My Recent Posts


I found the time to work on pictures again for the moment and .... when I finished that one I thought:


How did I get to that message ? 


I just wrote it into the pic and then....we all have a POV about whatever subject. About Nazis, about climate change, about politics, be it national or international. But what I notice is that very often people are very open and defend their views on the net, but when it comes to do the same in real time, in public, they keep quiet.


No, we don't want to offend anybody. On the net, fuck you, but on the day I see you face to face, how are you dear ?


We're pretty primitive in that regard. We dare to say whatever to whoever while hiding in front of the keyboard at home, but when it comes to take REAL ACTION and stand for our view in public, we hide.


HOOO ! The Iraq war ! The Holocaust ! The suffering everywhere ! The neoliberal, warmongering club, the banks ! The Russians ! The crime ! No jobs ! Unhealthy food ! Media control ! RAAH !


And so on. We complain. We moan. 


Why ? Why aren't we really DOING something about it ? Because we're afraid. It might be that a future employer might see our profile on F**kbook or Instagram, or we might, oops ! have posted an inappropriate image on Snapchat, or - not to be excused - written comments that are in favor of countries which are our natural "enemies"...


Beware. Slippery when wet, or how Jeffry said: Mind the gap between train or platform.


But if you DON'T mind, it's good. That means that you don't have given up. Fuck about other people's opinion. They don't feed you. It's you only who decides, and the sooner you realize that, the sooner you will know who you are.


Because when you need help, reckon that no one will be there. You have friends as long as you can keep their pace.


