brooklyn nets, eh?
[img]http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g309/Fionn-Whelan/Simpsons/Bob.gif[/img]
Printable View
brooklyn nets, eh?
[img]http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g309/Fionn-Whelan/Simpsons/Bob.gif[/img]
OT: The discussion here (on the NBA Board, don't spend much time on OTC) is definitely at a higher level than it was at my last stop (ESPN NBA General, ugh :facepalm ). If you parse out the trolling, this is probably the best basketball forum out there.
[QUOTE=fpliii]OT: The discussion here (on the NBA Board, don't spend much time on OTC) is definitely at a higher level than it was at my last stop (ESPN NBA General, ugh :facepalm ). If you parse out the trolling, this is probably the best basketball forum out there.[/QUOTE]
I would say RGM has the best pure basketball talk. This place is way too diluted with Kobe And Lebron talk, and isn't moderated enough IMO. However the OTC has its great moments, although it used to have more interesting characters a couple years back
[QUOTE=macmac]I would say [B]RGM has the best pure basketball talk[/B]. This place is way too diluted with Kobe And Lebron talk, and isn't moderated enough IMO. However the OTC has its great moments, although it used to have more interesting characters a couple years back[/QUOTE]
by [B]pure[/B] do you mean Modded to the point that everyone just regurjitates the same tired ____________( fill in copy and pasted stats from BR)
Nothing pure at all from RGM....they mainly have the same tired topics up all week ( lots of them copied from ISH)....and of course its modded to death so you have less troll topics.....but it also provides zero fun interaction.
I have an account for there for over 5 years .......Place is dead now ....
Knowlegable posters and stupid Trolls>overly Modded site with posters posting stats like spam bots.
[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]by [B]pure[/B] do you mean Modded to the point that everyone just regurjitates the same tired ____________( fill in copy and pasted stats from BR)
Nothing pure at all from RGM....they mainly have the same tired topics up all week ( lots of them copied from ISH)....and of course its modded to death so you have less troll topics.....but it also provides zero fun interaction.
I have an account for there for over 5 years .......Place is dead now ....
Knowlegable posters and stupid Trolls>overly Modded site with posters posting stats like spam bots.[/QUOTE]
Well personally, I usually take my talents to the Raptors board and I can say that without a doubt, the topics there are more in depth and thought out (when not in full panic mode, or sheep mode) than anything close to here. From proper cap breakdowns, to playbook dissecting, just more advanced critical thinking in general.
The main general board is somewhat boring I tend to agree but again, much more mature and less cluttered than over here. I will go back and forth between the two as my personal preference
You can't judge a persons intelligence on a forum.
Some of the more intelligent posters here in reality are trolls on this site.
The ones that put in effort to appear smart are often not that intelligent at all.
If you are an American you are coming from pretty far back too.
[QUOTE=macmac]Well personally, I usually take my talents to the Raptors board and I can say that without a doubt, the topics there are more in depth and thought out (when not in full panic mode, or sheep mode) than anything close to here. [B]From proper cap breakdowns, to playbook dissecting, just more advanced critical thinking in general. [/B]
The main general board is somewhat boring I tend to agree but again, much more mature and less cluttered than over here. I will go back and forth between the two as my personal preference[/QUOTE]
I could see that.....ISH is to Mosswood park and Rucker as RGM is to Brown University YMCA and the Princeton offense.
[QUOTE=fpliii]OT: The discussion here (on the NBA Board, don't spend much time on OTC) is definitely at a higher level than it was at my last stop (ESPN NBA General, ugh :facepalm ). If you parse out the trolling, this is probably the best basketball forum out there.[/QUOTE]
I find that difficult to believe. Trolling is 24/7 and eventually infiltrates everything. Even the people who don't troll are almost always carrying agendas.
To me there are a couple great posters who you can have engaging discussions.
Anyway I joined the site because Dklaer is a tactical genius :rockon:
[SIZE="4"][FONT="Book Antiqua"][COLOR="Green"]Thanks for nothing.
Spell&Grammar[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
people who seldom if ever try to draw attention to themselves but who consistently find excellent points to make in a low-key, friendly way. you'd almost think that they're aussie or some shite. :P
[b]miller-time[/b]
I have no idea how to assess the level of knowledge from posters posting in only or mostly in the OTC... obviously everybody have random knowledge in some specific random non-basketball fields and have great grammar/vocabulary i guess, but thats as far as it goes... many of these "smartest people" mentioned here i have never even seen actively discuss basketball or not seen in the NBA forum at all and thats the only place where i can truly evaluate knowledge (basketball knowledge) from posters in a basketball forum... but i cant possibly mention them all...
