How can I get people to read my blog?

[Thoth]

The phrase you're looking for is "TLDR".

[curtis290]

i too feel strongly that history is best viewed through rose tinted glasses.

A common liberal critique of conservatives, but usually an insubstantial one. Could you be more specific please?

Okay, I actually did read all of that post, though it hurts my eyes a little. You might try smaller paragraphs--not less said overall, just break it into smaller bits to be easier on the eyes.

I think you're over-generalizing in many cases, and in some spots I don't even get what you mean; for example, I didn't marry my wife out of career considerations. My big problem at the present is that I don't have a career, or prospects for a career. I suppose you're saying that's the problem, but really a lot of it seems the inevitable consequence of technological progress and increasing education. The world was a lot less complex "back in the day," but that's because back in the day they didn't have computers, airplanes, decent medicine, telecommunications, in many cases indoor plumbing...you can't turn back the clock now, so it seems pointless to complain about it.

OK, first, you might have no married your wife for career considerations, but most women marry men based on their career and income, and most men wouldn’t marry a woman far below them as far as class goes. Second, as far as turning back the clock goes, that’s where I disagree with you. I believe in a political system that does not worship economic growth or necessarily speedy technological progress for the populace as a whole, so I believe that economic gains can and should be sacrificed for the good of the nation. In such a state, people are tougher and less concerned with the prospects of economic growth…they’re willing to sacrifice getting that fancy new car if it means new sets of night-vision goggles for a few soldiers.

There are actually plenty of people, liberal and conservative, complaining about the impact of "social media" on social behavior. I'm the wrong person to talk to about that, since as an Aspie I rarely socialize in the first place, but I think a lot of the concern is overblown. It's a weird and, to me, baffling way of living to constantly check Facebook status or send text messages, but I haven't read anything indicating that people, young or old, have lost actual social skills as a result. If people feel lonely and electronics aren't doing anything for them, they'll have a face-to-face talk with somebody. If they don't have somebody, they'll find somebody. It might not be a perfect existence, but if rural American life was all that great William Jennings Bryan would never have had a career.

OK, again I’m going to disagree. It might have to do with how old you are, but I’m noticing HUGE changes in the way people interact. Facebook has completely changed the way we interact with each other and meet people. When you meet someone you keep track of them by friending them on Facebook. This means that people are much more accessible and easy to contact, but this accessibility actually makes things harder. Since it’s so “easy” to meet anybody, it devalues each meeting and interaction you have with someone. Earlier meeting someone was a big deal, now we meet so many people and it’s so easy to do so online that it’s completely casual now. But it’s more than Facebook, it’s cell phones, texting, messenger, lots of different things.

If you don’t think people are changing, ask older people, especially those who work in schools. I’ve been talking to a lot of my old teachers about this, and they say the kids are changing every year. They interact differently and they have shorter attention spans. There are more social outcasts than before, and lots more gamers that have poor social skills. I’ve talked to a counselor that told me she has visibly seen social skills get worse and worse with kids, and she blames messenger and Facebook. I mean look at these forums. We have all these people that go here for their socializing instead of doing it in real life.

I believe this place is so snarky primarily because we're a fairly closed, static community. We get maybe one or two new, active members per year. The rest have been around for a while, we've gone over a lot of the major topics of discussion, and we all pretty much know what everybody thinks. For example, if I criticize the wealthy, DinoDoc will jump down my throat, while mentioning gay marriage will cause BK to appear and tell everyone that gay sex causes cancer of the booty and anyway gay people don't know how to be monogamous. Actually, when BK's active he invariably shuts down any attempt at serious discussion by jacking threads onto his pet issues. That's another reason.

That’s too bad, this place used to have way more traffic. That being said, there is a lot of funny stuff here, the wiseass comments can be very entertaining at times (:

It's all about presentation, not substance. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/03/ma...1&ref=magazine

Glenn Beck is an idiot. All the conservative pundits are the same. They talk about family values, but they really mean lower tax cuts and smaller government. In relation to our GDP, the government is much smaller and less intrusive now than it was during the Golden Age of the 1950s. How will cutting taxes and downsizing the government keep families from getting divorced? From losing their faith and values? He’s a crook, he’s just like Ann Coulter, trying to make money off of his ridiculous discourse.

You quoted my "This is just a jew-baiting away from...." and yet completely failed to grasp the significance.

Sorry, I don’t get it. You compared me to the Nazis, and I said I wasn’t anti-Semitic, so I have nothing to do with them. It’s too much important of a part of their philosophy. What are you saying here?

I read your post, Curtis. All of it.

As C0ckney said, the past isn't quite as wonderful as you paint it. Even Karl Marx recognised that Capitalism was ultimately progressive. That isn't progressive as in people having too much sex - that's progressive in that people live better, healthier, and less painful lives - which they do. Not all people of course. In my city, the 1840's were brutal and horrific for most ordinary folk, which is why Marx, who witnessed it all, thought that something better must follow the capitalism that he saw. What happened is that the pain of early industrialism did eventually create better living conditions.

