Quote from: CoinCube on February 15, 2017, 05:59:53 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on February 15, 2017, 12:31:19 AM

Quote from: CoinCube on February 14, 2017, 05:38:54 PM

Are we defining slavery here as top-down control?

I'm defining it more broadly as an inability to effectively have freewill due to a loss of independent control over one's choices.

Making choices which do not achieve premeditated goals is not a causal (and thus not an independent) relationship and the person is not in control. Making choices which achieve goals, but those goals were coerced or driven by mind control is not being in control. By control, I mean in an entropy equation, where the potential outcomes are independent.

I am choosing to use the term slavery, because SJWs abuse the term to incorrectly claim that they have achieved the elimination of slavery.

What you are describing here is a failure of potential or a limitation of self-actualisation.

No.

Please re-read what I wrote and TRY to understand it.

Quote from: CoinCube on February 15, 2017, 05:59:53 AM

Using the word slavery is a particularly poor choice of wording as it implies and absolute and fixed limitation on freedom rather then a gradual increase in self-actualisation over time.

You obviously do not understand what I am writing.

Self-actualization has nothing do with dependent variables, i.e. if we could self-actuate it then it wouldn't be a dependency and the entropy would be higher (as for example why statistically very few escape from their formative years of indoctrination by which ever religion or cultural mechanism is in place in that person's upbringing). If religion and other means of cultural indoctrination were as open to self-actualization as if they did not exist, then they wouldn't be effective (and society would devolve in random noise which is why we can't move directly to infinite entropy!). Certainly you can't argue that people are choosing God religion based on a rational, independent assessment. You are playing semantic games and I am using math. Please go remember what an independent variable is in relationship to the equation of entropy. Please stop conflating qualitative subjective opinions about physical slavery and my objective analysis of the mathematical independence of the actors.

You like other SJWs want to paint some special significance to a particular manifestation of dependency (i.e. control) and say "this is slavery and we ended it", as some smug accomplishment. And I am pointing out that some form of dependent control is always involved, thus slavery is always present. You want to paint some subjective significance to some arbitrary manifestation of dependent control. Go on lying to yourself to appease your emotions (a manifestation of your enslavement and non-objectivity), but it isn't a rational and objective assessment.

Quote from: CoinCube on February 15, 2017, 05:59:53 AM

Is this conversation so threatening or what you feel to be the definitional errors of others so infuriating that you feel compelled to sacrifice communication in the name of rhetoric? Is it not better to simply point out what you feel to be the errors of others and use wording that accurately conveys the concepts you are trying to convey?

I have accurately conveyed the concepts. But unfortunately I can't force someone to comprehend what is written.

Edit: as I had explained, I observe SJWs justifying their destruction of diversity of control and promotion of a power vacuum (i.e. how you for example apparently feel so good+smug about using the State as a proxy to fuck with other tribe's women and children) by claiming they have eliminated slavery and bettered humankind and society, when in fact they are lying to themselves. Physical slavery was economically necessary until it became unnecessary due to technology. The power vacuums being created and the destruction of diversity is unsustainable and Stage #4 will collapse into Stage #5, which will be payback time and then your smug, dysfunctional, and increasingly ignored Constitution will collapse into dust.

Quote from: CoinCube on February 12, 2017, 05:25:48 PM

I absolutely respect the rights of others, but others must extend that same courtesy to me. My culture and society has chosen to emancipate it's women. This means my daughters at age 18 are adults with complete freedom under law to own property, vote, and make independent decisions. I will certainly fight for them to keep these rights if others seek to steal them via violence.

If Mr. Donaldson wishes to live in a society where women have not been emancipated he needs to try and change society without coercion. In the US this means getting men and women to support repealing the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution via a new constitutional amendment. I fully support his right to try and do this but I doubt his prospects for success.

Alternatively he (and others that share his views) can move to a society where women have not been emancipated. There are not a lot of options here as most societies have emancipated their women.

Quote from: iamnotback on February 12, 2017, 11:17:45 PM

If you haven't noticed, the SJWs are starting to rail against the God religion, and your freedom to send your daughters to a religious oriented school of your choice is going to be lost in the societal organization and governance paradigm you advocate.

Quote from: CoinCube on February 13, 2017, 12:58:14 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on February 12, 2017, 11:17:45 PM

You implicitly demand that my female children not be denied exposure to certain "rights" else I am not allowed to live in "your" society. What happened to my society and my choice? In other words, you demand I invest for at least 18 years in my children and have all the repercussions+liability for how my children behave and perform, but you don't give me the control to decide what I think it best for my children. This is why fathers are defecting and allowing the State to raise their children, even if they are still around by implicitly allowing their kids to attend State (and even SJWs infected private) schools.

What I am driving at here is that your so called universal "rights" are actually allowing the camel's nose under opening in the bottom of the tent to enable the total annihilation of my culture and infect+overwhelm it with the culture of the State and SJWs. This is the insideous Marxist demoralization strategy. This is a slippery slope which slides all the way to the Frankenstein outcomes such as where both men and women defect from the optimum life strategies and society collapses.

Every society has rules. In the USA the highest form of those rules is laid out in the constitution and the constitution gives women the right to vote. If you want to try and change the constitution there is a mechanism to do so.

Our rights as parents are not absolute...

You can try and change societies rules (in this case via a constitutional amendment) or you can move on to greener pastures...A fourth (and probably best) option is to join or build a voluntary non-coercive subculture compliant with and nested within the larger culture that reinforces healthy behaviors.

And I advise you to make sure your cult doesn't require the control over other cult's women and children, if your cult intends to survive into Stage #6.

Because the State proxy by which you pound diversity to death and appease your unrealistic emotions is going away folks...kiss it goodbye...

SJWs are worried about everything except reality and being adaptable. There is nothing wrong with nature, the people are fucked.