Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
Is the U.S. becoming a Third World country for you?
Yes 45%
No 6%
Somewhat (please post) 8%
Not at all 4%
Screw you, alarmist commie!! 34%

Votes: 92

 Welcome to the Third World

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Dec 05, 2001
The President stole the election, with the complicity of the highest court of the land and his brother, a powerful governor.

Then, after a terrorist attack, his Justice Minister started rounding up foreigners and holding them without identifying them to the public.

Meanwhile, the crashing economy kicked thousands out of work, forcing many to line up for unemployment or take 2 or more poverty-wage jobs.

Sound familiar?

The United States may be the richest country on earth, but for more and more Americans, the United States is becoming another poor Latin country.

Below, read the Adequacy.Org guide to getting on with life.


More stories about Globalization
Yumi bai spikim Tok Pisin nau!
The British Empire - Why it was so good.
There was not enough violence in Genoa
Philip Morris Is Right
How to Smash Global Industrial Capitalism Without Leaving Your Bar-Stool
Chip Hell -- the AMD story
The Death of the Channel
Breaking Down the Language Barrier
Shit or Get Off the Pot
A Guide to the United Kingdom for Americans.

More stories by

Hump Day News Wrap-Up #1: Where is Chandra Levy?
The cultural and economic benefits of smoking
Germany Eats Young in Attempt to Globalize
Philip Morris Is Right
In Praise of Censorware
what now for US Israel-Palestinan policy?
Milosevic, Sovereignty, and the War against Terrorism
Something Patriotic that The Geeks Can Do Right Now
Wil Wheaton Moves Beyond Wesley To Internet Stardom
Why They Should Abolish the World Series
Looking For A Few Good Crusaders
Britney Spears' Six-Inch Secret
An Adequate Look at Insider Trading
Google Needs a Winston Smith
America's Case for Packing Heat
What To Do About Arafat?
Koleen Brooks Has Got The Right Stuff
Shit or Get Off the Pot
Don't Be So Patriotic

Americans are very patriotic -- more so than other nations. We're the inventors of Americanism (and Un-Americanism). For us, this belief in Nation goes deeper than in, say, Mexico. There isn't any un-Mexican-ism, is there?

In Mexico, most people are UN-patriotic. You can buy Zapatista T-shirts in the plaza outside Los Pinos, the Mexican White House.

Latin Americans have generations of experience standing on the outside of government decision making. To get their minds off of the fact that they are mere chattel in an iron-fisted dictatorship, they focus on other aspects of life such as football, religion, and music.

As an American adapting to life "post-September 11th," you should do the same.

To people used to living in a Third World Country, the well-lived private life confers a survival advantage. It's best to avoid the likes of Ashcroft, Pinochet and Fujimori, lest you wind up in the black sedans of the secret police.

The results are amazing. Latin Americans, who have perfected the art of surviving government crackdowns, have produced the world's best footballers, the most inspired and spiritual worshipers, and the most passionate and innovative musicians.

What's more, all this culture distracts Third Worlders from their crappy jobs and dreary career prospects. The average dot-com job in the U.S. which may barely pay for rent and food here, is a dream to most of these people! Nonetheless, many Third Worlders are out partying the night away well into their 40's, while the average USian geek is an "old man" when he's 25.

So, take a page from NetSlave's anti-capitalist manifesto and cultivate your own private life.

Another way to relax into Third World living is to disregard the law. Get away with what you can! Why respect the law so much when you, the householder, are paying more taxes than rich corporations?

Third Worlders are well known for participating in the "informal economy." That's the gray market and the criminal underworld, in layman's terms. It includes everything from wildcat currency trading to drug smuggling to funding for "terrorism."

In the Third World, the government and the economy are often so screwed up that whatever moral qualms someone might have about participating in a shady deal dry up like an Atacama jellyfish. In Mexico, heroic polkas are penned to sing the praises of pot smugglers; they're linked back to Mexican heroes like Pancho Villa.

Americans must similarly embrace crime and criminals, if only for practical reasons. In a situation where the worst terrorists in history had valid ID, you've got to respect a nonviolent person that flouts a system of smart ID cards, and helps innocent Americans live their daily lives despite the government crackdown.

I'm not suggesting that you go out and do something that will get you in big trouble. Just quit being such a good citizen.

I'll close with a story I heard one day at Barnes and Noble. A man found a wallet in a parking lot in February 2001. He opened it up and saw an Arabic name and a drivers license from an Arab country.

He took the wallet to the managers of the store that owned the lot. They refused to take it, saying they weren't responsible for lost items.

He took the wallet to the police, who said that they didn't handle that sort of thing. So, he took the wallet home and put it in a closet in his house.

After September 11th, the man was watching the news and saw that the FBI was looking for tips and leads. He decided to be a good citizen and used his lunch break to take the wallet to the FBI office.

The FBI agents shut him in a little room with 2 agents and a bright light. For 3 hours they bullied and badgered him, asking "How long have you been hiding him?" and "How do you know him?"

When they let him out, the man felt dizzy and decided not to return to work -- and not to be such a "good citizen" next time.

For further reading:

Will your household survive?

How to not be an idiot at a job interview.

What happened the last time the FBI started running around after political groups.


