I've been arguing net neutrality since the 90's. It's hopeless. Big corporations got elected in to office and they will make new laws to change thing to profit from it.

They need to regulate capitalism.

Being that predator is part one part of one's person it has to be regulated, but, it cannot be regulated in a society that as been formed as it's pime operational process. As you say, who will regulate the regulators, especially when the regulators basic social principals are also predatory bound.

The prime moving force to create a civil society is predatorism, so ther-fore it can be understood to be a self defeating social process. For example- a pride of lions can only exist as long as the members cannot successfully prey upon their own kind. They can't so so because they lack the intellectual ability to adjust themselves to prey upon one another. There-for they are stuck where their at and can only prey upon the defensless in the area. The off-setting forces in the lion pide keep them from anialating the pride. In the case of "people" this is not so. In the Old Seers study we had to re-define "people". To us "people is neither male nor female and became understood to mean ---an intellectual person or being and considered neither animal or human. The term is our use (keep certian elements catigorized) it simply expesees--intelect. Here=in lies peoples problem. I staed of being as the lion people can reason to be a predatior and make adjustments to it's use. It becomes the prime social value. Everyoone becomes a predatory entity as thy mainsay of society and "the prey" (misue of people) becomes everyone. 

The problem cannot be solved. The masses have to change social values and place the values in the person to p[erson catagory not the material and money catagory. That is to say--the masses have to live together in accordance of what will keep them at peace with each other rather then predatory status via wealt and personal powers over each other. We Smurfs know that a predatory social structure isn't needed to live on planet earth. A predatpory structure is prefered in the world only becasue the elements of "person" are not properly recognised in what they are, so all merely become trained to follow the leaders who are the main predators.

There's more but I'll cut it here.

There is a solution and you stated it. If there is a solution then it can be solved but it requires people to be devoted to a common cause.

Currently capitalism has no common cause unless you are greedy, even then most greedy people are out for their own gain.

While I understand the analogy, it isn't quite the same. People can be controlled to a certain point. 

I believe, for example, people who molest kids (predators and abusers) can be controlled. The more violent types need to be locked up, but the lesser ones can be trained provided they conceed their problem within society.

People who are greedy can be trained, but the more serious ones just need to be locked up.

Your money is your labor. 1 hour of what you produce is 1 hour of what someone else produces. Thats looking at the commercial side of it.

Nice to know know you think of Plato as an idiot, since he was the original one to ask this question.

So if the people are the ultimate regulators, why do we need politicians, beauracrats and taxes to pay for them? Eliminate the middle man.

Sorry but I don't share your slavish devotion to elitism. Yes, The common man is just too stupid to make his own decisions or spend his own money, so we just have to turn over all our power and wealth to elite group of politicians that decide everything for us. Another stupid question, what make these socialist politicians so wise intellegent and non-greedy? They share the same DNA as us lowly peons.

Now for the ad-hominem since you have nothing rational to say...

 History proves we would have been better off with what we need rather then what we greed. Now then, am I complaining--nope. with out the systems in play throughout history I wouldn'r be here. So, one can be gratyeful, but one still doesn't have to agree with how it was done. In another way others would still be here. The cave floks didn't have much at all bur were still here. The object is, to change it. Now the world is really suck---it has to depend on war to progress and kep the progress going. There is no way we will go another 2000 years without neuclear war. Today they play with war as though "they" can perfect and control war. Haitory has it---that can't be true. So, now what. 

We have every reason to want to be where we are. Individual people did nothing to get us here, it took the entire species. War is the natural state of the universe. I'm half done your first paragraph and you're absolutely completely wrong on EVERYTHING.

No, it isn't. God damn read some fucking history.

Wikipedia.

The earliest emergence of civilizations is generally associated with the final stages of the Neolithic Revolution, culminating in the relatively rapid process of urban revolution and state formation, a political development associated with the appearance of a governing elite. The earlier neolithic technology and lifestyle was established first in the Middle East (for example at Göbekli Tepe, from about 9,130 BCE), and later in the Yellow River and Yangtze basins in China (for example the Pengtoushan culture from 7,500 BCE), and later spread. Similar pre-civilized "neolithic revolutions" also began independently from 7,000 BCE in such places as northwestern South America (the Norte Chico civilization)^[10] and Mesoamerica. These were among the six civilizations worldwide that arose independently.^[11] Mesopotamia is the site of the earliest developments of the Neolithic Revolution from around 10,000 BCE, with civilizations developing from 6,500 years ago. This area has been identified as having "inspired some of the most important developments in human history including the invention of the wheel, the development of cursive script, mathematics, astronomy and agriculture."^[12]

-------

It had to start somewhere by someone. If it didn't exist previous then someonr(people) invented it.The key word here is "emergence". It wasn't before it emerged.

