How are you going to celebrate the New Year?

Mandalorian FaLLouT GoD · Fri Jan 02, 2004 6:23 pm

is there anything in alcohol to get addicted to?

anyways i kicked my cousins/3 buddies ass at risk while drinking like a pack of smirnoffs and watching family guy.

the guardian · Post by **the guardian** » Fri Jan 02, 2004 6:26 pm

Mandalorian FaLLouT GoD wrote:is there anything in alcohol to get addicted to?

I hope that's just unclever humor.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Fri Jan 02, 2004 9:36 pm

My point wasn't trying to whine about anything else than moralization. If you start to moralize drug usage but at the same time glorify alcohol, it seems pretty two-faced to me.

In my opinion, all drugs and other shits-for-brains should be made legal and the choice of using or not using should be given to the people. And instead of spending resources on controlling drug laws, we could actually civilize people on the subject. Then everyone would be free to make their choice - if you're a pathetic loser with nothing to provide for the society, then please go ahead and OD with whatever you want (be that substance amphetamine, marijuana, liquor, water, fucking gecko piss or whatever).

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 12:37 am

Kashluk wrote:My point wasn't trying to whine about anything else than moralization. If you start to moralize drug usage but at the same time glorify alcohol, it seems pretty two-faced to me.

I completely agree. Drinking is just as bad as doing drugs. Drinking has become accepted though and has become refined. Some day maybe drugs will follow that line... like designer drugs instead of expensive wine?

Kashluk wrote:In my opinion, all drugs and other shits-for-brains should be made legal and the choice of using or not using should be given to the people. And instead of spending resources on controlling drug laws, we could actually civilize people on the subject. Then everyone would be free to make their choice - if you're a pathetic loser with nothing to provide for the society, then please go ahead and OD with whatever you want (be that substance amphetamine, marijuana, liquor, water, fucking gecko piss or whatever).

Thats a little over the edge dont you think? It would create quite abit of chaos, but of course, drug dealers would be out of business since legalization would lower prizes a shit load. I cant justify it though, alot of people have gone under drinking and just because you make drugs legal it wont mean people will treat them with anymore respect. Im living proof. I do drugs (not very often though) AND drink myself senseless (Abit too often maybe). Alot of people do.

Sol Invictus · Post by **Sol Invictus** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 10:20 am

You still haven't answered my fucking question about who the hell the guy in your avatar is.

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 12:03 pm

Exitium wrote:You still haven't answered my fucking question about who the hell the guy in your avatar is.

Kashluks? Isnt that some gay finn WW2 war veteran? Or soemthing.

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 5:08 pm

Kashluk's avatar is the guy who invented sugarless gum.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 8:55 pm

All wrong

But damn people, you sure did give me the laughs! I must've crapped my pants...

The guy is Wittengstein, Ludwig Wittgenstein. Google or something if you don't know him.

46&2 wrote: Thats a little over the edge dont you think? It would create quite abit of chaos, but of course, drug dealers would be out of business since legalization would lower prizes a shit load. I cant justify it though, alot of people have gone under drinking and just because you make drugs legal it wont mean people will treat them with anymore respect. Im living proof. I do drugs (not very often though) AND drink myself senseless (Abit too often maybe). Alot of people do.

Well, you could ponder on the other hand, that what does illegalizing drugs help then? It only seems to encourages criminal activity (duh, if it becomes illegal, doing it is criminal) and controlling the law takes resorces from the government, that could be used for other activities.

Personal Freedom all the way, you should be free to do whatever you want with your body. As long as your "freedom" doesn't put anyone else in danger or anything, I think it's everyone's own business what they do with themselves.

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 9:06 pm

Kashluk wrote:
Well, you could ponder on the other hand, that what does illegalizing drugs help then? It only seems to encourages criminal activity (duh, if it becomes illegal, doing it is criminal) and controlling the law takes resorces from the government, that could be used for other activities.

True, but I dont think its a solution. Its like saying "Oh well, im tired of trying to stop this, so ill quit and not care"

Kashluk wrote:Personal Freedom all the way, you should be free to do whatever you want with your body. As long as your "freedom" doesn't put anyone else in danger or anything, I think it's everyone's own business what they do with themselves.

Im all for anarchy, in a "perfect" world. But society would break down.. and I dont think the ones who have the choice will want this and actually I think its to late. We have become dependent on each other. Maybe some day, in a Fallout like scenario we will see a truely anarchistic world. But that would require a break down like nuclear war/global chaos.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 9:20 pm

Forty-six & Two wrote:True, but I dont think its a solution. Its like saying "Oh well, im tired of trying to stop this, so ill quit and not care"

Damn, boy, that's a hit under the belt! ... I guess, I understand your point now.

Kashluk wrote:Im all for anarchy, in a "perfect" world. But society would break down.. and I dont think the ones who have the choice will want this and actually I think its to late. We have become dependent on each other. Maybe some day, in a Fallout like scenario we will see a truely anarchistic world. But that would require a break down like nuclear war/global chaos.

Well, I'm still not aiming for anarchy with abolishing drug laws... It's only drugs, you know?

Laws conserning murder, theft, public disturbance etc. would still be in order. If people really really really wanna get high, they will (even if it's illegal). So why stop them? Or, to put it in better words: not trying to stop them with force, because that usually just encourages the rebellious side of 'em. Education on the raw facts about drugs could work better than strict NO! DON'T ASK QUESTIONS! IT'S ILLEGAL!

But of course, this is only my opinion.

atoga · Post by **atoga** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 10:49 pm

Woah, that guy is Ludwig Wittgenstein? I've never seen him, I never expected him to look like that... bizarro, eh? Anyway, pretty cool guy.

Let me guess, Kashluk. You read a lot of philosophy. A lot of philosophy.

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 10:57 pm

On the other hand he might not have read enough philosophy eh? Cheers mate.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Sat Jan 03, 2004 11:02 pm

Sol Invictus · Post by **Sol Invictus** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 12:15 am

Kashluk wrote:All wrong But damn people, you sure did give me the laughs! I must've crapped my pants...

The guy is Wittengstein, Ludwig Wittgenstein. Google or something if you don't know him.

Fuck. I knew I saw his face somewhere. I confused him with Hegel and Heidegger and tried looking those guys up and they look old and bald. If I remember correctly, Wittgenstein supported the Nazi Party back in 1933 but he left Germany to the United States because even though he supported the Nazi Ideal he didn't like the way they were carrying it out, or something like that.

He even supported Nazism through the 50s, though he never made a big issue out of it. Also, he met Hitler and discussed the Ubermensch stuff.

He was an existentialist.

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 1:09 am

No, Exitium. The mini-bio you provided describes Heidegger, who was associated w/the Nazis until he quit his post in '34.

Wittgenstein was Austrian, but spent WWII and the years prior to it in England, teaching off-and-on at Cambridge.

OTB

Sol Invictus · Post by **Sol Invictus** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 1:16 am

See, I still mix them up.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 7:19 pm

Yup... and Wittgenstein was a lot more left-wing orientated. He even wanted to go to the Soviet Union to work as factory labor, but the big bosses denied his application, because they would've rather seen him teaching in Moscow University. So he ended up working in Britain instead, I don't know if that choice was any better, though

Franz Schubert · Post by **Franz Schubert** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 8:21 pm

Anarchy is for confused people who don't understand how humans work.

mandalorian wrote:anyways i kicked my cousins/3 buddies ass at risk while drinking like a pack of smirnoffs and watching family guy.

Risk pwns.

the guardian · Post by **the guardian** » Fri Jan 09, 2004 3:03 am

No, anarchy is for people who can't stand the way humans work.