I'm not saying that there aren't specific problems with the way things are now, but those ancestors of ours would probably swap their lives for ours in an instant, given the opportunity.

OK, thanks. This is what I mean: good points and intelligent discourse. Now there’s lots to talk about but I’ll keep it brief for everyone’s sake (:. Capitalism is progressive in that it leads to technological advancements, but usually the process was mostly painful. The main issue was that it just happened too fast. Had the governments done a better job to slow it down, it would have been much easier on the populace. They did (in your country, see the poor laws of the 18th century and Speenhamland). Now I’m not anti-capitalist, and I do agree with you that it was good for people in the long run, but I do believe that the market can and should be subverted for human and cultural needs.

But as for your comments on the ancestors, that’s a whole different issue. According to liberal theory, we should be infinitely happier than our ancestors. We have more freedoms and much more in terms of material comforts. We should just be bursting with joy every day. Yet the rate of depression and suicide is appalling in the OECD countries. This is mostly because of religion’s lack of presence in our lives and because the liberal lifestyle is unfulfilling. We’re supposed to pursue happiness for ourselves, but the pursuit of happiness means that we’re pursuing the happiness we don’t have, whether it’s a promotion, a bonus, or that big new house. It is also because we’re accustomed to whatever we are brought up in. We’re used to this environment and it seems normal to us, despite its many comforts.

So yes, if one of us were put into a farming community in 1840, we wouldn’t like it because we’re not tough enough for that kind of work and we’re addicted to our conveniences. But this doesn’t mean that they were worse off than we were. If they were transplanted into our society, I don’t know how they’d react. On the one hand, they would be thankful for its many comforts. But I think they would ultimately find it an unfulfilling lifestyle. They wouldn’t understand why we spend and borrow so much.

The men would have a very difficult time adjusting to the white-collar workplace. They’d be too tough for that kind of work and would probably have to work in a factory or something of the sort. But even then that wouldn’t be as fulfilling to them as working their own land. It’s not like there’s room for the small farmer in this society.

The kids would become accustomed to this society and have a set of problems totally foreign to the parents’ understanding. They probably wouldn’t go to church and they would be rebellious and disrespectful. The girls would be promiscuous and the boys would be weak, and they couldn’t be punished the normal way, since that is considered inhumane in liberal society. They couldn’t be appreciative of what they had since it would be all they’re used to. They would suffer from anxiety and depression and turn to alcoholism and drugs.

There is more to life than freedom and material comforts. This is something that lies outside the liberal philosophy. And the pursuit of happiness, the accumulation of wealth and material possessions is ultimately not a fulfilling lifestyle. This is why I believe that religion keeps resurging in the US despite the fact that it is the most classically liberal country. Especially without much history and a corporate manufactured culture, Americans find this liberal lifestyle very unsatisfying and continue to turn to religion for guidance. So I want a state and a people that don’t buy into liberalism. Of course their quality of life will be higher than their ancestors of the 1940s, we have the technology, but the pursuit of wealth won’t be our goal. We’ll be more than willing to sacrifice the fancy house, clothes, car, and plasma screen TV for our cultural and national goals, whether it’s getting rid of the garbage that’s on TV or fighting terrorists abroad.

I don't think I've ever seen someone write that much before in their posts. I read one sentence and decided I was bored of it already.

Sheesh, you must really hate books then!

The phrase you're looking for is "TLDR".

What does that mean? To look ‘something’ read?




Oh, and you'll all happy to know that I'm starting to go to conservative forums for an audience. It actually has been much less successful than my time here. At least here, a few people are willing to read what you have to say and to have an intelligent discussion with you. I went to one forum called conservativesforum.com. Apparently it's the #1 American conservative forum online. I made a brief post there introducing myself and my beliefs. It wasn't bad at all, although in the last sentence I was a little too opinionated and said you libertarians are too concerned with material comforts to make sacrifices for what's worthwhile. Within 10 minutes I was banned from the forum. I can't even access a single page from the website.

Next I went to conservativecave.com. I introduced myself, asking if I could find any conservatives who don't worship the free market. People were furious. But they were so much less intelligent than the people on this forum. There's a lady who is convinced that only Christian nations 'do well with capitalism' as well as a guy who doesn't think the Scandinavian countries are atheist because they practice viking and norse religion. He's also convinced that all of Japan's economic gains are a result of stealing American technology. A few people told me to go to the Libertarian forums, even though I specifically accused them of being too libertarian. Anyways, if you want some entertainment, just check it out. http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,49273.0.html

I agree with many of the American conservative's problems with academia. It has an overwhelmingly liberal (and sometimes Marxist) bias, as well as far too much faith in science, progress, and 'rationality' (sometimes the most obvious truths can't be proven by statistics or in an academic study and don't seem rational, but that doesn't mean they aren't true). But man, their anti-intellectualism really gets me down sometimes.

[MOBIUS]

This guy's definitely channelling Darkstar...

[Felch]

This guy is ****ing hilarious.

He's gotta be somebody's DL.