-------

Here's another from Wiki--Civilization is a people farm, just as I said a while back. Someone has to be the farmer--it's the ones that invent it for thier puposes. Farmers run a farm for thier own gain on the first count

Civilizations are intimately associated with and often further defined by other socio-politico-economic characteristics, including centralization, the domestication of both humans and other organisms, specialization of labour, culturally ingrained ideologies of progress and supremacism, monumental architecture, taxation, societal dependence upon farming and expansionism.^[2][3]

NO you don't answer it. Socialist politicians and beauracrats have the same damn DNA as the rest of humanity. The same damn selfish motivation. Calling yourself a socialist that "cares about the workers" doesn't make it so, it makes them a scam artist.

If people don't have time to be watchdogs, it is because they are slaves that spend most of their working hours paying taxes. The political elites don't want you to have any time or money.

Well I was talking about something different. Either way, ego is always a killer

YES I did answer it, hundreds of times. Lying scum.

Irrelevant.

You're a scam artist and a sociopath and a liar. Keep deluding yourself.

Proving once again you don't know shit about taxes or government.

No, I'm saying YOU didn't even read the source material for your own source, else you'd know it destroys your argument completely.

No I used the terminology used by the wiki article to make it easier for you to understand. Foolish me, I should have known you'd get hung up on semantics instead of learning something.

You are absolutely wrong. But then you're apparently asking historians about ants when the correct field is entomology, not history. Which is like asking a geologist about astronomy. Actually no, at least you'd be staying in the same family of science that way. No, you're effectively asking an English major about biology. Ridiculously ridiculous.

So we can add basic English to the subjects you know nothing about. Intellect has nothing to do with civilisation. I suggest you look up the word, because by definition you can't have civilisation without social stratification, which is just the scientific way of saying you can't have civilisation without authority structures.

No they communicate through smells and movements. What's your point?

Agreed, you aren't arguing. You're saying abunch of bullshit and I'm ridiculing you for it.

No you aren't. You can't get ONE specialist in any fields pertinent to the discussion to agree with you, because you don't have a fucking clue and I do.

Projection.

Blatant lies as proved by your own source material.

Yet learning nothing.

But you're wrong.

Which is irrelevant.

Yet I am.
As an aside, I never claimed a civilisation could last forever. In fact I quite specifically said the opposite. So if you're attempting to claim I claimed otherwise, you can shove your bullshit back up your ass where it came from.

No, you simply aren't willing or able to comprehend how nothing in the article you posted suggests social stratification came after civilisation. In fact, it proves the opposite. Which proves that your ridiculous claim that someone one day just made up all the rules to screw people is absolute bullshit.

Oh look you're still making shit up.

Ants have a civilisation, as any entymologist would agree. It is a fact.

Wrong.

Because a cow herd isn't a civilisation. Wow you're dumb lol. How could a servile species bred in captivity as a food source be a civilisation?

How unfortunate you had children. But unsurprising they are as ignorant and stupid as yourself.

Next time send her to a real school.

The only one you're kicking in the gut is yourself. Well, now your daughter as well. I have a lot more than 5 years education in psychology, psychiatry, and sociology. More like 20 years. You and your daughter are literally stupid.

Yes, they do. Learn to read moron. There is literally 0 evidence and 0 non-theist professionals in the fields discussed who would disagree with me. But feel free to keep living in never never land.

Go for it shit-for-brains.

Yet another topic you know nothing about. To educate you, there is one forum on this site, called 'kill 'em with kindness'. That forum is the only place on this site where rules about respectful conversation are enforced. This is not that forum. And if it were, I'd have already warned you for being disrespectful to me. Since we aren't there, I returned your disrespect with disrespect. If you can't take it, shut your fool mouth.

Oh look that's a perfect description of what you're doing.

Which simply proves you also know nothing about psychology.

Yes you have. You disrespected me and you posted a load of horseshit that noone credible would agree with, then posted a link that proves how full of shit you are while pretending it corroborated your fantasy. If that doesn't deserve disrespect, nothing does.

Everyone I'm disrespectful to has earned that disrespect a dozen times over. Go fuck yourself and your passive aggressive holier than thou hypocrisy.

No you aren't. You are here to advertise your cult of smurfs and their idiotic beliefs. That is all you've ever done here. That is why you are labelled a theist.

I represent a number of other intellectuals who I respect their findings and 3 of them are highly successful pschyciatrists with many years of experience and now retired. I'm not tolerating his impatience anymore, and if he has a the psychology he says he has then he should know how to overcome the tendaces to denigrate others. How in the world is any new person going to feel comfortable posting here when they can expect to be attacked because Vastet disagrees with their postings and lauches an attack on their persons. The record is clear and posted where the initial insults came from when there was nothing in my subject matter to warrant it.  The record is evidence. When I post I expect critical analysis, and I don't expect to be right every time and no one is. Disagreement with another isn't an excuse to denegrate any person.   If we are asked to tolerate him then he can learn to tolerate floks who he thinks are stupid.

Observe his recent post. Any attempt to to straighten things out only brings on another attack.

THESE RULES ARE NOT FINAL AND MAY BE EDITED AT ANY TIME.

=======================
1. Introduction.
=======================

Give us your nutters, your cranks, your theists yearning to be free, and in the spirit of Freethought, we'll do our best to oblige them.

