November 17, 2012 | Author: Mircea Popescu

You're likely familiar with that useless spamsite which puts up ads to advertise that it "never uses ads"i. Let's dig a little deeper under the surface of hypocrisyii, for instance by reviewing the article on "Street children".

There's a section about Romania, and it reads :

Romania

A report of the Council of Europe of year 2000 estimated that there were approximately 1,000 street children in Bucharest alone. The prevalence of street children has lent to a burgeoning sex tourism business in Romania, though efforts have been made to decrease the number of street children.

There's also a graph :

homeless_children_in_us_2006-10

Now let's see if we can use our math skills for a moment.

    Place Total Population Independent Children
    Bucharest ~2mn 1`000
    USofA ~300mn 1`500`000

So the United States in all its backward, rogue state rural glory has about a degree of magnitude more children living independently than the god forsaken shithole of Bucharest, a sort of Los Angeles minus the fresh air. Isn't this fascinating ? And if there's room for anecdotal evidence, the only place in this wide wide world where someone thought of offering me the services of underageiii prostitutes was the United States of America.

This is why wikipedia has nothing to do with culture : it is a means for the stupid to reinforce their stupidity with the idle belief that their stupidity is widely shared, without pausing to think that it is only shared by the stupid others. Or, in other words,

wikipedia_wales

———
  1. And if you're one of the Romanian speaking readers of this blog you probably recall that I don't think much of it, and why. []
  2. Seriously, the "free" encyclopedia where anyone can contribute and have their work deleted unless they're part of the bureaucratic circle-jerk ? Heh. The revolutionary new idea of replacing intellectual hierarchy refined over the centuries and based at least on some semblance of work, competence and scholarship with a bunch of useless thirty-somethings that "were there first" ? But please, spare me. []
  3. Underage as in under 14, not underage as in under 21 or whatever the hypocritical "respectable people" pretend is the "proper age". []
Category : Meta psihoza  | 16 responses.