This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - More Than Mortal
Pages: 1 ... 343344345 346347 ... 502
10321
« on: December 09, 2014, 02:11:42 PM »
Depends.
What position am I in to hit the switch? Is it just a random opportunity, or am I some sort of political leader?
Also, is it as if it never existed, or will the Internet just suddenly stop working for everybody?
10322
« on: December 09, 2014, 01:11:29 PM »
Your PM is about as bad as Bush. Increased tutti on for schools, cuts in education and retirement. Seriously, you can't be blind to these things.
That doesn't make him a fascist. Also, Bush increased government spending across the board, and it was the biggest increase since LBJ; the Dept. of Education saw a 165pc budget increase. In saying that, Labour also have a desire to bring down the deficit by the same year as the Tories. Both want the same thing, and yet neither will deliver. The cuts in spending are necessary, although they certainly could be handled better.
10323
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:55:42 PM »
Conservatives are kept in check by the democratic system but they try and destroy it every day and take what little freedom we already have.
That's a massive generalisation you're making. Especially since my Conservative Party is probably the most democratic of the three main parties in Britain. I don't know how you can possibly claim conservatives are behind this, especially since most conservatives are the liberals of the 17-18th centuries. It's not so much about how conservative one is, but about how authoritarian one is. Stalinism is a much bigger threat to democracy than I am, and they aren't conservative by any measure. Hell, even fascism isn't conservative half of the time.
10324
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:42:01 PM »
Europe is very right wing. Italy, Spain, France, the Nordic countries, even England. Since when?
I'll give you borderline-authoritarian welfare states.
But there's no way they're that right-wing, economically or otherwise.
Hold on I confused the French party in the EU with the government. My bad.
The others are though. Look at the laws being passed by your government. Look at the Nordic countries. They're great countries no doubt, but they're pretty fascistic and definitely right wing. I mean they're conservatives.
I won't deny that my country has been passing excessively invasive and unnecessary laws, but that doesn't even touch fascism. And yes, they're conservatives, but being conservative is nowhere near fascism. There's a stark difference between a surveillance-welfare state and fascism. Hell, fascism isn't even economically right-wing - our conservatives don't exactly fit the mold. Although I do wish they were further to the right, economically.
10325
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:32:22 PM »
Europe is very right wing. Italy, Spain, France, the Nordic countries, even England. Since when? I'll give you borderline-authoritarian welfare states. But there's no way they're that right-wing, economically or otherwise.
10326
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:23:42 PM »
Whether or not it's enforceable, it only continue to make America look like an ass on the world stage.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Foreign governments which accuse the U.S. of torture and immoral conduct ought be derided for the idiots they are.
10327
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:20:58 PM »
Kiyo, Meta, Slash, Berzerk Commando, Kernel Kraut, Kinder, and a few others whose usernames I can't remember. Ey? What's the charge?
10328
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:20:08 PM »
>europe
>right wing
Authoritarian? I'll give you that, they're working hard on it. But Europe is pretty far from right wing.
I should point out the neither the fascists nor the Nazis were right-wing.
10329
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:19:15 PM »
2013 Meta.
Hey fuck you. If I was going to be a totalitarian I'd be one who wasn't utterly inefficient and economically illiterate.
10330
« on: December 09, 2014, 12:17:51 PM »
I could see some instances in which torture could be ethical. Not to say the CIA hasn't totally overdone it.
Although, I think wartime collateral damage is more morally troublesome than torture.
10331
« on: December 09, 2014, 11:32:35 AM »
I'm only respected by 2 users?
Am I not doing my job?
most people here don't want gays to be killed
#shotsfired
10332
« on: December 09, 2014, 11:29:43 AM »
Now this is how you police.
10333
« on: December 09, 2014, 11:17:21 AM »
Did he have another forename prior to that?
10334
« on: December 09, 2014, 11:16:02 AM »
then the world would fascist right now: it's not
Unfortunately.
10335
« on: December 09, 2014, 11:15:04 AM »
Loyalty and utility.
How do you define utility in friends?
Being able to support my goals.
10336
« on: December 09, 2014, 10:45:06 AM »
NONE OF YOU MANLETS CAN BEAT 188CM LOL GET ON MY LEVEL
>tfw 191cm
10337
« on: December 09, 2014, 10:41:20 AM »
Loyalty and utility.
10338
« on: December 09, 2014, 08:19:52 AM »
Wait, no. You're just an American.
>yfw im british
American in the sense that you're a moron and are overweight.
Shiggy diggy
10339
« on: December 09, 2014, 01:19:07 AM »
Wait, no. You're just an American.
>yfw im british
10340
« on: December 08, 2014, 07:44:54 PM »
and it's very likely that segregated parts of town will develop based on what businesses serve what customers.