The Rational Response Squad/No God Network will not allow a chaotic zoo in which troublemakers are allowed to prevent anyone from exploration of Freethought, nor do we want a stifling jail house, where freedom of speech of not encouraged.

These House Rules outline a minuscule set of conventions of good conduct that aim at fostering a friendly, open and stimulating atmosphere crucial for the kind of forum we would like to preserve that includes a consistent framework for dealing with destructive shenanigans.

As the owners of this site, we reserve the right to remove anyone from our site, at any time, for any reason. We will not provide financial and/or commercial support for anyone whose main goal could be detrimental to this site. We will not publish anything online from anyone who makes deceptive or dishonest claims in order to undermine the credibility or viability of this site. We are open to criticism in order to improve the site, but attacks personal or otherwise, are not acceptable, especially from people who aren't willing to admit that they could be wrong.

These are the general rules seperate from Killem with Kindness rules. We still have to be repectful of others---regardless. Notice the term, distructive shenanigans etal.

The way I see it, the moment he used her to insult me, she became fair game. If he'd simply mentioned her in passing or attempted to use her education as an argument from authority; then it wouldn't have warranted the return fire. But he claimed she was actively insulting me, thereby allowing return fire.

A lie.

Hardly.

No, you do.

Not even remotely true.

Lol. You did start the ruckus. And while it may be a specialty of mine to insult someone while proving the insults are true, I don't seek out such opportunities. They are always delivered to me. I always start off in a peaceful tone, unless someone comes in swinging.

Translation: you repeat your false information after I've refuted it, ignoring the refutation.

An insult couched in your own ignorance is not my problem, it's yours. I'm not the one having trouble understanding reality, you are. When you claim I'm having a problem understanding something when I understand something MUCH better than yourself, it is an attack. There's no other way to take it. I tried to take it as an opportunity to educate you, but you decided to ignore reality and suggest I'm the one who's uneducated, while posting a link that was evidence for my argument.

Some people refuse to be reasoned with. You're one of them.

Ridiculous.

Lol. How long have you lived in that cave?

Not happening. You say something stupid, I'm calling you on it. Period. You are damn lucky you weren't posting this nonsense when there was still a few dozen people of my education level or higher posting regularly. You'd be swamped by information showing how false your claims are. A lot of the people calling your shit out would make my counterattacks mild by comparison.

My opinions answer to noone but me. I spend my free time here, it isn't my job that I get paid for. I don't represent the Rational Response Squad in my posts, I represent myself. I volunteer a service for them, a position that I was given during a time when spam filled the site regularly. I was made a moderator to contain that spam, as most of the old mods had either permanently departed or only frequented the site irregularly.
These days the administration has found a way to block the spam so there's not much for me to do. I believe as wholeheartedly in free speech as Brian Sapient does. You have to cross a hell of a line to see me actually use the moderation tools. I can't remember the last time I did. digitalbeachbum can attest to how rarely I use those tools. You basically have to be breaking the law, or spamming or trolling in multiple topics simultaneously, or being incredibly insensitive to someone going through a crises to even provoke a warning from me.
As far as anyone, yourself included, is concerned; I'm an individual beholden to noone for my opinions.

When was the last time any of you studied entymology or sociology? Having a piece of the puzzle doesn't make you an expert on the puzzle.

I do. I also know how to exacerbate them. When confronted by willful ignorance and stubborn stupidity, I use everything at my disposal to contain or destroy it. The greatest problem our species is facing is the propagation of false information as if it were true. It is a serious and significant threat to our survival. I refuse to just idly stand by while members of my species try to destroy my species, intentionally or otherwise. I won't silence you or anyone else, I believe wholly in free speech. But I won't just be silent either.

Never happened, never will happen. I don't start insulting people until I'm insulted. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

False. Just because you never saw the instigating incident doesn't mean there wasn't one that can still be referenced years later. Maybe you should spend some time reading through topics that predate you. There's a good 6 years of those topics. The fact is that you can not point to a single occasion where I attacked someone unprovoked in my nearly 11 year stint here.

You have yet to post a useful analysis of anything. 90% of the time it's a giant wall of text that noone reads because they get half a paragraph in before they conclude you don't know what you're talking about, or you're talking about something bizarre. You aren't generally a dick so people don't jump at the opportunity to ridicule you, the way they do beligerent theists, But the lack of response to so many of your posts should tell you something.

You have never been asked to tolerate me, and you won't be. You are free to ignore me, or leave, or whatever else you want to do. It won't make me ignore you, but we're all free to do and say what we like. That's why this is the best forum on the internet.

Says the guy who has 2 of his last 3 posts nearly exclusively dedicated to personal attacks. lol

I don't know if she was behind him laughing or if he was speaking metaphorically, but I would have ignored it. Kinda pointless to respond to a person who isn't actually posting here.

Both of you need to grow thicker skin.

and letting it be. Only one more item, He dosen't insult unless he's insulted first. Check his post 22, but you know you don't need to. Well , maybe I do need a thicker skin as you say. Thanks for your concern. OK, lets move on, what's next.