Hardly worth a response. (1.00 / 2) (#1)
by Adol on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 11:12:34 AM PST
Yet I am. :P

I've gotten familiar with this site through it's "news" stories, and this is more of the same. Hoaxish jibber-jabber.
~~~ Adol, adventurer extrodinaire.

Have you got a job? (none / 0) (#2)
by perdida on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 11:22:27 AM PST
Are you free?

etc. etc.

This is what democracy looks like

USA != Democracy (none / 0) (#5)
by MessiahWWKD on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 05:04:41 PM PST
I don't know about you, but I would never want USA to become a true democracy (i.e. mob rule).
For all of those wondering, the United States of America was never a democracy. It was designed to be a constitutional republic although in some ways, it has become more democratic (i.e. the people elect senators instead of the house).
Not that democracy is wrong in general, but I believe it is in government.
Guardian angel, heavenly friend, walk with me 'til the journey's end.

i agree (none / 0) (#30)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:44:59 AM PST
The USA must become a true democracy if it wants to survive. Democratic Republic is no longer sufficient to quell the waves of hostile enemies assaulting USA dominance in world stage. Democracy means all will vote for the best good, more people vote = more votes = better, q.e.d.

USA must prepare for the coming global super storm if any hope left to survive. Don't be caught up in the anarchronism.

your missing the point (none / 0) (#73)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 03:30:31 AM PST
The USA becoming a democracy will be the end of the USA as a country. The problem with a democracy is that once the majority realizes they can vote to take money away from wealthy people( the minority)and give it to themselves the whole system will fly into chaos. Were almost there now with senators and congressmen giving out entitlements. Seriouslly all they have to say is that if you vote for that nasty republican he may take your entitlement away or he may refuse to increase taxes on the rich.

America Will Never Be a Third World Nation! (5.00 / 5) (#3)
by Electric Angst on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 11:27:24 AM PST
There is one simple thing that will ensure that the US is not, nor will ever be, a third-world nation. Unlike poor nations, begging for American handouts (such as Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Great Britan, France, Germany, etc.) we don't have any respect for that pseudo-sport Soccer..

When an American says the word "football", he or she means a multi-million dollar game, where real man struggle for territory and do their best while in their best armor. (Because, unlike those pussies in that other pseudo-sport, rugby, Football players are so strong and fast that if they didn't wear armor they would kill each other.)

So, as long as children kicking a flattened ball down dusty streets remains a scene from Buenos Ares, and not Baltimore, the good old USA will always be on top.

In the dark times, will there still be singing?
Yes, there will be singing. There will be singing about the dark times. -- Bertolt Brecht

Replying To: (1.00 / 3) (#7)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 08:50:49 PM PST
Football players waer all that armour because they are so scared that someone will hurt them and they will start crying. id like to see the average football player placed ona rugby ground, with no more armour thatn a mouthguard, have 5 guys ruck the shit out of them, have a 15 man ruck collapse on them multiple times in a game, and run around for 40 minutes with no more than 5 minutes total break

You know less than nothing about football (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by moriveth on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 11:27:55 PM PST
If you had the slightest understanding of football, you would realize that your post is simply a mainfestation of the usual European ignorance about America. First, you confuse the physically normal soccer and rugby players with the infinitely more muscular and developed football players. How would you like a 6'8" 320 lb. guy charging at your midsection with the speed of a sprinter? A professional quarterback has to withstand such an onslaught dozens of times every Sunday. And take a closer look the next time you see a wide receiver jump for a pass with a couple defenders waiting below--crunch! No wonder not a game of America's favorite sport goes by without carting multiple bodies away--torn muscles, broken bones, severe concussions, even the occasional corpse.

Clearly, football is much more indicative of masculine virtue than is soccer or rugby. But that's not the only point of superiority of football. Unlike rugby or soccer, which consist of players running around striving for individual glory, football is a game of incredibly complicated strategy, both on and off the field. Ever seen those complicated X and O diagrams? I have been watching football for many years and still can't understand them--and since my IQ is in the 99th percentile, it clearly takes a rare intellect to play on a football team.

Muscle. Guts. Brains. Football has it all. And soccer, much less rugby? It's a matter of time before they end up in the wastebasket of history, like cricket.

Masculine virtue. (1.00 / 1) (#17)
by tkatchev on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 11:37:27 PM PST
Free clue: "masculine virtue" does not mean beating total strangers into a pulp for no good reason.

Peace and much love...

Really? (none / 0) (#19)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:23:11 AM PST
What would you consider masculine virtue?

in Europe they think Elton John is a man! (3.00 / 1) (#22)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:33:11 AM PST
in Europe they think Elton John is a man!

Who is "Elton John"? (none / 0) (#24)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:35:38 AM PST
Is this some sort of obscure American cultural reference?

Peace and much love...

Sir John (none / 0) (#26)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:37:22 AM PST
Tony Blair said Elton John was "the greatest masculine specimine that i have ever seen"

you queer (none / 0) (#65)
by philipm on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 05:20:07 AM PST
OK, some queen hitting you with her fairy wand and making you a "sir" (why did she have to make you a sir, where you not respected before????) doesn't make you a man!!!!!!!!!!


Oh, I see. (none / 0) (#23)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:33:12 AM PST
I understand now: "masculine virtue" means "possessing of a penis". Conversely, "feminine virtue" means "possessing of a vagina".

Sorry, but some of us outgrew our childhood astomishment with primary gender characteristics. I know that toddlers are shocked to find out that men and women have differing body parts, but really, some people have a mental age greater than five years.