Some guys that immediately pop to my mind are Kblaze & ShaqAttack, those are fantastic basketball minds.
I haven't been on this site long enough to fully assess someone's intelligence. You have to define what intelligence really is. Intelligence, to me, does not mean someone can regurgitate information; sure some people might know a lot of things, but that does not make them smart especially when a quick google search can bring up any information, so a guy like KevinNYC should be quickly eliminated. I won't hate on KevNYC too much though because he did write a conspiracy satire that I thought was creative, but other than that one moment of intellect, he's pretty stupid overall.
I would say a guy like Pauk is intelligent; he has the ability to elaborate and convey his thoughts in long elaborate paragraphs. You can add that kid Sourpatchkid, Rake and JMT, y'know, guys who have the ability to put thoughts into words a lot better than most people who are usually verbally handicapped and can only stick to one liners. I think that is a gift and something that many people can't do, heck, some people in here can't even read more than one line (and are happy to admit so), so you know they are automatically dumb as f*ck.
I don't like guys who have a thesaurus handy to try to sound smart because conceptual thinking (the ability to understand the whole idea) is a lot higher level of thinking than merely using big words. Sometimes people might sound smart because they use fancy "mysterious" vocabularies but they tend to miss the conceptual meaning because they get too wind up with trying to sound smart. [B]The truly smart guys are the ones who use simple words but the idea is big.[/B]
I also like that "aha" moment where a person says something you have never heard before; Myth, Iamgine, MillerTime and Nanners have done it a couple of times, but for the most part, they haven't done it enough for me to consider them full blown intelligent, but the fact they are the few who did it for me gives me a level of respect for them although I might not agree with them and actually think Myth is a douche and Iamgine is a closet homosexual.
And really, guys with too much green bars are usually stupid because they can't convey their opinions with honesty. They are trying too hard to be with the "in crowd" and I think that hampers their intellectual capacity.
Overall though, there are more dumb posters in here than smart ones: guys like Nathanjizzle and others spring to mind. They have this ghetto gene in them that makes them ghetto minded and usually this mindset means a lack of education. They speak only from emotions and can't express their thoughts in a coherent intellectual way.
I like to use vulgar language to elicit an emotional response from them as the start of their premise. Usually when they speak from emotions they can't think with logic and they fall for it everytime, so it's fairly easy to find flaws in their argument. Sad thing is they are too stupid to figure it out and actually get mad and their last resort is to cry to the mods without ever realizing what the fallacy in their argument started with. Haha.
the absolutely smartest person on insidehoops is the poster who never wastes a minute of his life over here...
the rest of us will never be as smart as that guy.
:lol
[QUOTE=IamRAMBO24]I also like that "aha" moment where a person says something you have never heard before; Myth, Iamgine, and Nanners have done it a couple of times, but for the most part, they haven't done it enough for me to consider them full blown intelligent, but the fact they are the few who did it for me gives me a level of respect for them although I might not agree with them and actually think Myth is a douche and Iamgine is a closet homosexual.[/QUOTE]
Aww you took me out and replaced me with Iamgine and Nanners :(
Does that mean I've never made you "aha" or does it mean you consider me full blown intelligent and therefore not a part of that group? I'm pretty sure it is the second one!
[QUOTE=miller-time]Aww you took me out and replaced me with Iamgine and Nanners :(
Does that mean I've never made you "aha" or does it mean you consider me full blown intelligent and therefore not a part of that group? I'm pretty sure it is the second one![/QUOTE]
Haha I deleted it on accident when I went back to edit that sentence. I'll give you credit, you gave me a few aha moments. Kudos.
Being a computer scientist and engineer. I would say i am "the" absolute smartest person on ISH!
[QUOTE=Bladers]Being a computer scientist and engineer. I would say i am "the" absolute smartest person on ISH![/QUOTE]
I find people who proclaim themselves as smart aren't really smart.