Neil Lock Added Apr 5, 2018 - 3:21pm
Stone-Eater: Yes, a really good thought. I think one aspect of it is that on the Internet there are places - like this one - where people (some, but not all) are willing to listen, and even to agree to disagree on things. And those places tend to accept new people relatively easily.
In the world outside, however, it's hard to get out there and just talk to people. Even if your views aren't so controversial! I think that basically, the problem is that "society" as a whole (that word Opher loves so much!) has become closed, and resistant to change and new ideas. While, on the Internet, it's easier to find people to interact with; as long as you steer clear of the trolls, of course.
In any case... The gentleman in your picture, I think, is in no real danger. If he were to fall, he would merely do a Swiss roll :-)
Bill H. Added Apr 5, 2018 - 3:35pm
People are on the edge these days. There used to be a day when you could flip off some other asshole driver on the road without much more than a finger back. Now many of them are packing heat.
20 years ago, you could proudly display a bumper sticker or a lawn sign for your favorite candidate during elections. Now your asking for a bullet thru the car or house window. You can't discuss much politics or even POV's these days at gatherings or functions because there is always an idiot or two that comes unglued and makes a scene, which occasionally results in a round of fisticuffs. Apparently that is their way of having a reasonable discussion.
Leroy Added Apr 5, 2018 - 4:04pm
Very good article, Stoney, and one that I have previously given a lot of thought.  Many feel that there is a degree of anonymity on the net.  My views on climate change could get me fired.  It is one reason why I don't use my full name.  My former company made "green" widgets; you know, the stuff that goes into landfills and takes millions of years to degrade.  I could be fired for ridiculing green products.  The widgets are by no means green, but it doesn't prevent us from plastering in on our products.
I'd venture there are more atheists on line than will admit it in real life.  There is too much social pressure is real life to admit it.
In summary, there is too much work and social pressures in real life to be honest.  Some people are bold enough to put there full information on line.  It is foolish.
Bill H. Added Apr 5, 2018 - 5:13pm
There was a user here on WB about a year ago or more who used his real name and had no issue at all with letting everyone know exactly what city he lived in. Along with that, he made it a point to slander and insult many users here whenever he could. It also turned out that after a quick web search, he was well known in his town for the same activity.
He abruptly disappeared from this site and from the editorials in his town's newspaper, no one wonders if he happened to ignite some hothead's fuse or worse.
Many of you may know who I am referring to.
James Travil Added Apr 5, 2018 - 6:20pm
I'm pretty open about being an atheist, it's not such a big deal where I live. Not as open about being a Satanist. I have to get to know someone first. I'm not big on politics in general but I have no problem discussing my views on the establishment media, which is probably my biggest concern of the things mentioned. I agree that we should find and suggest solutions not just complain about the situation. I always suggest people to avoid the broadcast corporate mainstream media outlets, along with Facebook and the like. And I suggest as an alternative quality independent journalists and media. I also suggest to others to share stories about incidents of yellow journalism and fake news from the big supposed "free press" with others. It is by sharing the truth online and off that we can beat the establishment monster. 
George N Romey Added Apr 5, 2018 - 6:40pm
I’m in many ways all over the place. I have no specific ideology. I believe in public healthcare and guaranteed employment because it creates a stable, cohesive society. I’m for halting immigration until this country has a sensible policy, stabilizes economically and stops the abuse of the HB1 Visa program. 
I try to respect people that aren’t Fox or MSNBC controlled. The world and it’s problems are multi dimensional.
I stay off FB and Twitter. Too public. I want my privacy despite what Zuckerberg thinks.
Tubularsock Added Apr 5, 2018 - 7:09pm
Well. So that is why Tubularsock has so few friends. Well hot damn!
Stone, you may be on to something but Tubularsock just doesn’t know how to shut the fuck up, I guess.
And, why stop now!
When it is something Tubularsock feels the need to say ....... IT IS SAID. Regardless of the odds which has resulted in some very interesting confrontations over the years.
Just too fun.
Tom C. Purcell Added Apr 5, 2018 - 7:53pm
The best part about dedication to the pursuit of truth is; fear is negated by the indescribable feeling that, with truth is God or, in pursuing truth you'll find many things before truth itself but in the end, maybe that pursuit leads to God.  That's the hope for the faithful, I think, in most cases.  We ought to be aware of temptation and the potential for our own malice to get the better of us.  But when driven by good things, when guided by undeniably benign and positive wishes and truth itself, have no fear.
Tom C. Purcell Added Apr 5, 2018 - 7:55pm
So, yes, I can support my opinion in public and on a small scale, have successfully done so.
Pardero Added Apr 5, 2018 - 10:29pm
Independent news sites and forums, even this one, are a threat to the small handful of elites that control mainstream media.
