RicoS321

The West didn't really exist as a concept outside of agriculture though (it came to being well after agriculture had bestowed the mindset of man's dominion over everything). Most who were offered the alternative of what we'd now call the West's way of life refused for very obvious reasons. Force, expropriation and slavery saw to it that no choice was eventually given. There are plenty of historic examples. Jefferson, I think it was, who wrote to his mate about how kidnapped indigenous people always returned, whereas those kidnapped by indigenous often disappeared back to them even after their release. The same story with those shipped to England to view our amazing achievements, only for them to swiftly return home confused by the stupidity of it. It makes sense, really. There was no real impediment to subsistence, so why would anyone want to trade that for toiling in the fields to harvest a monocrop that could be wiped out with one bad season? It takes a massive leap to suggest that was a better system than what previously existed, on any level. Agriculture was better once you'd chopped down the trees though. Parasitic, or human supremacist would be my preferred descriptions. The latter because it pisses off those that are anti racist (correctly) but are comfortable with the parasitic economic system (because they're middle class and it benefits them). In other words, they're perfectly happy with oppression and the perverted viewpoint that one being is more special than another, but not when it comes to an arbitrary sub-group of one particular species.

Except for the majority of human existence, we did live in symbiosis with the planet. There is a far greater body of evidence that we're hardwired to do just that (as every other species on the planet does), rather than the post agricultural world based on parasitic systems. Parasitic systems that always consume themselves over time. Mainly because they ignore time in their myths and stories (our myths being progress and growth). Good lad. There's no contradiction there. It's not for anarcho-primitives to be dictating systems to people. It's completely possible to understand that the only workable human existence is that of anarcho-primitivism, whilst recognising that the only way to reach that point is through civilisation's collapse. With anarcho-primitivism, there's nothing to be designed or systematised, it just simply is. Humans living as nature intended - universally connected - as every other species does. It's not something you can cajole people into, or have a dictator, or a democracy, set the rules. That doesn't absolve anyone of individual responsibility, but there is no feasible way to enact anarcho-primitivism within the existing system, so you basically have to choose your own level of adherence to it. I choose to watch fitba, which is obviously just a circus, but I can suspend disbelief to offer some relief. You'd go fairly mental quite quickly otherwise. He's probably got a job and lives in a hoose too, the heathen. If he doesn't already, you can point him to the writings of Darren Allen and Tom Murphy for some light entertainment.

We don't generally shit the bed under Thelin. We just seem to confidently brush off the glaring errors, before doing exactly the same twenty minutes later. Milne didn't give the ball away for their third last night through panic or having given up. He confidently tried to thread a ball through to a retreating centre half in the name of passing out from the back. A crazy decision drummed into them on the training ground. Ignore the score, just keep doing it until it works seems to be the philosophy. Equally as likely to lead to a 0-6 tanking as shitting the bed like.

To understand the change to this format, you have to understand what they're trying to get to. The final goal is a European league(s). This gets everyone used to the idea by creating the format first, and then slowly increasing the number of games you play within the format. It doesn't make sense now, but in a couple of years, you'll maybe have 8 games in Europe rather than 6. Then 10. The closer you get to the final format, the less pronounced are the differences in fixtures but, paradoxically, the effects become more visible (team X played exactly the same fixtures as team Y, bar one fixture which they lost and finished three points behind them, missing "promotion"). At that point, the calls are then switched to shouting for a full round of fixtures for everyone rather than questioning the tournament itself. It's basically using the sunk cost fallacy to get what you want. Governments, businesses and football cunts do it all the time. The most obvious example is VAR. Your goal is to remove all refereeing errors from football, so you introduce a shite system. You then slowly chip away at each type of decision until you get what you want. At a certain point, people stop questioning the existence of the system itself and they are the ones saying "well we've got this system, why aren't we using it for throw-ins?". Aided and abetted by morons in the media who have discussions about "how we can make VAR better", rather than "how can we organise to get rid of VAR", not realising that the former discussion doesn't mean impartiality, you've already agreed with Thatcher's TINA (there is no alternative). It's not just football. Every single town and city on the planet is setup in the most ridiculous fashion to accommodate car travel, for example. We must bail out banks, and so on. We don't have a say. We all know that the correct answer is to rip it up and go back to knockout tournaments, unseeded. We all know that what makes European football magical is its scarcity.

I didn't think he was great, but the role plays to none of his strengths, and all of his weaknesses. Yet, when you compare to Karlsson on the opposite side, there wasn't a significant difference between the two performances.

It's not a league though, is it. It's a contrived bollocks set of games where different teams play others at random. It's tragic as fuck that people actually came up with it in the first place. You can't even properly slag us off for finishing bottom because we played different teams than others around us. I'm fucking glad we're avoiding this format for imbeciles next season (unless we win the league).

Shame. I think we were really starting to come onto a game in those last fifteen seconds.

Bilalovic would scored three by now, but we're saving him for the league.

Reckon Clarkson will be off soon. Zero point in playing him in that position.

Shite goal to lose. Poor from Mitov, but I think Knoester needs to read that better when Shinnie sends the player inside.

Maybe somebody got their names mixed up

Arguably the worst of the three. In fact, not even arguable. Not remotely controversial. If I won the cup with the Dons, I'd try and reproduce with myself.

The Tims aren't very good

The pitch? Bloody yanks.

It's a growth-based, competitive system. To rip up a growth based, competitive system and replace it with another would be the stupidest thing we could do. It takes a real denialist mindset to suggest otherwise. You correctly derided those who deny climate change, but I'm not sure that moving the denial barrier to "nicer" perpetual economic growth is any less derisory.