Peace and much love...

asexual reproduction? (none / 0) (#25)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:36:18 AM PST
I read somewhere that Russkies reproduce asexually, is this really true? IS that where those freaky little nesty dolls come from?

I read somewhere... (none / 0) (#39)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 03:43:47 AM PST
...that there is more to life than exploring all the wonderful combinations of friction and gonads. It was probably filthy communist propaganda, though.

Peace and much love...

football players (3.00 / 1) (#48)
by nathan on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 07:35:10 PM PST
They're such manly men, that only other men could love them. (Or cheerleaders, I suppose.) Imagine Theban sacred banders, transposed 2500 years into the future. Sweaty, musclebound, courageous, violent, leonine; and after the battle, how better to celebrate than with rauncy buttsex. Indeed, no woman could possibly belong in their world of power, sun, strength, engorgement, and masculinity.

Haven't we all felt, with the football players, their desperation and sorrow at living lies? Doesn't the violence have just that much of a frantic tinge today? It's a travesty of the first order that the queer theorists have never sought the football players' emancipation from heterosexualist oppression. How poignant it is when lions cry!

Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

As someone (Gore Vidal?) once observed... (none / 0) (#54)
by moriveth on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 12:54:49 AM PST
In America, the most macho activity is not having intercourse with a woman, but rather watching male athletes on television.

Nothing strange in that. (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by tkatchev on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 04:09:09 AM PST
It's well-known that "machismo" strongly correlates to fascism. After all, if you are going to communicate with the opposite sex on any level, you'll have to be somewhat androgynous.

Peace and much love...

Phallocentrism and fascism (none / 0) (#62)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 10:33:22 PM PST
Excellent point.

It has been repeatedly proven that phallic imagery and fascism go hand in hand. One of the primary causes for the Italy's ongoing slide back into fascism has been the presence of many of the world's foremost sports car manufacturers within their nation.

For this reason, I feel that the so-called 9/11 terrorists did the USA an enormous favour by destroying the nation's most prominent double-phallus. Perhaps this decisive action will help to slow the US's own march towards fascism.


double phallus (none / 0) (#64)
by philipm on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 05:17:52 AM PST
Now, which part of the double phallus upsets you wymanist? Is it the part that goes up your butt? Or the part that goes in your front? Because if it is the butt part then you are sorely mistaken, since italians love to have butt sex, everyone with everyone.


Vagina, vagina, vagina (5.00 / 1) (#69)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 03:03:05 PM PST
Are you afraid of the word? You can say cunt if you like. Babbling about my "front" makes me wonder if you know how sex is supposed to work. Perhaps you should ask yourself why female genitalia makes you so uncomfortable that you feel the need to euphemise it away.

I'm just here to nurture.


say it ain't so! (none / 0) (#78)
by nathan on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 01:06:11 PM PST
Wymynyst, have you internalised the phallocentric male dialectic?!

"[H]ow sex is supposed to work," indeed. How it's supposed to work - according to the oppressors.

Please, tell me I've misread the whole thing. I devoutly hope so.

Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

There's no need to be squeamish (none / 0) (#79)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 02:06:57 PM PST
Like it or not, sexual reproduction usually involves penises invading vaginas. This biological mistake on the part of God or evolution has caused our society to develop sexual attitudes based on violence, domination and rape. I don't like it, but I don't see what I'll achieve by pulling the wool over my own eyes.


Suggestion. (none / 0) (#80)
by tkatchev on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 02:41:42 PM PST
Have you looked into artificial insemination? Maybe asexual reproduction? Better yet, you could take up kitten breeding.

Hope that helped.

Peace and much love...

Have you looked into emasculation? (none / 0) (#85)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 10th, 2001 at 12:32:44 PM PST
Just a thought.


I'm there, dude! (-) (5.00 / 1) (#90)
by tkatchev on Tue Dec 11th, 2001 at 01:10:34 AM PST

Peace and much love...

but... but... (none / 0) (#81)
by nathan on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 03:16:22 PM PST
Doesn't this limit the definition of 'sex' to 'procreative heterosexual intercourse?' Is this the way sex is really supposed to work?

I'm frightened and alone.

Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

I'm afraid so (none / 0) (#82)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 04:58:10 PM PST
Defining penetrative sex as a method of obtaining pleasure requires a mindset that defines one of the participants as a giver of pleasure. (Almost always the wymyn.) Penetrative sex is inevitably reduced to a dominance/submission game. Wymyn are expected to accept a role more suited to a bondage fantasy than to a human being, simply because it feels good to men, (and occasionally to wymyn.)

The only excuse for penetrative sex is reproduction. Even this involves a level of violence against wymyn, since it is almost invariably used to enforce traditional gender roles.

Any man who truly loves a wymyn without seeing her as a possession, will find a way to express his affection without forcing her to demean herself for his pleasure. Love is not phallocentric, despite what you have been taught.

--wymynyst (nt) (none / 0) (#83)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 05:00:52 PM PST

One day... (none / 0) (#84)
by hauntedattics on Mon Dec 10th, 2001 at 11:59:18 AM PST
science will figure out a way to get men pregnant, and then we'll have taken another giant step toward equality between the sexes. In the meantime, the enlightened among us XXers will refuse to bear children in protest of the phallocentric patriarchal oppressor.

Now excuse me while I go look at this nice winter wonderland motif.

hey! (none / 0) (#67)
by nathan on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 02:01:28 PM PST
Long time no see!

Anyway, I appreciate your illustration of the link between phallocentrism and fascism. I'd like you to know that, along with Mssrs. Guccione and Hefner, I fully support the wide dissemination of vulvular imagery in our society.

Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

Feminism is a liberalist myth. (none / 0) (#68)
by tkatchev on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 02:36:10 PM PST
Let's face the facts, facts are stubborn things:

  1. Men get conscripted and killed in wars, with no more consideration for their life and dignity than for mere cattle.
  2. Men live less than women, on average; in some places, the difference can measure a whole decade or more!
  3. Men, on average, are more prone to congenital disease.
  4. Men, on avrage, are much more likely to become drug or alcohol addicts.
  5. Men, on average, are much more likely to die a violent death. (Even if we discount war casualties.)
  6. Men, on average, are more prone to psychosis or general mental ill-health.
  7. There is no organized social or political movement for the betterment of men, as a group.
  8. On average, there are more women in the world than men.

I could go on, but I think this is enough. I hope my point is clear just from these few obvious facts.

Peace and much love...

Your heart is in the right place (none / 0) (#70)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 03:10:50 PM PST
I've been away on a feminist retreat. Sometimes I just need to take refuge from the dick-swinging male world and be among like-minded wymyn.

While it is good that you are showing your support for the nurturing vagina over the dominating penis, you have chosen to do it in an unacceptable way. Pornography -- all pornography-- is violence against wymyn. The dominant technic of the smut magazine industry is still penetration. You are worshipping the vulva, but only in its role as a servant to the phallus. This is just not good enough.


Oh, yeah, they're soooo hard... (5.00 / 1) (#55)
by gordonjcp on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 04:04:29 AM PST
Yep, definitely...
You do realise that if you took an American Football player and stuck them on a shinty pitch they'd be *dead* in 2 minutes?
Imagine a game like Ice Hockey, but without any protective gear, much heavier sticks (called "camans", quite sharp edged laminated wood). Oh, and there's hardly any rules about hitting people. And rather than keep the head of the stick near the ground, like hockey, you swing from above the shoulder, like golf.
Bloodshed is almost encouraged, certainly expected.
It has to be seen to be believed. No, in fact it has to be *played* to be believed.

What? Shinty? (3.00 / 2) (#86)
by RobotSlave on Mon Dec 10th, 2001 at 06:29:48 PM PST
Here in America, your "shinty" is a game for teen-aged girls. We call it field hockey, and develop fetishes around the uniform, which features skirts and stockings.

Lord, you Brits will never toughen up. The fact that a woman carries a heavy club, and is accustomed to drawing blood with it, would be considered attractive to a manly American man.

© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

yeah, yeah... (5.00 / 1) (#95)
by gordonjcp on Thu Dec 13th, 2001 at 09:50:21 AM PST
We have field hockey too...
It's nothing like shinty though, but I do have to agree with you about the uniforms :-)
Around 4 or 5 people die every year playing shinty. We don't usually bother with an inquest or anything, we just get on with the game...

when a european says "football" (1.00 / 1) (#11)
by PotatoError on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 10:07:54 PM PST
he or she mean a multi-BILLION dollar game.

Yes, but... (3.00 / 3) (#15)
by jeff on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 11:10:42 PM PST
...when europeans say "billion" they really mean one sixth of an American cent. It's true, go look it up.

Europe is a slave state (4.00 / 1) (#28)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:41:00 AM PST
sorry to break this news to some of you wild eyed idealists, European football players are owned by their teams, that would never go on in the USA, we abolished slavery more than a century ago. Try and learn something from our example, yo?

Comparing football players to slaves (1.00 / 2) (#50)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 08:45:16 PM PST
well, every worker is a slave.
footballplaeyrs do their work.
They play football.

You work at ..dunno...wild guess...shoefactory
You get paid.
You are a slave.
Funny eh?

i guess you don't know too much about football (none / 0) (#93)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 13th, 2001 at 12:44:36 AM PST
I am sorry but your "analogy" is hopelessly moronic. Here is a clue for you:

Can GM trade their autoworkers to Mitsubishi???

You Americans are so shockingly ignorant of (real) football, the most popular sport in the world.

Telling someone that... (none / 0) (#94)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 13th, 2001 at 05:16:11 AM PST
Hmm...moronic eh?
Nice, anonymous shouting.I'm anonymous too, but I doesn't mean I suddenly forgot how to behave.

And from my european point of view, footballplayers are workers.

REAL football eh? (none / 0) (#103)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 10:48:50 AM PST
Yes I can totally see your soccer (or REAL football) you are not aloud to touch the other are not allowed to use the appendages that you have the most skill with....and you shoot into a little goal...sounds real manly to me. Please do not let your envy of anything american make you think that your sports are better than ours. You have only to look at all the young people in every country, specifically their want of American goods, to see how you are wrong.

umm no (3.00 / 1) (#45)
by PotatoError on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 06:52:29 AM PST
There isnt a european currency (yet). So i was working in english pounds. Yes if I was talking about italian lira 1 billion wouldnt be that impressive. But uk pounds are actually stronger than the dollar at 1 = $1.33 (not necessarily a good thing though). seeing as a very good player can be bought by a club for 32 million so in $'s that actually is over $40 million I can assume that the football industry is well over $5 billion easily. Seeing as manchester united is payed 200 million in saterlite TV rights alone and then you have all the other clubs in the UK + all the other ones in Europe. Shit thats a lot of wasted money!

When an American says "football" (none / 0) (#97)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 16th, 2001 at 11:39:44 AM PST
He or she means a multi-BILLION dollar game. Seriously, the money transacted on the Super Bowl alone must approach 1 billion dollars.

ok (none / 0) (#99)
by PotatoError on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 07:43:21 PM PST
yes now we are even and I can sleep soundly tonight.

LOL (1.00 / 2) (#49)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 08:42:07 PM PST
this was hilarious
pathetic patriotism just soaks from your text.
"I believe in God, country and goverment"
no wonder everybody wants to bomb you down.
