Waiting for ...... wikileaks

[fskimospy]

Now see. this is where leftist ideology separates from reality.

Life is competition. It's how we got here. Humans did not rise to where we are today by being equal and peaceful. We got here clawing and fighting through evolution. It's part of the human condition. You can no more stop ambition than you can stop the sun from rising.

Life is not Star Trek communal fantasy. Humans are ambitous creatures who strive to one up each other constantly. It's what makes us great.

Reality check time, buddy.

It's not 'leftist' ideology, it's anti-government ideology.

As for everything else though, I largely agree.

Wikileaks serves a valuable purpose, but I fail to see how this document release serves that purpose. If people are committing real crimes, war crimes, etc that are not being punished, then yes, I say that is precisely the sort of thing that Wikileaks should expose.

But these? Diplomatic cables, dealings with other countries, etc? Absolutely not, and to argue that they should be released is ridiculous in my opinion. The purpose of individuals leaking information in the past was to expose an injustice, not give our diplomatic playbook away to other nations. Some people here might not want us to play hardball and have secrets, but everyone else is going to whether we do or not.

I fail to see how the world is made a better place by this leak.

 

[Amused]

Not all, just the worthless ones. And it doesn't make us great, it's our fundamental flaw/weakness that destroys peace and potential.

Hardly. It's what has moved us forward from living in caves and chasing our food.

Communism taught us that, without a doubt, it is selfish ambition that drives production and innovation.

 

[PrinceofWands]

i can understand your defensiveness because of the way they are talking about your views, but i think that is a little unfair

competition is a healthy aspect of life, but it can be taken too far imo

I've never found an ounce of benefit in competition. Co-operation to accomplish a goal, yes...competitiveness, no. It's a purely negative aspect of humanity.

 

[LumbergTech]

The "future of humanity" dictates we deal with less than ideal circumstances not by letting everybody in on what we are doing. The future of humanity doesn't depend on allowing Iran every advantage possible or NK to know what we are doing. The future of humanity isn't a flat idealistic structure whereby Immanutjob and Kim Jong Il will all of the sudden be "nice". It isn't a situation where AQ suddenly gives up and decides to join the world.

If this were true we wouldn't exist as a country as we'd never have even been independent.

It's amazing to me that people take such a naive perspective on their fellow humans.

can you end a post without being insulting? i would enjoy a productive discussion of the issue

"The "future of humanity" dictates we deal with less than ideal circumstances not by letting everybody in on what we are doing."

firstly who is this we? people within the united states? people who want peace?

i have a fundamental problem with this line of thinking, it basically says that we cannot know if the world is being pushed in a direction that we desire (which btw could be pushed in no direction) by those who we elect and their arms (such as the military)

 

[PrinceofWands]

Hardly. It's what has moved us forward from living in caves and chasing our food.

Communism taught us that, without a doubt, it is selfish ambition that drives production and innovation.

The most ignorant, bullshit lie ever perpetrated by those with an over-inflated sense of self-worth in an attempt to better their lot in life.

It is intelligence and creativity which drives innovation, and rational co-operation which needs to drive production.

 

[Amused]

I've never found an ounce of benefit in competition. Co-operation to accomplish a goal, yes...competitiveness, no. It's a purely negative aspect of humanity.

Mao thought this too, and millions starved.

EVERY attempt at co-op production has led to lower production, and in mass scales, starvation.

Your ideology has a long history of fail behind it, and is based on a fairy tale.

 

[yllus]

Who the fuck cares what we know about what's going on over there? Now Iran knows that we know that everybody around him knows that they are all begging the US for him to be gone. This further destabilizes the area and harms our long-term interests.

What do you consider "waste"? I am sure the cost/benefit isn't always a "waste".

Obviously this guy reached far beyond his pay grade, exposing security flaws. He should be summarily executed.

I care about what's known about what's going on over there, and so should you. In the wake of one rather pointless Middle Eastern excursion one would want to know if another one is imminent, or if this one's actually worth it.

Iran knows exactly what its neighbours think of it.

On "waste", again from The Guardian:

American (and British) taxpayers might question, too, how most of the billions of dollars going in aid to Afghanistan simply exits the country at Kabul airport.

...

The money‑wasting is staggering. Aid payments are never followed, never audited, never evaluated. The impression is of the world's superpower roaming helpless in a world in which nobody behaves as bidden. Iran, Russia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, the United Nations, are all perpetually off script. Washington reacts like a wounded bear, its instincts imperial but its power projection unproductive.

Money aside, the same old unproductive crap tends to be attempted over and over again when there's no real oversight or accountability: something secrecy encourages.