The start of intellectual thought which lead to modern Science and is responsible for 99% of our intellectual evolution started with a single statement made by one man:
[B]"The only thing I know is that I know nothing."[/B]
It is when you don't think you know anything, is when you start questioning and looking for answers. The educational system teaches you the opposite, hence why we have so many dumb kids in our society today. They make up terms such as "objectivity" to dissuade curiosity and then throw in exercises such as "problem solving and critical thinking" for students to find criticism and suspicion towards answers that do not fit in the criteria that they are indoctrinating the students with. After many years of this exercise, students will only take the words of "objective" authoritative figures (government, police, media, church etc). and simply deny anything out of the realm based on an act of habit and no rational thought.
Curiosity is frowned upon amongst students today; most students think being really smart is in memorizing a bunch of facts and knowing a lot of things, but TRUE EVOLUTION OF KNOWLEDGE is really in denying what is consider to be "objective" and figuring something better and newer.
If you know a lot of things and consider yourself smart, then basically you are only regurgitating what everybody else already knows and can probably figure out if they don't know with a quick google search, and if you think you already know it all, what incentive would you have to even question the knowledge being passed down to you.
[B]Try figuring out what nobody else knows if you truly want to be smart.[/B]
[QUOTE=IamRAMBO24]
If you know a lot of things and consider yourself smart, then basically you are only regurgitating what everybody else already knows and can probably figure out if they don't know with a quick google search[/QUOTE]
You said every thing right until here.
No its not as easy as doing a quick google search.
If it is, why don't you go build a nuclear bomb or go perform brain surgery or engineer a phone or design a innovative software.
Thats what I taught. There are people who devote their entire lives learning and engineering things you take for granted today. These are the real smart people. The nuclear physicists, the neuro surgeons, the computer engineers, and the computer scientists.
Those are just a few, Go study your history. 95% of the technology we have today were developed by "engineers". People who spent their entire life researching.
You don't just wake up one day and make history. Thousands of engineer contributed to the advancement of technology we have today and the standard of living. Whether you look at technology, healthcare, lifestyle, space, etc.
These people devoted their lives to something more than just the norm.
They didn't do a google search. You can't build a plane by doing a google search. You have to devote yourself to it.
That's why the list in the OP is a complete joke.
[QUOTE=IamRAMBO24]
I also like that "aha" moment where a person says something you have never heard before; Myth, Iamgine, MillerTime and Nanners have done it a couple of times, but for the most part, they haven't done it enough for me to consider them full blown intelligent, but the fact they are the few who did it for me gives me a level of respect for them although I might not agree with them and actually think Myth is a douche and Iamgine is a closet homosexual.
[/QUOTE]
lol, should I feel honored or offended?
:cheers:
Just found a way to reenact nzt48.
Gonna outwit done folks to get to top 10 fa sho
Intelligence is not the definition of an "aha" moment. Its making a mark on society. Being more than just a regular man.
[QUOTE=IamRAMBO24]
Curiosity is frowned upon amongst students today; most students think being really smart is in memorizing a bunch of facts and knowing a lot of things, but TRUE EVOLUTION OF KNOWLEDGE is really in denying what is consider to be "objective" and figuring something better and newer.[/quote]You aren't likely to have any great new insight, if you don't learn, and understand what your predecessors discovered. If you can do that, you are really smart, very few people get that far. If you replace the word "objective" with "common sense", or "conventional wisdom" I'd probably agree with you. Nothing of utility can come from denying the objective.
[QUOTE=Bladers]You said every thing right until here.
No its not as easy as doing a quick google search.
If it is, why don't you go build a nuclear bomb or go perform brain surgery or engineer a phone or design a innovative software.
Thats what I taught. There are people who devote their entire lives learning and engineering things you take for granted today. These are the real smart people. The nuclear physicists, the neuro surgeons, the computer engineers, and the computer scientists.
These people devoted their lives to something more than just the norm.
They didn't do a google search. You can't build a plane by doing a google search. You have to devote yourself to it.
[/QUOTE]:applause:
[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]Yeah I hardly ever see you on the OT boards....
But you are one of the best/smartest NBA Posters here...always look forward to reading yo BBALL posts....[/QUOTE]
:roll: of course u do cuz ure an idiot.
NEXT
shaqattack pollutes the nba forum with narcissim. he cant help himself from all those flavorless 10 paragraph posts cuz insecure losers like phoenixglove fawn over him. the massive length of his posts create the illusion that he actually knows wtf hes talking about. some guy rambling on for 3 pages bout his personal top 10 rankings in 2008 isnt smart. he likes the traffic from impressionables like alpha. rainierbeachphagg0t ran the same game cept he hit on religion and virtue. heroinattack aint got that platform.