Do you think segregation could've occurred as seriously as it did without the Jim Crow laws? The government cares not for morality. It's only interest is pleasing the loudest voice. Segregation isn't sustainable without government support.
10341
« on: December 08, 2014, 06:33:55 PM »
Employment is different though.
I'm divided, to be honest.
10342
« on: December 08, 2014, 06:32:02 PM »
If you think fascism isn't a serious threat to democracy, you're kidding yourself.
What about militarism, colonialism, Stalinism, anarchism, communism or voluntarism? I'm actually not that opposed to suppressing fascism, and I'd trust myself to do it right were I in government, but my problem is where do we draw the line. Can we trust the government to only ban the literature that is exceptionally dangerous? Should they ban books with anti-democratic yet non-militarist and non-racist sentiments like anarchism? Should they ban books promoting anarchism if they promote insurrection and revolution? How do you measure danger; is the anarchists homemade-bomb-making guide more dangerous than Mein Kampf? Why do we assume democracy is the best form of government in the first place?
10343
« on: December 08, 2014, 06:28:03 PM »
If you've read about what the Nazis have done and you're interested enough to read the book of psycho numero uno himself, chances are you think they had some good ideas.
Or you just have an interest in history/politics - as I did. However, you've actually brought up a good point, that Hitler was a psychopath. Neo-Nazis, in this day and age, are probably inflicted with either a lack of education, poor parenting or a mental disorder bordering on ASPD/psychopathy. In other words, the issue isn't actually the book itself.
10344
« on: December 08, 2014, 06:23:47 PM »
That's where you're wrong. You're free from fascism. That shit has no place in a civilized society that values equality and democracy.
A society valuing equality and, especially, democracy must be incredibly fragile if a book will convert its citizens to racism and totalitarianism. So fragile, in fact, that it shouldn't be a democracy in the first place.
10345
« on: December 08, 2014, 06:22:23 PM »
For the same reason they should be allowed to deny services to Nazis. Of course, the latter example is much more understandable. Nazis are - rightly - universally reviled for their largely disgusting creed. It's completely reasonable for a business owner to want to deny goods and services to these people, based on their sentiments.
If we allow this to be true then it seems prudent they should also be allowed to deny services to gays - or anybody else for that matter. I think it'd be objectively immoral to do so, but it isn't my job to lobby the government to enforce morality. It's also not really the governments job, in my mind, to promote such forms of morality.
That isn't to say, however, that these people should be excused. We, as consumers, ought to take a bit of responsibility and don a bit of self-reliance, and make these people incur the financial costs. Spread the word, protest, tell people that the owners are bigoted. If people still go to this service, and they remain in business then tough shit, really. It isn't your place to compel anyone to not receive services from such a place for such a reason.
But, what we don't do is cry to the government and get some fucking pointless law signed into being for the sake of "progress" and "justice".
10346
« on: December 08, 2014, 06:16:07 PM »
I have one idea, which I like to call the Aesthetic Principle, that I maintain is sort of semi-original. It basically asserts that all forms of human, if not sentient, behaviour necessarily stems from aesthetics. I've seen it expressed in vaguely similar forms - Pirsig's MOQ, Nietzsche's perspectivism - but never in a way that explicitly makes aesthetics the very basis of philosophy.
What about you?
10347
« on: December 08, 2014, 05:31:33 PM »
Why are people who didn't go through it getting compensation? It's as idiotic as the government paying half of family since my dad's side is Irish. And in case some don't understand, the Irish were also sold as slaves in America
That's part of the reason why the institution of the family needs to be abolished already.
The State is the only family you really need.
10348
« on: December 08, 2014, 02:44:25 PM »
Don't want to lock the thread >.>
It's fine. There's no antagonism here. I have nothing against Rocket personally, I was just trying to explain where we were coming from in relation to him. If you don't think that's suitable, though, then I'll stop.
10349
« on: December 08, 2014, 02:40:22 PM »
it always becomes 100% about my beliefs.
Actually it evolved from a discussion about the pastor's expressions to the biblical nature of homosexuality and sin, and Max asking how you could split the difference between the person and the acts since nobody chooses to be gay. To which you articulated the point that you don't think it's a choice. It wasn't a "Let's jump on Rocket" bandwagon. It was an evolving discussion, in which the imperative became getting you out of a horrible misinformed and potentially bigoted mindset. We're not attacking you, or questioning you, just for the sheer sake of it.
10350
« on: December 08, 2014, 02:30:39 PM »
not other people being questioned, but simply me. That is why.
That's probably because people feel the need to question you since you pretty much refuse to engage in any meaningful and developmental discussion from the word go. I think it's an issue with you - not everybody else. I have no problem with being questioned for however long. If I don't understand the question, then I ask them to articulate it better. I only get frustrated when people are being exceptionally obtuse.
Pages: 1 ... 343344345 346347 ... 502
|
Show Posts