: [A], I put forward two very functional arguments on why your ideology rarely works. I guess though, I am anything, if you may say.
A: Honestly I am quite sick of this asinine conversation. So I shall resort to my default response. Quiet yourself [insults F]
F: Oh dear, liberty and justice embodied have spoken. Lo and behold how they abstain from casual contradiction like few before.
A: Go fuck yourself.
F: Shhh, it shall all be alright...calm down.
A: I'll reiterate. Go fuck yourself, also get off my post.
F: Reconsider why you are so insistent on berating ME rather than my argument and CALM DOWN BRENTHEN, DAMN.
A: Let me reestablish my position. Go fuck yourself.
H: Y'all ball so hard.
G: Ye shall cease your dispute.
H: Everyone calm down or I will be forced to get involved. And then dat shit cray.
G: my comment has been eaten alive! i shall demand justice!
A: Oooohhhh [H], he so Cray cray!!! He fuk shit up in da ghetto! He one badasss muttha fucka
E: Um...Sorry to disrupt but,I'll read a part of the Introduction Sheet that we received during the meeting:
'Debating Etiquette'. 3. "....Refrain from using any type of name-calling or insulting during the debate."
4."Conform to the standards of formal speech practiced in debating by eliminating colloquialisms,slang and swear-words from your vocabulary during the debate."
A: [E]. Fuck off.
E: Oh,really? It's you who should calm down! You weren't following the basic etiquettes that are necessary in debating! You kept asking [F] to f**k off,saying that she'll have 0 friends,calling her [insult] (even though she is),which wasn't an appropriate title.
A: [E], you seem to be confused. This isn't a debate. Did you not know that? Did you miss the memo? So why don't you stop playing the people's advocate and instead, go with my saying of the day. Go fuck yourself. Don't you have some girls to stalk [E]?
I: hm, now this is getting personal.
A: Yep.
--post terminated--
As a Facebook user, I have come across numerous arguments taking place on the comment section of wall posts, here is a long example of one such arguments regarding a current event. All names have been changed because I did not ask for the consent of the participants of this argument to publish their comments, and therefore do not have the right to use their real names (I wouldn't have done that anyway).
The participants are represented by letters A through I, in-text reference to any of the participants by other participants are are enclosed in [], as well as third persons mentioned who did not participate in the argument
Insults that may reveal the occupation of any participants are generalized and stated as [insult]
Spelling and grammar are not changed from their original text.
I am posting this as an experimentation in short story writing, no ill intent whatsoever.
Overview:
The first argument occurs between participants B and D, the second the major argument occurs between A (the creator of the post) and F. E and G are frequent commentators to the argument and E briefly argues against A in a developing third argument before the post is terminated. C, H and I are onlooking commentators.
Original post:
A: If anyone wants some good debate practice, I recommend the first electoral debate which airs tonight between Romney and Obama.
Comments:
B: I call Romney
C: As of 10:09 pm on CBC, 75% for Obama, 19% for Romney, 6% unsure.
B: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...well there goes america's economy
D: [B] ur a racist
B: how, just because I don't support Obama I'm a racist?
D: wanna debate whether ur a racist or not?
E: Hm....That will be a great debate for sure. I'm for Obama,but wouldn't debate on it.
C: "Republican", not "racist", would be a better adjective, now that you can debate about.
B: Obama had a 1.3 billion dollar debt for 2011...thats bad leadership
D: were not talking about whether obamas bad or not, were talking about whether ur a racist or not. [B] get ur head in the game
B: Im not a racist
D: u support hitler, your argument is invalid
B: I do NOT support hitler
D: i clearly remember what u said last year
E: Oh,yes. I do,and I bet at least 5 people could remember what he said about Hitler in our maths class,[makes a joke about B's name]
D: ^[E]'s killer chirps
B: I said hitler was a good leader not a good person and i have never once in my life said i support him
D: does a good leader cause millions of deaths?
B: no a good leader is able to take a country from a depression to ruling half of europe. A bad person kills millions of people. The two statements are not intertwined...plus when stalin took over he killed anyone that did not support him, does that make him a bad leader? NOPE. Stalin like hitler is a bad person but a good and effective leader.
