Profile overview for Absurdification.
Submission statistics

This user has mostly submitted to the following subverses (showing top 5):

26 submissions to news

4 submissions to funny

1 submissions to economy

1 submissions to technology

This user has so far shared a total of 31 links, started a total of 1 discussions and submitted a total of 97 comments.

Voting habits

Submissions: This user has upvoted 8 and downvoted 0 submissions.

Comments: This user has upvoted 93 and downvoted 0 comments.

Submission ratings

5 highest rated submissions:

5 lowest rated submissions:

Comment ratings

3 highest rated comments:

These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America submitted by OhBlindOne to news

Absurdification 1 points 43 points (+44|-1) ago

So appalling... a free country with no free media... but who didn't know this already...


There's a reason I haven't owned a television in almost least ten years...

There's isn't much difference in terms of approach between the American media and the government-run media in China or Russia, it just serves the interests of different oligarchs... The American media doesn't allow the slightest dissenting opinion on just about any cause and topic..I can't imagine that there are many countries where a supposedly independent media is focused 24/7 on its activism and obsessively promoting its narrow interests and causes...

It used to be that you could watch comedy, and that it was, or could be, a temporary respite from all that, until Bill Maher, and Jon Stewart came along (nothing particularly against them), and so many others that use comedy only as marketing to draw viewers, only to then push their activism self-righteously throughout their shows.

Even shows like the Simpsons and Friends became unwatchable at one point, filled to the brim with barely-subtle activism and indoctrinating messages of one sort of another... it's not by accident that Flanders is the only character on that show who is made the the subject of genuine spite and invective...

The American media has a lot of similarities with government-run media abroad, only it uses PC culture to project the appearance of consensus, and to then threaten any dissenting opinion, to immediately dismiss a person's opinion or stance without argument, and to get the person fired as well, either publically or by not renewing the person's contract, even when the person's comments were very much tolerable.

P.S. That infographic was awesome...

These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America submitted by OhBlindOne to news

Absurdification 3 points 34 points (+37|-3) ago

Well, normally you would have a point, and you may still have one, but the fact that you would declare such a thing, reflexively and without any thought to nuance, is itself reflective of extensive brainwashing...

There was a great Montreal-based Jewish author named Mordecai Richler who wrote a review once about a book on "Jewish Power", it became a pretty famous book, it was published about 15 years ago..

Mordecai Richler called it "brave" in his review for addressing the issue... It was written by a Jewish person who documented the large and outsized influence of Jews in banking, hollywood and other industries.. that stuff is generally common knowledge..

However, in that same book, its author described the pervasive activism of Jews, he even explicitly stated that most of them have a large "hostility towards Christianity", and later on the author concluded by saying that "Jews have huge power", but that "they use it for good"...

That last line about them using their power for "good" was actually in Richler's review...

The fact that a Jewish author would write a book stating that Jews have a ridiculous amount of power, but that they use it "for good", shows that they are, by their own accounts, an extremely activist group.

You can agree with the object of their activism or not, but most people would agree that extreme activism and bias throughout the media is not good, especially when it is always being camouflaged and denied.

P.S. I edited the post so as to add that there is a comment in between mine and the one that shows above it, when I said "you may still have a point", that was partially in agreement with the guy who said it was bigoted to make mention of Jews in the media, not the guy who posted before him :)

Its Time to Let Edward Snowden Come Home submitted by Absurdification to news

Absurdification 1 points 15 points (+16|-1) ago

Well, I checked out Alex Jones' infowars website for the first time this week.

I was just curious about what that famously hysterical anti-illuminati activist might be publishing at the time.

There was a prominent story on his website about some of the programs that Snowden uncovered, and the first comment posted after the article stated that one day there will be a national holiday in the U.S. named after Snowden.

Obviously, that may have been hyperbole, but it shows how people tend to either esteem Snowden very highly or revile him.

From what I can see, in the long run, Snowden will have done way more good than harm, and a presidential pardon seems eminently fair... it even seems advisable... that seems to be the kind of thing presidential pardons were invented for ...

Unfortunately, however, I am not sure that the government will ever review his case...

Not anytime soon anyways... unless maybe Rand Paul is elected president...