Does this mean the U.S. government should change its policies to simply publicize everything? No, that'd be silly. But these are unique times where our governments have arguably run amok when it comes to the public coffers and the people's rights. As a possibly corrective measure this almost seems perfectly timed.

 

[LumbergTech]

I've never found an ounce of benefit in competition. Co-operation to accomplish a goal, yes...competitiveness, no. It's a purely negative aspect of humanity.

it is possible to cooperate and compete
what about group competition?

 

[Amused]

The most ignorant, bullshit lie ever perpetrated by those with an over-inflated sense of self-worth in an attempt to better their lot in life.

It is intelligence and creativity which drives innovation, and rational co-operation which needs to drive production.

That's fine. Keep living in your fantasy world. I bet the millions who starved under Mao would agree with you...

 

[LumbergTech]

That's fine. Keep living in your fantasy world. I bet the millions who starved under Mao would agree with you...

i don't mean to be a dick to the guy, but i think that his anger is clouding his judgement

 

[PrinceofWands]

Mao thought this too, and millions starved.

EVERY attempt at co-op production has led to lower production, and in mass scales, starvation.

Your ideology has a long history of fail behind it, and is based on a fairy tale.

Actually that's a bullshit mischaracterization as well. 99% of human history has been one of cooperative production. It's only recently (when things started to degrade into shit) that the bullshit notions of control have polluted human evolution.

Tribes formed because group cooperation in production/defense was more effective than individual ability (regardless of its level). Towns formed for the same reason. Nations of towns for the same reason.

Innovation and creation are usually about improving the human condition, not about gain. Most inventions in the history of mankind bear this out.

In short, you're EXACTLY wrong in EVERY way.

 

[PrinceofWands]

it is possible to cooperate and compete
what about group competition?

The competitiveness generally will corrupt the group, bringing more negative than positive as an outcome.

 

[LumbergTech]

The competitiveness generally will corrupt the group, bringing more negative than positive as an outcome.

part of the problem is that not everyone wants to cooperate, and you can't force them to

i agree that competitiveness can breed corruption, but im not convinced it has to

 

[KlokWyze]

The hate and fear of wikileaks is pure fucking hilarity. The amount of idiots that argue topics they don't understand was obvious to me, but to see them just quake and rage information to come out is just fucking.......... lol.

The more human beings put in positions of power are held accountable for their actions, the better for the rest of us. How can you complete belligerent fools think that blind faith in government or business is good for you or your children. Quite interesting that many people would rather purposely be ignorant of reality, just to save themselves a short term headache, in order to dig themselves into a hole impossible to climb out of.

Quick! Kill all the Wikileaks founders so our government can save us!!!!!

 

[PrinceofWands]

part of the problem is that not everyone wants to cooperate, and you can't force them to

i agree that competitiveness can breed corruption, but im not convinced it has to

Then they're free to go it alone, and succeed or die in the attempt. They are NOT free to dictate to others how they MUST live however.

Can you name ONE instance where competition hasn't led to negatives? Any one from all of history?

 

[LumbergTech]

The hate and fear of wikileaks is pure fucking hilarity. The amount of idiots that argue topics they don't understand was obvious to me, but to see them just quake and rage information to come out is just fucking.......... lol.

The more human beings put in positions of power are held accountable for their actions, the better for the rest of us. How can you complete belligerent fools think that blind faith in government or business is good for you or your children. Quite interesting that many people would rather purposely be ignorant of reality, just to save themselves a short term headache, in order to dig themselves into a hole impossible to climb out of.

Quick! Kill all the Wikileaks founders so our government can save us!!!!!

Unfortunately you aren't helping much by attacking them rudely. Many of them are being rude as well, so its not that they don't deserve it, it just isn't helpful. I agree with what you are saying to an extent, but I think that being belligerent and not addressing the core of the problem ...which is: What level of secrecy is the right level of secrecy?

 

[PrinceofWands]

That's fine. Keep living in your fantasy world. I bet the millions who starved under Mao would agree with you...

Yeah, because that's the ONLY thing at play in that...it was ONLY about a general theory of cooperation that all the bad things happened. Nothing else was involved at all.

Meanwhile just adhering to a general theory of competitiveness and selfishness has ALWAYS led to absolute perfection and joy.

It seems you've solved it all, way to go.

 

[NoStateofMind]

This simplistic world view is symptomatic of Paul and his followers. Those who think we live on an island or in a simple world are also those who have the least ability to deal with bigger issues and the complexity of life.