remember to mark red X to your yard

Well... (none / 0) (#61)
by Electric Angst on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 07:27:00 AM PST
The only thing is, if I get DSL, I'll get a router and 5 static IPs, so I can run every machine in the house off of it. I could also set up my own server if I wanted. Those are the advantages over Cable. The disadvantage is that, to do all that, I'd have to pay upwards of $170 a month...

In the dark times, will there still be singing?
Yes, there will be singing. There will be singing about the dark times. -- Bertolt Brecht

You're crazy (none / 0) (#75)
by theboz on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 09:14:22 AM PST
I do all that, but for $49 a month. I do only get one real static IP address, but I use NAT so it doesn't bother me because I forward certain ports to certain machines anyways.<p>
This is all off topic though, we should be arguing about how the U.S. is starting to suck worse than ever in our lives, or at least since the 80's.

All becomes very clear (none / 0) (#66)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 12:11:02 PM PST
There, now you know why everyone hates the Americans. You're such an arrogant asshole... a perfect sample!

Only in America (none / 0) (#74)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 04:23:52 AM PST
Only the USians would invent a game that's so stupid noone else wants to play it just so they can win. Because we all know that's the real reason. You guys can't stand losing (which you will to the much more well-fit and trained people in Europe), so you invent a bunch of silly games like your wannabe-rugby and wannabe-cricket. I mean that's really pathetic. That's like wrestling with your imaginary friend Fluffy, just because you can't beat the other children in the sandbox, then go around screaming about how good you are when you've pounded Fluffy into the ground. Well I'm not impressed, and frankly, noone else is either. You can play your pathetic little sports, but don't come touting your horn about it, we all know you're just losers.

Deep denial. (none / 0) (#76)
by moriveth on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 10:40:49 AM PST
The U.S. dominates the Olympics year after year--perhaps not quite the dominance we show in military might or Nobel Prizes, but nevertheless we are the unquestioned world leader in athletics.

But keep your head in the sand, Anonymous Reader. Your snotty attitude is precisely why the U.S. will continue to kick Euro-ass in every meaningful area of human endeavor.

It's a question of size. (none / 0) (#77)
by tkatchev on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 11:30:48 AM PST
Look, if you add all the medals that member states of the E.U. get, you'll definitely get more than U.S. You can't really compare all of the U.S. to some pissant country like Belgium or Holland; for any meaningful comparison, you'll need to compare the U.S. to all of the E.U.

Peace and much love...

Wake up, tkatchev. (none / 0) (#87)
by RobotSlave on Mon Dec 10th, 2001 at 06:40:46 PM PST
If you wanted to count the total of all EU teams against the US, then to be fair, you'd have to let the US field one team for each State, or something. Which might be a good idea, as there are so many euro-ass-kicking US athletes that fail to make the cut during the trials.

© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

re (none / 0) (#91)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Dec 11th, 2001 at 08:58:07 AM PST
No better yet take a random sample of populations from ages 20-40 have them compete, then tell me how fat yanks will go then. (Of course the states will have loads of good athletes 300 millionish pple).

Indeed. (none / 0) (#92)
by moriveth on Tue Dec 11th, 2001 at 09:59:53 AM PST
America's Olympic dominance is symbolized by NBA star Vince Carter jumping over a 7'2" French defender in the 2000 Olympics.

As Carter demonstrated, American athletes are so far superior to their European counterparts that one can make no reasonable comparison.

What?? (2.00 / 2) (#4)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 01:24:31 PM PST
Okay, there are alot of differences between the US and Mexico, you can't compare them fairly. And the Barnes and Noble story really sounds like it was made up. There are no facts that can be independantly confirmed! Don't you even wonder if the story is true? Of course not, you're a communist, like everyone else on this website.

Why? (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 08:43:51 PM PST
I wish I knew what could possibly possessed the world to get to the state where the only way for someone to protest not being free in his own land is to blow himself up. The world powers ignore a brewing uprising, and instead fuel a circle of violence that is spiraling out of control towards a very bloody war.

Forget living like a 3rd world country. Eventually, the Saudi king is going to die, radicalists are going to ceise power, the US economy is going to go into deflation, nuclear war in Israel, anarchy at home. Time to live like the Flintstones. GAME OVER.

"Yes, my skin is whiter than yours."

sorry dude (none / 0) (#33)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:49:44 AM PST
white boy, grow up get a job, join a protest, find a useful contribution to society and stop wasting time on the internet whining about the problems of your "nation"!

In my country we laugh at USA!

GAME OVER!!!!!!!!!!

there are many poor people in america because (1.00 / 2) (#8)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 08:52:37 PM PST
its the american way to shit on everyone and step over everyone and thing you ever cared about in an attempt to fill your pockets with gold

Laziness leads to poverty. (4.00 / 1) (#9)
by MessiahWWKD on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 09:01:29 PM PST
They're poor because they're lazy and need to get jobs! Perhaps we should ship all the homeless over to Europe. They'd actually fit in there.
Guardian angel, heavenly friend, walk with me 'til the journey's end.

no... (none / 0) (#21)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:31:59 AM PST
Nobody should be poor in a country as rich as USA, everyone should make 1 million dollars a year, just take away Bill Gates' money!

Bill Gates is a Liberal Myth (none / 0) (#40)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 03:47:17 AM PST
Actually, most of Gates' capital worth is in worhtless Microsoft stock. It sounds great on paper, but in reality he isn't that rich at all. He owns surprisingly little tangible, real-world capital; that means that if some sort of market crash happened (akin to the "dotcom bubble", only wider in scale) Gates would be left bankrupt.

Peace and much love...

Capital worth is a liberal myth (none / 0) (#71)
by fluffy grue on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 09:35:05 PM PST
