Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Religion & Politics' started by Baya Rae 4900, Oct 16, 2011.
Can't you just make a post trashbin thread so you can keep all of the stupid shit you think is cool into one thread?
I feel the mass exterminations had ulterior motivates behind them as everything the Nazis did had ulterior motivates.
Same could be said for Stalin I suppose.
Stalin did what he had to do. Socialists are brutal, unforgiving cunts. Stalin understood this. Probably better than anybody.
Too bad for us he failed to complete his task.
The planet is worse off for it.
The irony is that Satan's plan, if carried out, would have made the whole place better for all of us.
Given that, do you really believe that Satan would have wanted something done which would have made the planet better?
Now I've fucked myself in the head.
I'm going into my circular room to sit in the corner.
So, itt we discuss how evil world leaders maybe were going the Adrian Viet route?
Robert Mugabe running a kleptocracy was a good thing?
Africans are brutal, unforgiving cunts. Mugabe understands this. Probably better than anybody.
How does that justify robbing from everybody and giving to Mugabe?
Also your stance on Pol Pot is needed other wise this is just a "I liek hitler; he kills jews and doesnt afraid of allies" thread.
It doesn't go to Mugabe, though. Mugabe gives most of what he confiscates (it's not stealing if the government does it, remember) to his most loyal of underlings to ensure the unity and survival of Zimbabwe. Is he good for the economy of Zimbabwe? Of course not, he's a quasi-socialist that is using the only productive members of Zimbabwean society as scapegoats. But we're not judging these people on economic sense.
Poly is the same as Stalin, IMO. All socialists understand the fundamental principle that you can't keep a socialist government functional unless you sacrifice socialists to it once in a while.
I get how you might be able to justify Hitler (and you'd be working hard to do that), but Pol Pot reducing his entire country to ruins using rape, slavery, genocide of his own people and luddism does not make sense. How could the Cambodians destruction be a force for good?
Mugabe I think I'm o.k with, you've summed up Mugabe pretty well.
Have you ever met a fucking Cambodian?
Fucking scum of the earth.
Pol had the right idea.
Well, fuck a proper answer, this shit got settled.
ha ha ha oh wow
You think governments are a force for good. That's priceless.
I wasn't talking about goverments I was talking about the Cambodians.
Taking quite the libertarian point of view, are we?
The truth, my Aussie friend, is that the governments we have today are the result of a three-thousand year democratic process were humanity is even now still striving to make as perfect as humanly possible. No form of government-civilian relationship will ever be perfect, not if it's totalitarian neither democratic, and ideologically, no ideology on its own is superior to another ideology, as they're both heavily dependent on political status and socio-economic context. Italy is soon filing for bankrupcy while it has a very right-wing government, while Spain is doing as bad as Italy but with a socialist government.
There is no difference. People always fuck up and imperfections rule the day. Governments also regularly fuck up. Why? Because a government is made out of people like you and me, it's an organic structure of which its succes depends on the people behind it. Good, sensible politicians equal good, sensible governments. No rational being will deny that.
So to just say that governments are always, as by a law of nature, a force of no good, is not only untrue but also very relative.
Democracies were created, and continue to exist, as a mechanism to reduce the militancy of the general population by placating their wish to have some sort of power. And, when they vote for a bad politician, the government makes them feel guilty. It's not libertarian, though they are quite thorough on de-constructing the idea and results of government, but a governmental one. Do be an effective government we must understand government and use all its tools.
This doesn't only apply to democracies but any government form sensu lato. Take China for example, a pseudo-democratic state that is actually totalitarian on the inside but tries very hard to maintain its democratic facade exteriorly. People are even less militant there than here, and they don't have democracy (China only has one allowed political party to vote for) but are suppressed through various other tools such as censorship.
Any kind of government form can be seen as a way to reduce militancy in your eyes, which i won't object, as the primary goal of a government or state was to create an orderly construction out of a mess where everyone did as he/her pleased. That can only be done through rules which people must live by. And that obviously cripples the 'freedom' people have.
Ofcourse, don't listen to me, heck, from your point of view it'd just be best to get naked and start living in the woods talking to wild sparrows.
Governments aren't about order. The governments exists to serve itself. Human beings, by nature, are ordered. The societies that need brute force and legislation to function shouldn't exist.
Lol, and you say you're not libertarian?
Also, by your logic, no society should exist.
Just because your shitty society is full of maniacs, doesn't mean every society is. You short-sighted twat.
And no, I'm not a libertarian. I have no qualms about exploiting government. Just because I follow their school of thought when deciphering the effects of government, doesn't mean I'm one of them.
haha, way to go, little Rosseau
Your brain is the definitive proof of entropy
Btw, why are you always advocating the Alpha-male route, when you're totally a sad Delta, at most, mate?
Jesus christ, they fuck up what I said and turn it in to a fuck the man thread.
You know what would happen to "alpha-males" in a decent society devoid of government? They'd get lynched or exiled.
Every society has bad elements that need to be controlled. The mentally-unstable, the rapists, the serial murderers, the greedy, the niggers, all need to be governed. Whether it be by general will of the people, or by a totalitarian dictatorship.
Sure, 4.000 years of history proves that
Or maybe with "decent society" you are talking about OZ?
Holy shit Snorlax, you've taken "using outdated and theoretically disproven philosophies" to an entirely new level.
The very fact that you still use philosophy that originated from the Age of Enlightenment shows that you haven't been able to cope with time. Every last bit of the Enlightenment lies in war graves in Auschwitz, in Leningrad, in Berlin and in Normandy. The only single thing Enlightenment did was tear Europe apart for two centuries at the cost of bringing us a new but hardly changed form of government the Ancient Greeks called democracy.