Some people, that you may have strong differences with,
may have nonetheless, convinced you that they are sincere and genuine. You trust them, while disagreeing. They are those unique and individualistic characters that some 'love to hate.'
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but beware of those who smoothly offer you an attractive bill of goods that seems reasonable in the main, but is a pig in a poke.
The powers that be, could not possibly be so ineffectual or powerless that they would not attempt to steer you back to the MSM narratives. It would only be remarkable if they failed to make repeated and capable attempts to bring you back to their usual narratives. They would typically use in-group and ostracization techniques to peel people away and create a popular group-think that would become a consensus because of the typical human desire to be in the popular group.
Sometimes, it is those shuffling iconoclasts, misfits, and stubborn oddballs that you can rely on, to be true, even if they can be annoying and outrageous, occasionally. ; )
Dave Volek Added Apr 5, 2018 - 10:52pm
I've of the same mindset of Bill H. Compared to previous decades, one has to be more careful in casual conversation, especially in politics, religion, AGW, pipelines, Mr. Trump, Mr. Trudeau, etc.---unless one knows for sure they are on the same side. 
We can learn from each other on WB with our differing opinions. In the real world, we get a psychological whack on the head from people would should be sharing quality time with. It seems better to say nothing. 
I remember a time when someone ( a non-troll) would say something like: "I disagree with you, but I defend your right to state your opinion." I haven't heard that for a long time, even on WB. 
We are becoming less tolerant of differing opinions. 
Pardero Added Apr 5, 2018 - 11:25pm
Dave Volek,
A Frenchman said that. Voltaire?
You are right. I fall into that polarization trap myself, sometimes. I have to catch myself. The elites want us highly polarized and unable to compromise on reasonable plans.
The powers that be, only want 2 teams, both with pig in a poke platforms, and those same TPTB control both. They want you to have to buy a bill of goods, instead of picking and choosing the specific items that your conscience and values finds acceptable.
opher goodwin Added Apr 6, 2018 - 5:00am
I don't have too much restraint. I'm a bit renowned for arguing about what I believe. I think all my friends and colleagues are fully aware of my views.
wsucram15 Added Apr 6, 2018 - 8:56am
SEF-The idea isnt to defend your ideas, its to get people to understand them and see your pov.  They dont need to agree but understand why you think what you do, you also need to be open to the same from them.  Something I dont think happens enough.
Sometimes the art of conveying an idea requires listening to the concerns of others, and letting them rationalize out the logic, not talking them through it. 
Opher..touche' I like your last line.
opher goodwin Added Apr 6, 2018 - 10:13am
Jeanne/Stone - I used to believe that simply by explaining things simply and coming up with solutions we could change the world. That was while I was still naïve and thought that most people were inherently good. I now know that most people couldn't care less about anything, some people try to make things better and some are plain bastards.
Riley Brown Added Apr 6, 2018 - 10:47am
Stone, its not a good idea to have political or religious views that are public and associated with you in ways that can be seen by anyone researching you on the internet.  Too many people that might influence your next job, or your life may be able to use those thought against you, even if one day you change your mind.
wsucram15 Added Apr 6, 2018 - 11:08am
Oper..can agree to a point...I dont think people are inherently good. I do think that SOME people have the right intentions although usually for their own purposes while some do try to affect things for all.
But then there are people that manipulate others and even themselves into a frenzy.
listening is the only way to figure out who is who.
I assert at this time if you do not listen you cannot change you, and this is where change begins.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 6, 2018 - 12:32pm
I'd venture there are more atheists on line than will admit it in real life.  There is too much social pressure is real life to admit it.
Here in Europe that's no problem. At least in the German-speaking areas religion is not even a subject of discussion. If it is any subject, it happens in private. But not on any media.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 6, 2018 - 12:35pm
If I were younger I would probably consider that. But at 60 I have the advantage to appear as an old fool LOL
Stone-Eater Added Apr 6, 2018 - 12:39pm
Bill / Dave
I agree but I take the risk to be open on the net with my real name. There's not many Friedli around. Why ? Because I don't like hiding in real life, so I don't do it on the net as well. If it is to my disadvantage, so be it. I couldn't care less.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 6, 2018 - 12:44pm
Oph / Jeanne
I can only repeat what I said. To be afraid means to shut up. And that's what some like - the people to be afraid. Whether in real life or on the net.
Remember one thing: You might drop dead in the next minute, who knows ? And all those fears you had don't count anymore LOL
Stone-Eater Added Apr 6, 2018 - 12:50pm
my toilet leaks. Maybe a new tube can fix it :-)
Dave Volek Added Apr 6, 2018 - 2:10pm