The only truly meaningful form of "worth" is what you own in physical, tangible goods. Even "cold, hard cash" is merely a convenient representation of "money on paper" (ironic statement intended). After all, US$1 is just 1.0 shares in the US Economy, and its value is constantly going down (due to so-called "inflation").

Oil is power (none / 0) (#102)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 20th, 2001 at 07:59:33 AM PST
He who can destroy a thing controls the thing.

A bright and shining future could be ours (5.00 / 6) (#10)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 09:17:17 PM PST
The dual shocks of the dot-com collapse and the 9/11 terrorist attacks have demonstrated the vulnerability of the United States' economy. The dot-com collapse showed that America's soaring stock market was held aloft by nothing more than wishful thinking. The financial devastation in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks has shown that a handful of determined madmen can easily derail the world's largest economy.

It will only take a few more blows against the United States, a few judiciously placed bombs, a biowarfare scare or two, for our whole economic structure to burn, crumble, and fall thundering to the ground, the eceonomic health of the globe being crushed alongside it. The haves will consolidate their wealth and power, and have-nots will be forced to fight over crumbs. Evidence that this grim scenario is already becoming a reality can be found in the sweeping tax cuts for the rich that are being implemented by the Bush Administration. Next will come massive cuts in social programs, followed by an exodus from the cities, as the rich move private to gated communities, the better to protect their hoarded wealth. The poor, the unemployed, the disabled will be left to fend for themselves. New York City wil be converted into a gigantic maximum security prison. In Australia, gangs of fierce warriors will prowl the outback in surpercharged cars, armed with makeshift medieval-style weaponry. In the few deteriorating cities still remaining, outlaw computer cowboys dwelling in high-tech Sprawls will plug their brains directly into cyberspace, stealing information to sell to the highest bidder.

In short, it will all be very, very cool. So do your part today to turn the world into a post-holocaust wasteland. Stop buying stuff. Set up a car bomb in you local financial district. Mail someone anthrax. Wear your hair in a mohawk. Learn how to use a crossbow. The future could be a really fun place to live if we all work together to make it so.

i really liked that comment (5.00 / 5) (#13)
by PotatoError on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 10:18:04 PM PST
it started bad but ended up quite cool. In the post-holocaust wasteland I would join up with some other people and we would have a base like a big tower or something. And it would be like mad max or waterworld - except without so much water and once we had dealt with food and heat and stuff, we would collect lots of guns and cars and gas and make defences and build a huge tower to see enemies coming and we would also collect loads of computers so we could play network quake all day. And then we would find other friendly bases like our own and would lay massive cables between the bases and set up the internet again. So then we could play online quake with like hundreds of players. And there would be no religion and no wars and everyone would just make graphics cards and network devices all day and then one day we would make a spacecraft and fly until we found other civilisations and we would lay massive cables between our worlds and set up a massive interplanetary internet and then we could play quake with millions of players in one game. It might be a bit laggy though.

You're really cool. [nt] (none / 0) (#14)
by jeff on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 11:08:38 PM PST

I want to join your tower! (none / 0) (#101)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 20th, 2001 at 07:56:39 AM PST
It sounds like it would r0x0r

too late dude (none / 0) (#27)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:39:12 AM PST
USA is already a police state, i bet u don't even own a gun, sad little pansies u r

guns (none / 0) (#98)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 12:26:42 AM PST
you think guns can keep you safe?
unfortunately, if the government were to take drastic actions, it would be supported by the majority of the economic/military/social power in the country. otherwise it would be foolish to even begin. think how easy it would have been for the american government to have all middle eastern immagrants deported immediately after september 11th. ridiculously easy, and it would have been smiled upon by the bulk of the masses.
to sum it up: guns can't protect you from the majority. fortunately, i bend with the wind easily.

Two men enter - one man leaves! (none / 0) (#41)
by lowapproach on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 03:55:42 AM PST
I could not agree more, particularly in the area of a massively overdeveloped judicial system. Hundreds of millions of dollars to train every year's graduating class of law students, billions wasted on fees and paperwork and a system in itself so complex that even experts can battle indefinitely on one point with no clear victory. Even now the U.S. must resort to special military courts to try, convict and execute terrorists, because of the weakness of the present system.

Because of this, I propose that we combine civil and criminal proceedings under one roof, with plaintiff and defendant squaring off in ceiling-bracketed bungee harnesses. They will attempt to reach weapons fastened to the bars of the dome from which the public will look on, and within minutes every claim can be solved. In addition, those who break a deal should face the wheel, without exception.

This said, I am unequivocally not in favor of Tina Turner having a role in this new judicial system, even if she controls the methane pits with an iron hand.

I am so there (none / 0) (#52)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 09:42:32 PM PST
I completely agree.

Tina Turner is not to be trusted. How can we accept her treatment of Ike.

Third World my ass. (2.25 / 4) (#12)
by dreadfulgrape on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 10:09:28 PM PST
Third World my ass.

Perdida, do you even know what the Third World is? It sure isn't Mexico. The Third World is Afghanistan, or Central Africa, or New Guinea, i.e. cultures which haven't even made it to the industrial age yet.

Here's how I spent yesterday in your so-called "third world" nation: I awoke, showered and enjoyed fresh-ground premium coffee while I drove my brand-new gas-guzzling pickup truck to my job, where I'm well-paid and well-liked. Ordered lunch in. Went home as six, had a great dinner with the family, watched a DVD with the kids, tucked them in to bed, boinked the wife, did a couple of bong hits (oops, there I go disregarding the law) and fell asleep.