[QUOTE=Bladers]You said every thing right until here.
No its not as easy as doing a quick google search.
If it is, why don't you go build a nuclear bomb or go perform brain surgery or engineer a phone or design a innovative software.
Thats what I taught. There are people who devote their entire lives learning and engineering things you take for granted today. These are the real smart people. The nuclear physicists, the neuro surgeons, the computer engineers, and the computer scientists.
Those are just a few, Go study your history. 95% of the technology we have today were developed by "engineers". People who spent their entire life researching.
You don't just wake up one day and make history. Thousands of engineer contributed to the advancement of technology we have today and the standard of living. Whether you look at technology, healthcare, lifestyle, space, etc.
These people devoted their lives to something more than just the norm.
They didn't do a google search. You can't build a plane by doing a google search. You have to devote yourself to it.
That's why the list in the OP is a complete joke.[/QUOTE]
Let me elaborate my position:
I am merely defining my idea of intelligence in an ISH forum. You're talking about some high level college master's while some of these guys would be lucky to get a GED, so if you have accomplish all that, then more kudos to you.
I am directly attacking guys like KevNYC who recites news articles verbatim as his own type of argument. I don't see anything special about this because a quick google search can find any counter argument to anything said in this discussion forum. I do agree with you that if someone is well versed in a subject, they can intepret it in their own words and add something new (the aha moment) with their own angle. That to me is intelligence: it shows the person as someone who has thought deeply enough and is educated enough to formulate a seminal idea rather than regurgitate (at best) what has already been said or (at worst) simply link to a news article using someone else's word.
[QUOTE=Inactive]You aren't likely to have any great new insight, if you don't learn, and understand what your predecessors discovered. If you can do that, you are really smart, very few people get that far. If you replace the word "objective" with "common sense", or "conventional wisdom" I'd probably agree with you. Nothing of utility can come from denying the objective.
:applause:[/QUOTE]
Objectivity has been misused and manipulated to define knowledge as only restricted to certain sectors within the educational system. For example, history in school is being taught as objective, but it is far from that, in fact, I would argue that it is the most subjective topic being taught in the classrooms today since it does not teach from a universal perspective that encompasses all cultures (including that of religion), but a very small segment of American history. Even the media has been coined as "objective" when half of the population already knows it can be full of sh*t sometimes, but the idea has been so ingrained in our minds most people, although they willingly admit what is being presented isn't always true, will, out of habit, accept what is being reported as something not to be questioned. In fact, they have such a disdain for those who question the media, they would attack them with fervor and label them as "conspiracy nuts." [B]It is an act of indoctrination and the root cause is an obssession to the term objectivity.[/B]
I agree with you that expounding the findings of predeccessors is essential in the progression of knowledge, but it is the act of denying it is what starts the "curiosity" mode and leads to true learning. If you simply accept everything you learn in school and are being taught not to question but merely to regurgitate it on a test, you are not partaking in the act of true learning set out by Socrates when he utter his famous line, "The only thing I know is that I know nothing." It is in the thought of not knowing is what triggers the act of questioning, but I do agree with you must be well versed in the subject matter before you start questioning.
Even the term "fact" is a deceptive misuse of a term to hamper creativity (which seems to be a goal of the educational system) because the idea a truth is never changing and completely objective is a delusional way of seeing reality: [B]all ideas will change. [/B] Newer ideas will come along and replace the old ideas of today. This process will go on forever. So nothing can ever be an axiom or a fact because there are only "temporary" truths.
Education is not the only one guilty of this, Religion does this as well with their all knowing God.
all of which reminds me of figan, the erstwhile leader of a tribe of chimps studied by jane goodall in mogombe, tanzania.
figan was a medium-sized male with no particular leadership prospects until one day he came across a discarded oil can. after a little experimentation with his new toy, he quickly discovered that banging it along the ground and adding in his own shrieks greatly bewildered and alarmed the then-leader of the tribe, a large, powerful chimp in his own right.
figan pressed the advantage, made maximum use of his trusty can, and eventually the improbable and miraculous occurred-- the leader backed down and figan became the new alpha male, a position which afforded him prime access to most available wombs in the area. and what a sweet, sweet ride that was.
if figan was around today, i think he would use a wall of text, not a discarded oil can.
[QUOTE=Stempel, HERB]:roll: of course u do cuz ure an idiot.