D: so theyre proficient leaders. not good. good means pleasing and approved of. do u find hitler pleasing? u probably do, coz ur a racist
E: Um. From what I see, A trait for great leader, in many cases, is the leader who achieve those by avoiding as much deaths and disadvantages(that are handed down to the minority or disadvantaged) and achieve greatness to his/her nation.
A: [B], you told me and [other person] we were Hitler's mistakes. I'm not even Jewish asshole.
E: [A]. Which [other person]?[#1] [#2] or [#3]?
A: [#1]
E: Oh,I see.
F: I am 100% advocating the Chicago School of Economics, but Romney is obviously the worst of two evils in this case.
E: Support your reason why Romney is obviously the worse of the two evils.
F: Look, as a basic principle, the best government in a modern, liberal state is a limited government. While some intervention can be beneficial in the case of an oligarchical market, socially intrusive policies are almost guaranteed to backfire by a) coercing people to adopt certain mindsets or b) inciting insurgence. Alas, Romney's social policy is too invested in wombs to not be coercive and morally patronising...the role of the government is not to impose moral agendas. Romney wants to metamorphose it into some male-privilegesque, white-supremacist, non-secular vision of his personal ethics.
E: I see why. So,if that's so,then would Romney's conservative policies will try to force people into certain moral agendas that he (or the Tea Party) likes/believes in,which would basically force the people to follow and leave the others who are deprived and disadvantaged?
E: *believes in,and will force the people
F: Since he is planning to enforce some of his beliefs legally, yes...there's so many factors into why limiting freedoms is wrong, ranging from justice, to role of the gvt, to homogenisation and its sociopolitical repercussions to potential civil disobedience.
E: Absolutely. Those will,from what see, threaten the nation and its people indirectly or directly,as well as dividing and oppressing the different social and racial groups.
From what I've read from a French novelist,diversity and speciality is an integral part of survival.
A: But [F], you speak of why government needs to have a smaller and less apparent role. yet, are you not aware it is a traditionally republican standpoint for less government?
G: clearly Romney was better prepared
A: Also [E], are you actually using Voltaire? Also, diversity and specialty are not exactly Voltaire's key focus. Have you actually read his works...also [F] are you not aware that Romney isn't allowed to just go off and force his beliefs because he wants too? They have this thing called the constitution and this other thing called congress.
G: the country is ran by congress, not presidents
A: Exactly
F: No, a republican government is in fact more socially intrusive than a liberal one, which is a point I raised a few comments before. Additionally, knowing that Romney's legislation is potentially going to get congress seats in the prospect of his election, his proposed laws that restrict abortion (coercive: fact) and grant rapists parental rights (coercive: fact) become a looming possibility...Romney's economic policy is also not centred around the actual principle of a free market but, in fact, aims to fortify this gross misrepresentation of actual skill in the face of wealth. Whoever thinks investing money in coprorations in an attempt to generate jobs in an economy that is home to some of the world's most profitable businesses will change the market landscape, rather than aggrandise this fabricated inequality is a contemptible thinker. Markets create jobs and those are fired mostly by the average consumer, rather than corporations.
G: unlike Canada, in the US, presidential election is separate from the house and the senate...personally, i think neither Obama nor Romney should be the president
F: House and Senate members of the same political party basically follow the same agenda, so my point stands.
G: what do you mean? obama is a democrat and yet there are more republicans in the house of reps
E: [A]. It wasn't from Voltaire.
A: Well actually no they don't [F]. If you had any understanding of American politics
F: Please enlighten me on how they never ,IN PRACTICE, have followed a common agenda.
A: Ahhh I see. So basically you are generalizing. If you had ANY knowledge of American politics you would realize that congressmen do not necesarilly vote on party agenda, instead on Lobbyist intervention, and personal beliefs. It isnt like Canada where everyone follows a straight line. Also how can you tell what happens at the next congressional election? Also your insinuation that all Republicans are for legal rape, and religious intolerance, is exceptionally offensive to me. As I am a republican who is for abortion, religious tolerance, and a free enterprise based economy...and one more point, Fay you may be a great debater. There is no doubt about it. But you know nothing about how the world works, and yet you like to pretend you do.