P.S. In all fairness to Alex Jones, is there any difference between the illuminati and the NSA?

Seriously... is the guy really as crazy as everyone says he is?

3 lowest rated comments:

Salman Rushdie says he could not depend on fellow writers for support to write Satanic Verses today submitted by Dexter111 to news

Absurdification 6 points -6 points (+0|-6) ago

Hey I don't think this has anything to do with free speech, yes he should not need security following him everywhere, but at the same time no one should feel sorry for him at all, his book was truly grotesque, he has the right to say what he wants, but he also has to deal with the fallout from it.

It is a tribute to how gross and appalling his book was, that even those who were not Muslim or Pro-Muslim at all, generally found it to be just that. The book was nearly universally assailed because its content was disgusting, and because it was very hateful, and it was strictly intended as so.

As John Le Carre wrote some time later when he was a in public fight with Rushdie over the book: "There is no law in life or nature that says that great religions may be insulted with impunity."

Just because you don't particularly like Islam doesn't mean that it is OK to reflexively excuse anything that contains anti-Islamic elements in it.

Rushdie is NOT a freedom of speech advocate, he is more like reality TV diva out there to get attention, and the only objective he ever held was attack, offend, and incite as many people as possible. He is a grossly indecent individual. In that public fight with Rushdie, Le Carre had written in one of his letters to the Guardian:

"My purpose was not to justify the persecution of Rushdie, which, like any decent person, I deplore, but to sound less arrogant, less colonialist, and less self-righteous note than we were hearing from the safety of his admirers' camp."

John Le Carre and Roald Dahl famously attacked Rushdie after he published that execrable work. The only figure that defended his work was Hitchens, who was just as execrable, poorly-mannered, and perversely indecent as Rushdie himself.

There was a reasonably-famous public argument that took place between Le Carre and Rushdie in a British newspaper some years ago, before Hitchens decided to chime in. It was in the Guardian in 1997, and quite a few letters were written to the Guardian on the issue at the time by those writers.

If you wish to read the original letters to the Guardian, they are transcribed at the web address below, those transcripts are quite difficult to find. In the exchange of letters, it is clear that Le Carre is way smarter than the other 2 jerks put together:

Salman Rushdie says he could not depend on fellow writers for support to write Satanic Verses today submitted by Dexter111 to news

Absurdification 5 points -5 points (+0|-5) ago

Hmmm.. being "pretty sure" as you are doesn't change or influence reality at all...

The argument you made in the first sentence makes no sense whatsoever, it implies that a society with free speech should not only guarantee free speech but that it should also make sure that free speech should exempted from any repercussions that are "deemed" excessive. That is not only undemocratic, it is also anti-democratic. Those who committed acts of violence were prosecuted, so are you saying that those who merely issued threats or insulted Rushdie should be prosecuted too? Or are you saying that society should have legislation in place that renders it impossible for anyone to carry out something like that fatwa? Because that is obviously impossible.

I already said that those who placed the fatwa against Rushdie were horrendous, a nuance you deliberately ignored, but that doesn't change Rushdie's ignoble behaviour. There would be cause for outrage if he had been censored, however contemptible his book may have been. But he never was censored.

That was never the issue at all.

You state that there is no right "not to be offended", but that is illogical. That are millions more things that are not rights, than things there are rights.

It IS a person's right to be offended.

You speak of absurd views; few are as absurd, and as dangerous, as the ones you wrote of .

Erick Erickson disinvites Trump from his rally in Atlanta, explains why he thinks Donald Trump crossed "real lines of decency"... submitted by Absurdification to news

Absurdification 5 points -5 points (+0|-5) ago

Truly one of the most disgusting, sexist things I've ever heard anyone running for President say... Donald Trump is so creepy and appalling... and that quote I think may end his campaign..

There will always be some people who ignore every horrible and stupid thing that he says, but a lot of people who were once inclined to support him, I am not sure that they will continue to be so...

Shame on you Megyn...

How dare you repeat to Trump his own past quotes... don't you know that is crossing the line..

You were only supposed to look good, wear makeup, and ask him questions like "Donald Trump, is there anything you're not incredibly good at?"

Who do you think you are Megyn Kelly? An actual reporter?