NEXT
shaqattack pollutes the nba forum with narcissim. he cant help himself from all those flavorless 10 paragraph posts cuz insecure losers like phoenixglove fawn over him. the massive length of his posts create the illusion that he actually knows wtf hes talking about. some guy rambling on for 3 pages bout his personal top 10 rankings in 2008 isnt smart. he likes the traffic from impressionables like alpha. rainierbeachphagg0t ran the same game cept he hit on religion and virtue. heroinattack aint got that platform.[/QUOTE]
Herb Stempel with internet access and memory techniques Would make Ken Jennings look like a fukkin autistic retard.
i think that most 'intelligent' people (and yes, the term is endlessly debatable) have little use for calling particular attention to their own intelligence. few times does it offer any real benefit, and the pitfalls are many.
the point of having some kind of talent or intelligence is to EXERCISE it effectively in useful areas.
as in creative writing- "show, don't tell."
become effective in whatever you're striving in and let the results sort themselves out.
when it comes to dealing with other people, undertake the power of translation. observe how people think, what they care about, the ideas that run through their heads, the language that springs to their hearts and lips. and then build a bridge. and then build a bridge...
[img]http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/researchers-in-museums/files/2012/08/image_1.jpg[/img]
Giga,
THe "Demonstration, Not Application" rule was in the 48 laws of power and applies everywhere on the path to "enlightened superiority" aka being the best but being humble about it.
Practically all the old films celebrated this as a masculine virtue. I mean there were sporadic doses of cockiness and arrogance but most people (such as Charles Bronson were quiet killers). Now there's rappers going around saying "Mr Steal Yo Girl" and the only time when . It's said in Hagukare that occasionally a person does have to fluant their arrogance.. because it is just like a sword. If staying in the sheath to long it becomes dull but when being withdrawn too many times it loses its impact upon others.
Let's extend the intelligence gig a bit..
SOme guy said intelligence was a persons ability to invent something that would benefit mankind. I do agree, to an extent, but that is more consciountessness (like one love type universal good vibrations type sh!t, i mean sugar)
Another guy said that it was the case of the chimp's self-serving reign to power . THat's more like it!
Gig, define the following and lemme know an archetype that exemplifies each.
Wit.
Wisdom.
A Rational Mind.
Deductive Reasoning.
ANalogical Reasoning.
Inductive Reasoning.
Creativity.
Free Association.
FLuid Intelligence.
Vivid Imagination.
Visual THinking
Verbal Reasoning
Parallel Thinking.
Crystallized Intelligence.
Brainpower.
you run rings around me with your energy, J$. in most areas of life and the internet, i just kind of pop in for a little while, see if anything interesting happens, and then go lie down for awhile. heh.
you do bring up a million and one scintillating issues with boundless puppy-dog enthusiasm, however.
you know, in an alternate universe i have your same level of energy and your questing nature and we go back and forth all day talking about all kinds of interesting and inane shit. in any case, you always leave me with interesting things to think about.
archetypes for broad aspects of those qualities? how about pantheons of gods and legendary heroes across various cultures? have you found any inspiration along those lines?
i don't know... modern examples?
oscar wilde and dorothy parker for wit.
goethe for wisdom.
doyle's holmes for inductive, deductive and reductive reasoning.
robert anton wilson for fluid intelligence.
noam chomsky for verbal reasoning.
hawking for brain power.
picasso and van gogh for damaged creativity.
a supercomputer for parallel thinking.
ugh... brain tired. i need to lie down already.
damn you, thomas jefferson and your huge wheelbarrow full of money!
to the ph@ggott that neg rep me on this thread...
I know you don't know where to begin, you are that retarded. :roll:
"keep complaining I dare you"
I don't care ph@gott! :lol I'm not a complete loser like yourself. :lol
Coward bitch afraid to be owned... priceless.
No love for me? :(
how is this thread still on the frontpage?
[QUOTE=boozehound]how is this thread still on the frontpage?[/QUOTE]
Butthurt inertia
For intelligence I don't really look at *what* people say, more just the level that their brain is computing at. For instance, Stephen A. Smith on First Take. I don't agree with the way he sees the world in a lot of cases. His "filter" for how he views things doesn't usually vibe with mine. But you can tell his brain is operating at an extremely high level, where he's taking so many variables into account, is so precise with the English language, and covers all aspects of his arguments down to a tee.