F: If you had any idea of how the world works, or the guile behind it, you would not be disregarding the past practical manifestations of this example. Nobody mandates that party members have a shared agenda, yet they do - because there are political forces such as donations driving politicians' actions and because THE MAIN STATES THAT WOULD ELECT MITT ROMNEY ALSO CONTRIBUTE THE MAJORITY OF CONSERVATIVES IN THE CONGRESS & SENATE, HENCE ENSURING THAT THE MAJORITY HAVE SIMILAR AGENDAS. When you learn how to differentiate between how things theoretically and practically work please comment on my knowledge of not just how a tiny pocket of politics called "American Politics", but also THE WORLD works...you sound libertarian, NOT CONSERVATIVE to me. I am also a libertarian, which is why I am not a Republican.
A: No [F], I am a Republican through and through. I am simply stating that you should not go on pretending you have an actual understand of American Politics, and do not call then a "tiny pocket". If you had any world knowledge you would understand that what will be happening in America is one of the single most important elections in the coming decade. Now here is the thing. You have an exceptionally large vocabulary, which it appears you attempt to hide behind. As anyone who can understand what your are saying would understand that it is senseless gibberish that is basically repeating the same thing over and over again...you are a drone, If I may say. You have no understanding of what you are actually saying, you only understand how to convey your ever impressive vocabulary. Which in life, as much as you may hope, will get you 0 friends
F: [A], I put forward two very functional arguments on why your ideology rarely works. I guess though, I am anything, if you may say.
A: Honestly I am quite sick of this asinine conversation. So I shall resort to my default response. Quiet yourself [insults F]
F: Oh dear, liberty and justice embodied have spoken. Lo and behold how they abstain from casual contradiction like few before.
A: Go fuck yourself.
F: Shhh, it shall all be alright...calm down.
A: I'll reiterate. Go fuck yourself, also get off my post.
F: Reconsider why you are so insistent on berating ME rather than my argument and CALM DOWN BRENTHEN, DAMN.
A: Let me reestablish my position. Go fuck yourself.
H: Y'all ball so hard.
G: Ye shall cease your dispute.
H: Everyone calm down or I will be forced to get involved. And then dat shit cray.
G: my comment has been eaten alive! i shall demand justice!
A: Oooohhhh [H], he so Cray cray!!! He fuk shit up in da ghetto! He one badasss muttha fucka
E: Um...Sorry to disrupt but,I'll read a part of the Introduction Sheet that we received during the meeting:
'Debating Etiquette'. 3. "....Refrain from using any type of name-calling or insulting during the debate."
4."Conform to the standards of formal speech practiced in debating by eliminating colloquialisms,slang and swear-words from your vocabulary during the debate."
A: [E]. Fuck off.
E: Oh,really? It's you who should calm down! You weren't following the basic etiquettes that are necessary in debating! You kept asking [F] to f**k off,saying that she'll have 0 friends,calling her [insult] (even though she is),which wasn't an appropriate title.
A: [E], you seem to be confused. This isn't a debate. Did you not know that? Did you miss the memo? So why don't you stop playing the people's advocate and instead, go with my saying of the day. Go fuck yourself. Don't you have some girls to stalk [E]?
I: hm, now this is getting personal.
A: Yep.
--post terminated--
Sunday, 23 September 2012
Strong Beliefs
Strong beliefs are
The root of passion,
The fire of motivation,
The force of action.
Strong beliefs are also
The source of hate,
The carrier of intolerance,
The face of discrimination.
Pick a side
And sooner or later,
You find yourself
Standing on the same side
All along.
The root of passion,
The fire of motivation,
The force of action.
Strong beliefs are also
The source of hate,
The carrier of intolerance,
The face of discrimination.
Pick a side
And sooner or later,
You find yourself
Standing on the same side
All along.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)