2008-10-21

und1sk0: (Default)
2008-10-21 09:34 am

Don't be a fool! Stay in school! The ED-U-CATION RAP!

Ha-ha ha-ha huh!

Check it, yo:



DAMN YO, THAT IS CRAZY FRESH MAD STYLIN' WITH THE TIMES, SEEN!

Man, I fucking hate everything about modern advertisement media, focus groups and the genericization (NEW WORD!@ EN.WIKTIONARY.COM HOLLA, WUT?) of trends.

But is it inevitable, for the laws for thermodynamics state that which is cool tends to suck over time.

Now, personally I've never been in love with the term "blog." It sounds like something you do in your pants when you've been drinking cordials all night, find yourself with a mixed group of party kids and cross-dressers and accidentally snort heroin for the first time at 5am in the morning(*).

(* PLZ ADD TO URBAN DICTIONARY)

Let's come up with an alternative term for "blogging", one that cannot be easily co-opted by Madison Avenue?

I was thinking of maybe "FUCKSHIT".. As in,

"FUCKSHITTING on the road with the Obama campaign, I was struck by the earnest and unbridled optimism of the volunteers; this was truly something I have not experienced in my life in politics. Even the FUCKSHIT-o-sphere is humming with excitement."

Can you dig it?
und1sk0: (Default)
2008-10-21 10:09 pm

Open Question

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society.[1][2] Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.[3][4]

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital, and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.[1]

Socialism is not a discrete philosophy of fixed doctrine and program; its branches advocate a degree of social interventionism and economic rationalization, sometimes opposing each other. Another dividing feature of the socialist movement is the split on how a socialist economy should be established between the reformists and the revolutionaries. Some socialists advocate complete nationalization of the means of production, distribution, and exchange; while others advocate state control of capital within the framework of a market economy. Social democrats propose selective nationalization of key national industries in mixed economies combined with tax-funded welfare programs; Libertarian socialism (which includes Socialist Anarchism and Libertarian Marxism) rejects state control and ownership of the economy altogether and advocates direct collective ownership of the means of production via co-operative workers' councils and workplace democracy.

In the 1970s and the 1980s, Yugoslavian, Hungarian, Polish and Chinese Communists instituted various forms of market socialism combining co-operative and State ownership models with the free market exchange.[5] This is unlike the earlier theoretical market socialist proposal put forth by Oskar Lange in that it allows market forces, rather than central planners to guide production and exchange.[6] Anarcho-syndicalists, Luxemburgists (such as those in the Socialist Party USA) and some elements of the United States New Left favor decentralized collective ownership in the form of cooperatives or workers' councils.


Please explain to me how this in any way describes Senator Barack Obama's economic plan(s).
und1sk0: (Default)
2008-10-21 11:17 pm

Rest in Peace

Stephen Paul "Elliott" Smith, 6th August, 1969 - 21st October, 2003

I wish you had stuck around a little longer to write more songs. We miss you terribly.