I always think of someones "filter," and that's kind of their general viewpoint and way of seeing the world. And then behind that is a light. Smart people the light goes beaming through, less smart people there's less light. That probably doesn't make sense to anyone, but it's the little mental image I always have in my head when I think of intelligence.
lol
[QUOTE=joe]I always think of someones "filter," and that's kind of their general viewpoint and way of seeing the world. And then behind that is a light. Smart people the light goes beaming through, less smart people there's less light. That probably doesn't make sense to anyone, but it's the little mental image I always have in my head when I think of intelligence.[/QUOTE]
I think I intuitively get what you are saying. But I can't really put it into psychological terms. Can you give an example?
[QUOTE=miller-time]I think I intuitively get what you are saying. But I can't really put it into psychological terms. Can you give an example?[/QUOTE]
I think it makes the most sense when it comes to politics. If you're a hardcore Democrat, I see your filter as being Democrat based. So you're seeing the world through that filter. You're looking at things through that lens and it taints how you interpret any information.
A Republican might say this person is "dumb." But I think the filter is only one half, you also have to look at the "light," or the intelligence. This person might be extremely smart, it's just their brain goes through this particular filter that the Republican doesn't agree with.
But I think of people who have a "funny" filter, or a "perverted" filter. Whatever, that's just how their brains are processing the data. But the intelligence defines how thoroughly they can process it, how analytical they can be with the data they collect, etc.
It's definitely one of those weird things we all do inside our own head, that are hard to describe to others. I don't think I've actually talked about this to anyone before haha, seems so strange now that I'm describing it to another person
Edit- I think to a certain extent you can usually break down the way someone thinks into a few different filters. Especially if you go by categories. So like Stephen A Smith again:
Category: Sports
Filters: Not wanting to offend others, Looks to give credit whenever he can, retain journalistic integrity, take big picture view.
That's the filters that I think Stephen A. Smith uses when he talks about sports. But that's only one category. I don't know his filters when it comes to being a parent, a son, politics, religion, whatever else.
There are no absolutes!
The way boards operate doesn't always lend itself to the person who can teach and extend a moving new thought like Einstein. Its much more conducive for the poster who makes a quick point and takes a more popular view. To me the intelligence that is creative, bold and generates a feeling is the most potent in general but on boards I like the poster who can come up with an unique angle, expound on it, show some wit in the process of explaining.
Rasheed
Don Dadda
And Rufus Paul come to mind.
I have more but I forget screenames.
[QUOTE=joe]I think it makes the most sense when it comes to politics. If you're a hardcore Democrat, I see your filter as being Democrat based. So you're seeing the world through that filter. You're looking at things through that lens and it taints how you interpret any information.
A Republican might say this person is "dumb." But I think the filter is only one half, you also have to look at the "light," or the intelligence. This person might be extremely smart, it's just their brain goes through this particular filter that the Republican doesn't agree with.
[/QUOTE]
It is a lot more complex than that.
Scientist would love to call it genetics, but the way our brains are being structured has a lot more to do with thought than anything else. We have 2 sectors of society that is systematically indoctrinating people's minds. One is education. The other is the church. Education is a system of indoctrination, thus people who are more "educated" tend to be more liberal. The other sector is religion, and those who are religious will be more conservative.
It is because both political parties have spent a huge amount of money to influence one or the other, so through this association of social beliefs, both institutions are very successful in brain washing students or young children to believe in one or the other.
I think the main goal of the rich is to stir up a bit of class warfare, meaning, poor vs poor, y'know, this way they can divert the attention away from a rich vs poor showdown; the idea is if the poor are more focused on social issues (gays, racism, abortion, etc.) that will only make them hate each other more, and they won't be so focused on the people truely screwing them over: [B]the rich.[/B]
Most of society are conditioned in two ways: education or church. Most Americans are raised to hate one or the other, meaning, they were taught to hate their neighbors and the people around them that take the other side. What they teach in school is the antithesis of what they teach in the churches: if they say you should be accepting of gays in the schools, the churches will go against gays; when the schools teach contraceptives in sex education, the churches go against that, so on and so forth. You get the point. Living in America, you only have 2 choices growing up: being liberal or conservative, and it all really boils down to how well you do in school (liberal) or how much you like church (conservative). Those 2 institutions influence the minds of the population the most. There is a reason why the Democrats will pour their heart and soul into education and there is a reason why every Republican is nothing more than a religious hack. Both systems were bought and paid for and most americans are either brainwashed in one way of thinking or the other.