The powers that be, only want 2 teams, both with pig in a poke platforms, and those same TPTB control both. They want you to have to buy a bill of goods, instead of picking and choosing the specific items that your conscience and values finds acceptable.
I don't think this political arrangement was planned that way, but it is convenient for those who aspire for power. In the USA, if one joins the D's or the R's, it's a guarantee that one will be in the sphere of influence 50% of the time. The same relationship holds in Canada for the C's and L's. This 50% is better than the TDG which will really open up the political arena to many more citizens: some will find positions even though they did not aspire for them.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 6, 2018 - 2:14pm
Tell me one thing: Why are the Anglophones not capable to build a multiparty system that at least could resemble a democracy ?
Dave Volek Added Apr 6, 2018 - 2:38pm
The anglophone countries more or less bought into the Westminster system of governance where an elected person represents a certain geographical area. The USA would be included as a version of Westminster.
As Europe become democratized later than the Anglo world, it probably took a look at Westminster, saw its flaws, and opted for the Proportional Representation (PR).
Westminster leads to a two-party state, but for some reason Canada has a third party playing a minor role. PR leads to many more parties: even the smallest party can be party of coalition government.
If an anglophone country wants more parties to be involved, it needs to move to PR. But it is almost next to impossible to change this system--within the current system.
It would be difficult for a third party to find much traction in USA. Such a party would split the vote of its ideological-related parent, leaving the other party to electoral victory. The R's absolutely desire the D's to split into 2. The D's absolutely desire the R's to split into 2.
Either party could proffer up dead dogs as their candidates and still win elections.
In Continental Europe, a political party could split in 2, yet together they would hold the same power as before the split. In Westminster, the power goes to the opponent.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 6, 2018 - 3:11pm
In other words: Though shit. Nothing's gonna change ;-)
Dave Volek Added Apr 6, 2018 - 4:16pm
We can be cynical if we look back at the last two or three decades and claim nothing is going to change. But if we go back a century, we can see a lot of improvements.
My family would be considered lower-middle class. We could use more money, but our life is still comfortable. Lower-middle class 100 years meant a lot of drudgery! Health issues and a lower life expectancy was normal. Alcohol or church were usually the only forms of entertainment we could afford.
I come from a farming community in SE Alberta. In the 1960s, oil companies could lay their pipelines with impunity. If they wrecked something on the farmer's land, too bad for the farmer. But laws were created and oil companies are much more responsible and proactive in working with farmers. Big money is losing more political battles today than it used to.
Back in 1918, many Canadians died of food poisoning. Through a lot of regulations, the food industry--both processors and restaurants--are much safer.
I could cite other examples, but I see a general improvement in the lives of many world citizens.
In Canada's Westminster system with its three parties, the winning political party often gets 75% of the parliamentary seats with 40% of the vote. We Canadians usually decry at how undemocratic this is, yet when serious reforms are formally put up for general discussion, the Canadian public gets very vocal in opposing the furtherance of this social change.
I've been promoting the TDG for 18 years now. I have categorized its naysayers, which is just about everyone, as follows:
1. The system can't change, so there's no sense trying (that would be you).
2. We need only elect the right person or political party.
3. We need only tinker with existing rules a little (such as changing from Westminster to PR).
4. People need to invest more time in the process to vote more wisely.
5. The current system has its flaws, but it is still better than anything else.
I shall just keep plugging along.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 6, 2018 - 5:20pm
As I have worked in Calgary.......
1. That's why I leave that system. A grain of sand can't move a beach. And I'm too old to fight. When the young haven't understood, tough shit. I've tried my best.
2. Are you serious ? People change according to "needs"...
3. Ok, agreed
4. How ? They work for survival or for the next iShit and car. They have no time ;-)
5. Which system ? The worldwide economic dictatorship ? Because that's the system we have. No -ism bullshit or democracy.
Dave Volek Added Apr 6, 2018 - 7:16pm
These are the naysayer reasons for not taking the TDG seriously. They are mutually exclusive; i.e. the reasons really don't combine very well. 
As for the too old stuff, I figure the TDG will need about 10 hours a month of volunteer for the early builders. But we are not there yet. People have to spread the word.
I tried to spread the work, but my family, friend, and colleagues think I'm crazy. Not a stitch of help there. My wife let me cower in my man-cave for my hobby keeps me home and I'm usually ready for more family obligations. BUt she thinks I'm crazy too.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 7, 2018 - 3:20am
LOL Nope. You're not crazy. You're an idealist, that's all :-)
Doug Plumb Added Apr 7, 2018 - 6:26am
