Why the security is not as bad as they seem

(Ajax's Spear) #81

Vaccine use is not exclusive to babies, if that’s what you were trying to base your crack off of…

(Herandar) #82

Um, no. But nice try. (Vaccines???)

(Ajax's Spear) #83

It seemed to me you were replying to the comment directly above you.

(BioSnark) #84

seems to me people who disagree with you are smoking illegal substances.

(Ajax's Spear) #85

Well, if you can’t beat em’…

(Mad Hatter) #86

Somebody brought up a good point. What the founders are doing may not be fair, but even with an equal distribution of the resources people would probably still be unsatisfied. I’m not sure how bad the food and water situation is exactly, but it doesn’t sound like people are dying en masse yet. They’re poor, hungry, and thirsty, but not dying. If the founders were to share their wealth with everyone, it would probably go from 10% happy and full/90% poor and hungry to 100% poor and hungry, but ever so slightly less so than before.

It probably still wouldn’t make them happy and satisfied in other words. They would simply lose a target to blame for their lamentable condition.

(Atavax) #87

the resistance are a bunch of vultures. squabbling over scraps of meat. When you demand equality, you can never be satisfied, things can never be exactly equal. The founders hugely inconvenienced themselves by taking on the refugees and giving them food and shelter, and how do the refugees repay the founders for sacrificing so much to save the refugees’ lives; they try to take everything from the founders by force.

(Protector) #88

Who cares its fiction…

(madoule) #89

excuse me, dude. you seem to be constantly drifting off. protector is right yb saying its all fiction. however you seem to be solely arguing by from the founders perspective. aren’t you able to reflect what i would be like if you looked at the situation from the resistance. someone who is definitely holding from you, something that could make the lifes of many people a lot easier.

that is like saying: “hell man, i think we should have stayed with feudalism! even it meant for me to be a peasant.”

(KnollDark) #90

If you’ve checked out Horses Info Condempodum theres a link to a poll spread sheet and suprisingly Security is winning (if only by a small margin)

(Apples) #91

Go tell that to the warsow jew… its not begign at all and full of racial connotation, if you are too blind to see that, well, I’m afraid I cant help you anymore.

(Herandar) #92

Ghetto is not a racist word or term.

If you think that ghetto is racist, then you mst also think that ‘slums’, ‘boondocks’ or ‘suburbs’ is racist too. There were ghettos a long time before Warsaw in the Second World War, and there hane been numerous ghettos all across the world since.

(madoule) #93

[QUOTE=Herandar;261433]Ghetto is not a racist word or term.

If you think that ghetto is racist, then you mst also think that ‘slums’, ‘boondocks’ or ‘suburbs’ is racist too. There were ghettos a long time before Warsaw in the Second World War, and there hane been numerous ghettos all across the world since.[/QUOTE]

i didn’t imply nor think the initial usage of the word was meant that way. anyhow now we see how easily teh discussion can drift off. therefore i suggest to let it go. before we get into political discussions… whaddayathink?

(Apples) #94

Ghettos’s origin came from a venician neighbour were jews were put alltogether… in 15xx something, so yeah it has a strong religious or “race” connotation. It just has passed into common language, but not knowing the roots of the words you use is somehow dangerous IMO :wink:

by you I didnt mean you in peculiar, it was a general statement, as usual nothing personal.

Peace

(trigg3r) #95

yeah i was surprised as well, i like security more, but for some odd reason i allways end up playing the side with less followers :penguin:

btw, when are we getting some brink smilies? :wink:

(Atavax) #96

i am not wealthy, I am in the situation where the wealthy are holding from me something that could make the lives of many people a lot easier. I recognize it is their wealth and i have no right to it.

(madoule) #97

that is most admirable. still you and i can afford to spent a ludicrous time surfing on the web and discuss about this very aspect: that there are maybe a bunch of people having been locked out of vital resources. a small percentage of the arks population is keeping those for their own.
you and i still have access to clean water, power, human rights, freedom of movement (EU-wide in my case maybe other countries taking considerably small barriers). brink’s fictitious setting suggests the refugees do not.

(Herandar) #98

Language and word meanings change constantly. The word ‘gay’ meant happy in the 1950s, it meant ‘homosexual male’ in the 1970s, it meant ‘homosexual person’ in the 1990s, and nowadays it apparently means ‘stupid’ without any sexual implication at all. (Try to remember that when dealing with kids online.)

Ghetto had a strong connotation 500 years ago and it was somewhat revived by the Nazis, but there aren’t typically Jewish districts in American cities. But there are ghettos. And Chinatowns…

The original meaning is irrelevant to a contemporary discussion.

(MatthiasK75) #99

[QUOTE=Mad Hatter;261346]Somebody brought up a good point. What the founders are doing may not be fair, but even with an equal distribution of the resources people would probably still be unsatisfied. I’m not sure how bad the food and water situation is exactly, but it doesn’t sound like people are dying en masse yet. They’re poor, hungry, and thirsty, but not dying. If the founders were to share their wealth with everyone, it would probably go from 10% happy and full/90% poor and hungry to 100% poor and hungry, but ever so slightly less so than before.

It probably still wouldn’t make them happy and satisfied in other words. They would simply lose a target to blame for their lamentable condition.[/QUOTE]

to me its not about being happy, they are at the ark in the first place because they have lost everything they use to have and know. It’s not about living it easy and the high life, its about being equal. In the video it says the resistance are fighting for equal distribution of resources, not the resources themselves. In the Resistance’s eyes they would rather die equal than die as slaves. I dont see how wanting to be equal is being a baby, we are all human and should be treated as such

(H0RSE) #100

to me its not about being happy, they are at the ark in the first place because they have lost everything they use to have and know. It’s not about living it easy and the high life, its about being equal. In the video it says the resistance are fighting for equal distribution of resources, not the resources themselves. In the Resistance’s eyes they would rather die equal than die as slaves. I dont see how wanting to be equal is being a baby, we are all human and should be treated as such

Yes. Many people see only one side of it - the Resistance wanting “more.” What they fail to see is that this is a 2 sided battle. For the Resistance/refugees to have equal rations, the rest of the Ark would need to give up some of their extra rations. If the Resistance are “babies” for wanting more, what does it make everyone else for refusing to give up (even fight for) the extra commodities they have?

  • The Resistance/refugees fight for equal rations/living conditions
  • The Security/Founders fight to keep “living the good life.”

Resistance don’t want what everyone else currently has - they want to be equal, which would mean Resistance/refugees would have better than what they have now, and everyone else has slightly worse, not everyone living like kings. The Resistance want a little ‘more/’ but everyone else is unwilling to have a little less.

Also, the Resistance want to leave the Ark, yet the Founders refuse to let them do this. So they are forced to work, get rationed food/water, and crappy living conditions and even if they wanted to leave, they are not allowed.

The way I see it, the Resistance are realists and understand that they cannot survive on The Ark forever. Even if they leave the Ark and fail, it is better than sitting around doing nothing - They are looking ahead and planning for the future, not just for them, but for everyone.

The Founders/Security, seem to be much more calculated and self-centered in their goals. They are either

  • deliberately targeting the refugee’s for extermination, so resources can last longer
  • Doing all they can to “ride it out” as long as possible, before the inevitable happens.
  • They have a secret, master plan, that saves everyone, but in the meantime, needs to cause/maintain chaos.