[Thoth]

What does that mean? To look ‘something’ read?

To Long. Didn't Read.

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,49273.0.html

Nice job. It took 4 pages before any of them figured out you were trolling.

[DaShi]

Glad to see Chris found a place that accepts him.

[Heraclitus]

This guy claims to be familiar with my postings over the years yet claims that I'm a liberal

Oh and I'm not Black, dude.

Quit faking we've heard you ghetto accent.

However in all seriousness I've seen you implcitly refer to yourself as White and as nonWhite. What is your selfidentification? If I recall right you father is Syrian or Lebanese Arab right?

@Curtis: CC stands for Creative Commons. It lets you pick and choose whcih rights you withold and which you give away to any work registered under it.

[Solomwi]

I believe in a political system that does not worship economic growth or necessarily speedy technological progress for the populace as a whole, so I believe that economic gains can and should be sacrificed for the good of the nation. In such a state, people are tougher and less concerned with the prospects of economic growth…they’re willing to sacrifice not getting that fancy new car if it means new sets of night-vision goggle for a few soldiers.

[Dinner]

You could try actually writing something interesting. The current post is utter crap.

[curtis290]

@Curtis: CC stands for Creative Commons. It lets you pick and choose whcih rights you withold and which you give away to any work registered under it.

Did it, but I'm not quite sure how it'll help get people to read it.

I believe in a political system that does not worship economic growth or necessarily speedy technological progress for the populace as a whole, so I believe that economic gains can and should be sacrificed for the good of the nation. In such a state, people are tougher and less concerned with the prospects of economic growth…they’re willing to sacrifice getting that fancy new car if it means new sets of night-vision goggles for a few soldiers.

So you're saying that during a time of war, like the one we're in now, you would refuse to take a tax hike if it meant better equipment for our soldiers?

You could try actually writing something interesting. The current post is utter crap.

This is what I mean. You can't even mention one thing about it? Offer some sort of comment? Something you specifically disagreed with? Just saying something is crap without even mentioning one reason why does not constitute contructive criticism.

Oh, and you all should check out the link http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,49273.0.html. I got banned from the forum without warning or explanation (even after emailing the administrator twice asking why I was banned). Now I can't even access it from my computer. I did leave a last post under davis788 in the introductions section that should be worth reading, but I haven't seen it since I got banned on that computer as well. The right in this country disgusts me. They can't engage in any kind of intellectual discourse and think about big-picture questions. The answer to everything is always lower taxes and smaller government. And if you disagree with them on economic issues, you're not a 'real' conservative and they will ostracize you.

I am a social conservative first and foremost, and I believe in a strong foreign policy. This, in my opinion, makes me a conservative. And just like Republicans from the Bretton Woods era, I have a reasonable view on states and markets. But since I don't buy into their Reaganomics bulls##t I'm not one of them, and even trying to talk about my point of view enrages them. Also, my request for membership was banned at freeconservatives.com and nopc.com, the two other big conservative forums. It's ridiculous. They don't even want to listen to anyone who doesn't think just like them. Atheist libertarians who emphasize individual rights and don't believe in foreign policy are accepted there, as are conservative Christians whose primary concern are social issues. But when you get a social conservative who isn't a total libertarian, he's some kind of heretic. My hope is that the crisis will change their minds.

[Dinner]

This is what I mean. You can't even mention one thing about it? Offer some sort of comment? Something you specifically disagreed with?

It was just generic right wing crap, on topics which the mouth breathers constantly whine about, it had the authority worship and desires for a strong man to come and save you just like most right wing idiots have, and it just didn't have anything new or interesting or even worth reading. If you want to do the same thing as all the other nuts great but you'd better do it better then the professional nuts because they already have that sad little niche filled so I'd suggest coming up with an actual original idea instead of parroting someone else's dog and pony show.

[Al B. Sure!]

Check out the last few pages of the thread that curtis linked to:

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,49273.0.html

We're allowing you to remain just for the sheer entertainment of our general membership. I doubt that you'll make it through the weekend.

You are in my opinion a troll pretending to be a conservative,you have no rational thought process and that is demonstrated by your random and contradictory outbursts.

oh, for heaven's sake. why are we still feeding this guy? every reply he makes increases his google index score because he put his silly little blog URL in his sig.

I quit reading his **** when I saw the phrase "economic egalitarianism". first of all, it's redundant. second of all, it makes it clear that this little princess just had his first few classes in philosophy 101, and suddenly thinks that he understands the world.

somebody needs a hobby. or a girlfriend. or a phukpuppet. but he definitely needs something.

Finally! Whether conservativecave.com or Apolyton, something we can all agree on!


Curtis, out of curiosity, are you from Detroit?

[KrazyHorse]

I know. This kid is too ****ing much.

[Boris Godunov]

If you're as mind-numbingly boring in your blog posts as you are here, I'm afraid no one can help you.

[Kuciwalker]

I know. This kid is too ****ing much.

I managed to get through about half of the paragraph Solomwi was responding to before my eyes glazed over.