But I digress. The problem, perdida, is that your premise is all wrong. George Bush did not steal the election; only whining liberal bedwetters still believe that tired old line.

I'll grant you that Ashcroft is a bit of jack-booted thug, but I'll take him over the hideous Janet Reno any day as A.G. Lesser of two evils. (Reno will lose against Jeb Bush in Florida, BTW).

The U.S., far from being a third-world anything, actually runs the motherfuckin' planet in ways you don't even comprehend. We are the dominant market, culture, economy and military power. Crashing economy? What horseshit. Go live in Argentina, where money is worthless and the interest rate is 500%. Honestly, you don't know what you're talking about.

Here's the reason most people are getting laid off: They were working for companies that aren't making any money, or at least not enough to support the bloated workforce they had previously. In fact, over the past 18 months unemployment has only risen 1.5% -- not bad, considering the way the stock market cratered. Not exactly The Great Depression redux.

Third World? On the contrary, we're what everybody else is the world is trying to be.

Funny. (none / 0) (#18)
by tkatchev on Wed Dec 5th, 2001 at 11:42:49 PM PST
The U.S., far from being a third-world anything, actually runs the motherfuckin' planet in ways you don't even comprehend. We are the dominant market, culture, economy and military power.

It seems like you truly believe this. Sad. How many foreigners do you personally know? No, scratch that, how many real-life foreigners have you seen on TV? Yeah, that's what I thought. Whatever keeps you happy, though -- if you didn't have your deluded fantasies to make you happy, you'd probably go crazy and dynamite a high-school.

Peace and much love...

Russia is a thrid world nation (none / 0) (#20)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:29:57 AM PST
Face the facts, Mexico is richer than your weenie country. Lol, no wonder Mickey Ds is in every country in the world including Somalia Afghanistand and Bangladesh.

Huh? (none / 0) (#32)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:47:18 AM PST
I fail to see what "being richer" means when applied to a whole country. I sincerely doubt that Mexicans enjoy a higher standard of life that the average inhabitant of Moscow. In fact, have you ever been in, say, North Carolina? Can you seriously say that those poor people live better than the average Mexican peasant? 80% of the world's population has never seen a real telephone in their whole life. On the global scale, if you know how to use a telephone, you may consider yourself part of the global capitalist elite.

As for McDonalds, I think you are confused. There are all sorts of different restaurants here -- for example, Japanese and Chinese cuisine is very popular. There are many more Mexican or Chinese restaurants than American ones. McDonalds is not in any way a cultural phenomenon, it is simply one more restaurant chain among thousands. The only reason people hate McDonalds is for dismal food quality and predatory employment policies. Chinese restaurants, for example, get as much flak for hiring illegal immigrants.

Peace and much love...

ignore that lamer (none / 0) (#34)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 12:52:16 AM PST
100% of people in North Carolina have used a telephone. Dobrei Den.

Exactly. (none / 0) (#37)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 03:41:06 AM PST
That's my point. If the people living in one-room North Carolina shacks are considered "filthy rich" on a global scale, imagine what squalor 80% of the world's population lives in!

Peace and much love...

P.S. (none / 0) (#38)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 03:42:28 AM PST
Dobryj denj. :)

Peace and much love...

Nonsense. (none / 0) (#46)
by dreadfulgrape on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 07:15:43 AM PST
"How many foreigners do you personally know? No, scratch that, how many real-life foreigners have you seen on TV? Yeah, that's what I thought. Whatever keeps you happy, though -- if you didn't have your deluded fantasies to make you happy, you'd probably go crazy and dynamite a high-school."

I honestly have no idea what you mean by this -- I've worked with people of many nationalities, Hispanic, Indian, Chinese, etc. I've travelled to Europe on three occasions (ages 18, 25 and 35) so I have seen other cultures close-up. I'd love to go to Japan someday.

If a middle-Easterner who's let his student Visa expire gets rounded up for questioning, quite frankly that's his problem, not mine.

No, I can assure you my happiness is genuine, based upon the fact that I've worked hard to achieve the kind of life I've envisioned for myself.

Sad (none / 0) (#47)
by seventypercent on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 10:44:00 AM PST
I always get a kick out of people who claim that drug abuse is a "victimless crime." You are an excellent example of the fallaciousness of that argument. If you are using illegal drugs in your home in the presence of small children, then those children ought to be taken away from you. The fact that so many "parents" (and I use the term very broadly) behave in such ways with young children in the house is something that angers me very deeply. If you successfully go through a rehab program and test negatively for six months, then I would be supportive of giving your children back. But just barely.

Red-blooded patriots do not use Linux.

victim less (none / 0) (#63)
by philipm on Sat Dec 8th, 2001 at 05:10:26 AM PST
Actually, If you think about it, killing someone is a completely victimless crime.

The victim dies!

If you start bringing into it how other people feel, then some namby pamby liberal will feel bad no matter what you do.


USA is a third world country (3.00 / 1) (#36)
by nobbystyles on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 02:27:22 AM PST
in terms of income distribution, crap education system, corruption, nepotism (the Bushes) and lack of human rights (Ashcroft's FBI friendly policies) . I think like we used call the USSR 'Upper Volta with missiles', we should call the USA 'Somalia with Tomahawks'.

I am glad I live in an enlightened and modern country like the United Kingdom....

Depends on the definition of Third World (none / 0) (#42)
by ausduck on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 04:36:53 AM PST
Looking purely at the strength of the US economy (however temporary that may be, and ignoring the problems that you mentioned), might it not be argued that in fact the US is moving towards the Second World (now defunct Communist bloc). The harsh restrictions on freedoms in the US seems to me to modelling themselves on Stalinist ways.
Maybe we could call them the USSR with money, or something.

More like North Korea with greenbacks (none / 0) (#43)
by nobbystyles on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 04:45:03 AM PST