I say the same thing in public as I do on here. My position on the holocaust has cost me all my lifelong friends. Truth above all else, it has to be that way. My non Jewish friends who were offended by my views (more than Jewish people I have known)  speaks to the depth of the programming.
Doug Plumb Added Apr 7, 2018 - 6:27am
I have lost contacts due to my statements about politics and especially the Green nonsense.
Doug Plumb Added Apr 7, 2018 - 6:28am
If all technical people spoke against the Green movement, it would cease to exist and we would take free speech back.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 7, 2018 - 11:59am
My position on the holocaust has cost me all my lifelong friends.
Wrong friends ;-)
Katharine Otto Added Apr 7, 2018 - 12:51pm
I have alienated everyone with my strong opinions, so there's no one left to talk to, except on the web.  For instance, I have railed against slick floors and wheel-unfriendly streets, sidewalks, and buildings, as in your picture above.  They are dangerous, especially when wet, but does anyone listen to me, much less heed my suggestions?  Hahaha.  While I still feel the same, it's a waste of time and energy to keep harping about it.  I feel like a chronic complainer.
I agree with others, above, that people have become more intolerant.  Also that listening, with intent to understand rather than argue, is key.
Also, it seems that many people don't even know what they think.  They get their opinions from media, or important others in their lives, and have never really considered them in any depth.  We are trained from a young age to be dishonest.  "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
People say you shouldn't care what others think of you, but that's not true.  Because of widespread intolerance, people can be vicious against people who threaten the complacency of their fixed beliefs.  It would be nice if people weren't so judgmental, but if I had my way, there would be no wars.
Finally, ballot access in the states--Georgia, at least--for anyone but the accepted parties is nigh impossible.  It requires numerous signatures by a certain deadline, with the risk that the signatures can be disqualified.  There are so many rules that a potential candidate must be very dedicated, rich, or disgusted to run.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 7, 2018 - 1:02pm
I agree with others, above, that people have become more intolerant.
I guess the problem is different. People have an information overkill, get disoriented, and the reaction to that is not weighing information, but looking for the EASIEST WAY OUT. And that's by accepting 160 letters on Twitter or a headline on USA Today or the Sun.
Doug Plumb Added Apr 7, 2018 - 1:25pm
re "My position on the holocaust has cost me all my lifelong friends.
Wrong friends ;-)  "
I mean people I have grown up with, or known since I was a kid.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 7, 2018 - 2:25pm
Many people don't consider looking for alternative information - no matter which subject. And very often they'are afraid to support new POV's because they fear of getting isolated....
Stone-Eater Added Apr 7, 2018 - 2:27pm
BTW: I mean for some people here I'm a Nazi or a conspiracy theorist only for the fact that I QUESTION things. For many people questioning is already enough to be put into a drawer. You know ;-)
Katharine Otto Added Apr 7, 2018 - 2:58pm
Yes, you do question things, and that is refreshing.  Someone I know claimed she avoids reading "leftist" authors.  I read voraciously and indiscriminately, because I like to know "how the enemy thinks."  Yes, we have information overkill, but like you, I question things and am curious enough to try to understand as many points of view as possible.  
I hope that the information overkill will teach people to think more critically and learn to choose more carefully what to believe.
Stone-Eater Added Apr 7, 2018 - 3:05pm
We're on the same wavelength here :-)
Maureen Foster Added Apr 7, 2018 - 11:25pm
I wouldn’t call it hiding when we engage others in political discourse on the net versus face to face, I’d call it smart.  Perhaps you haven’t noticed, our political disagreements are rather heated and can get ugly very quickly.  Why invite all that animosity into your everyday life with people you have to interact with.  Better to do it online with people don’t know.  It’s not only safer, it also allows you to speak exactly how you’d like, rather than some watered-down version of what you want to say.  Furthermore, ever since it was learned that the IRS was targeting conservatives, it’s also prudent to speak anonymously (if your conservative), which you can’t do face to face. 
Mark Hunter Added Apr 8, 2018 - 4:45am
I don't mind giving my opinion about any subject; I just don't bother. Why talk to a brick wall when I can go home and talk to my dog? Yes, a handful of people will respectfully listen to you, but you still won't change any minds, and more than likely will be the subject of vicious attacks and general hatred. While I'm willing to defend myself, I don't like to argue, so why engage with people who do?
Awhile back I wrote a short piece about how I was progressing on a writing project, and some (anonymous) guy replied "yawn". People can't even let it go when they're not interested.
It's one of the few ways in which I've become much more of a pessimist over the years. I still think there are many more good people than bad--but the bad people are laying in wait on social media with bats and bricks. I don't need that crap.

Recent Articles by Writers Stone-Eater follows.