This type of shit is akin to forcing every company in the US to not only record board of director meetings but also release them into the public for investors to disseminate.

Obviously you and your ilk fail to grasp the implications of this.

You're right. We do not live on an island. The ramifications of an international conspiracy to remove a government from power has implications far more complex than we can comprehend. We can surmise though that Iran and North Korea's relationship has strengthened with this news. However we do not know how much of this was already known to them. Maybe, just maybe, the only ones who didn't know this was going on was little peons like us.

 

[Howard]

Can you name ONE instance where competition hasn't led to negatives? Any one from all of history?

You mean like a debate?

 

[LumbergTech]

Then they're free to go it alone, and succeed or die in the attempt. They are NOT free to dictate to others how they MUST live however.

Can you name ONE instance where competition hasn't led to negatives? Any one from all of history?

when you say hasnt led to negatives you mean the overall effect was more negative than positive? or that the positive effect was lesser than that of cooperation ? or what

to me it seems that the issue is the goal of the individuals who are competing.

are they competing for individual glory/benefits mainly, or are they competing to benefit some wider group

of course, the reasons someone competes isn't the only factor in how beneficial it is, but it might affect the level of corruption that the person is willing to introduce to win

 

[fskimospy]

Mao thought this too, and millions starved.

EVERY attempt at co-op production has led to lower production, and in mass scales, starvation.

Your ideology has a long history of fail behind it, and is based on a fairy tale.

The cause of the Chinese famine wasn't primarily that attempts at cooperative farming led to lower production, it was tyrannical and stupid people trying to radically remake a society along with some unfortunate natural disasters. Of course you could say that the tyranny was part and parcel to communism, but attempts at cooperative production themselves did not cause that famine.

This is not to say that communism is a preferable economic system, as history has pretty clearly shown that not to be the case.

 

[Amused]

Actually that's a bullshit mischaracterization as well. 99% of human history has been one of cooperative production. It's only recently (when things started to degrade into shit) that the bullshit notions of control have polluted human evolution.

Tribes formed because group cooperation in production/defense was more effective than individual ability (regardless of its level). Towns formed for the same reason. Nations of towns for the same reason.

Innovation and creation are usually about improving the human condition, not about gain. Most inventions in the history of mankind bear this out.

In short, you're EXACTLY wrong in EVERY way.

No, that would be you that is wrong. In fact, the vast majority of innovation has been for personal gain, NOT some communist fantasy you have. Do you ACTUALLY think the industrial revolution was driven by anything but individual companies striving to be better?

What the fuck do you think drove the rapid rise of human innovation over the last 200 or so years? Hint: It started with the age of enlightenment and the recognition of individual rights and freedoms.

Yes, humans co-op for protection and safety, but individual ambition drives innovation. Sorry to bust your bubble.

 

[LegendKiller]

Actually that's a bullshit mischaracterization as well. 99% of human history has been one of cooperative production. It's only recently (when things started to degrade into shit) that the bullshit notions of control have polluted human evolution.

Tribes formed because group cooperation in production/defense was more effective than individual ability (regardless of its level). Towns formed for the same reason. Nations of towns for the same reason.

Innovation and creation are usually about improving the human condition, not about gain. Most inventions in the history of mankind bear this out.

In short, you're EXACTLY wrong in EVERY way.

So you're saying that there's only 1% of human history where villages/city/states/countries/allies fought with each other and competed for resources?

 

[PrinceofWands]

You mean like a debate?

Which often lead to hurt feelings, divisiveness, elevated blood pressures, para-metricizing the educational value out of the round in order to win, playing the system, people dropping out rather than raising themselves to the level of education needed to compete at higher levels, ...

I could go on.

I spent a few years in collegiate debate and then coaching it...if you'd like to have a breakout conversation about the failings of competitive debate I'd be happy to oblige.

I would agree that when talking about 'debate' entirely in generalities that the goal is purely good...but as soon as you make it competitive it turns mostly negative.

 

[iGas]

Wikileaks operatives should have been assassinated long before this has come to this point, the fact these people are still out there shows CIA, MI6, etc went off guard. No doubt, in retrospect, they'd have done that if they only could.
Now, while I do enjoy reading that, and the stuff being uncovered only reinforces my take on global politics, the fact this level of material is in the public domain is insane.

Obviously Mr. Manning or whoever responsible for this on the US side should get the chair.

The same intelligent that suggested Iraq was a threat that justify the Bush & Co invasion.

And, all of this happens well after 9/11 ++ homeland security measure come into play.

Yup! We are much safer now to have MI6/CIA protecting our freedom.