Parallels are uncanny. Heditary presidency, hatred of foreigners, stupid badges US flag on all the politicos proclaiming their orthodoxy and intolerance to dissent.

Funny that you mention it. (none / 0) (#44)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 04:56:16 AM PST
Actually, there are only a handful of functioning corporations in the U.S. -- if you look at the scale and the amount of government inbreeding of monsters[1] like AOL, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, etc., you'll see that the sheer monstrosity of these corporations is unmatched by anything except former Soviet industry giants. I can't honestly call these corporations "capitalist" -- if I did, then I'd have to call Soviet heavy industry "capitalist", because there is absolutely no difference between them either in goals or means of getting these goals achieved.

P.S. Did you notice that Bush has taken to wearing a little pin-up pennant on his suit lapel? In the bad old days of communist hegemony, wearing something like that was a sure sign of totalitarian, communist rule. In fact, it remains a symbol of communism in refuges like North Korea and Cuba.

[1] You have to remember that usually these coroporations accumulate hundreds of brand-names to fool the consumer into thinking that he has real choice. For example, when you walk into a grocery store, you may see many different soft-drink brands, but in reality, chances are that every single one of them is owned by Coca-Cola. In fact, they may even bottle all of them from the same barrel. This is also a trademark of communism, invented in the bad old days of product shortages in the Soviet Union.

Peace and much love...

freedom of choice (none / 0) (#58)
by philipm on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 05:26:39 AM PST
So what if people really all do like the same thing (based on all watching the same tv channels, or reading the same newspapers)?
What if everyone actually likes sugary sweet syrup? Wouldn't it be the duty of a good capitalist to give people what they demand? And make a profit while doing it?


Huh????? (none / 0) (#51)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 09:40:56 PM PST
Don't you still have a monarchy over there??
Thats real enlightened, and modern. What do you pay these people?
Talk about nepotism.

Whats your tax rate?--50%-60%? Got to pay up so
half the people can be on the dole?
What do you pay for a gallon of gas??,
about 400% more than we do.

How many times have we had to come over there
and help you guys out when someone was kicking
your ass?

Reality Check

Clue Gratis: (none / 0) (#53)
by tkatchev on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 10:16:43 PM PST
How many times have we had to come over there and help you guys out when someone was kicking your ass?


Oh, I forgot that you're living in special "fantasy land". Hey, but don't let the facts interfere with your confortable life.

Peace and much love...

I think he's talking about... (none / 0) (#57)
by nathan on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 05:10:25 AM PST
...the Second World War.

Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

Oh, (none / 0) (#59)
by Margaret Thatcher on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 06:07:06 AM PST
One of those wars the US entered to defend their own interests. I suppose one could call that "helping you guys out when someone was kicking your ass".

How come I never hear the USA saying that to France or the Netherlands?

hey, Maggie (none / 0) (#60)
by nathan on Fri Dec 7th, 2001 at 06:20:56 AM PST
Get off my g-string, please. My country was in it from day 1, and we liberated Holland, thanks so much, despite being soullessly used as cannon fodder by you Pommies.

Americans say the crap you object to to France all the time. There's a whole genre of American "humour" about how the French love to surrender. I wasn't defending it, particularly.

Ever read The Winds of War by Herman Wouk?

Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

taxes? (none / 0) (#89)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 10th, 2001 at 11:16:35 PM PST
In my tax bracket I pay as much taxes in the US as I have in the UK and Scandinavia making the same dollar ammount.

The only real difference about European and American Tax Law is what you can write off and how much of it.

any good accountant knows this....


--another peice of propoganda going down in flames.

Good post, except... (none / 0) (#72)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 9th, 2001 at 01:17:46 AM PST
The conclusion was weak. The whole thing about the FBI - it's falsifiable. Maybe not easily, but unlike the rest of the article, it makes factual claims. The possibility exists that they could be disproven. It would have been better to close the article with a violent thundering paroxysm of unfalsifiable opinion. Closing the way you did is a serious flaw.

True or false doesn't matter (none / 0) (#88)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 10th, 2001 at 09:36:27 PM PST
The whole thing about the FBI - it's falsifiable
It doesn't matter whether or not the story is real. The point is that it doesn't take a big stretch of the imagination to picture it happening, and (sadly) I wouldn't be surprised if I heard a similar story on the nightly news. In my opinion that's plenty bad enough.

America has the astute honor of being the only country where police have been convicted for sodomizing a suspect with a broom handle. And that was during peacetime. It's hard not to believe that plenty of innocent, well intentioned people are getting screwed in the name of Staatssicherheit.

You people are just plain dumb. (none / 0) (#96)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 15th, 2001 at 09:28:02 PM PST
Are you being serious? Every single story I've read on this website has been a total crock. You come up with these horribly un-researched crockpot stories that have no basis.

Brilliant--but why look south? (none / 0) (#100)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Dec 20th, 2001 at 07:53:37 AM PST
What an insightful article! We should stop being so patriotic, honest and hard-working. But why do we need to look to Mexico for inspiration? We can look into our own inner cities. They are bubbling with resentment, laziness, suspicion. I'm heartened when I see the nation's youth emulating gangster culture, dissin' the Man who's trying to put them DOWN. I know that our future generations are not going to be as naive as we are. They're going to sit on their stoops smoking blunts and sipping gin and juice, "partying" even at the age of 40.

Sigh. (none / 0) (#104)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Apr 6th, 2002 at 11:04:44 PM PST
You know its true. I'll light it up until the day I die. Who knows, after you die maybe I will take time to blow smoke on your grave and laugh at how ignorant you were old man. What now?


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to