Mass'Debator
Posts: 4,224 
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
May 26th, 2008, 01:41 PM
Maybe I went off topic because I said something that pissed you off, or you found offensive, or doesn't suck your ass because you're from the US..... maybe you need to get a grip.
Considdering it's my thread to begin with and I started off the debate, I think I know what the hell the topic is about. Nice attempt to make me look hypocritical, but you fell flat on your ass on that one. I can almost see your semi-proud facial expression when you posted that, thinking you might have pulled a smooth one over me, but you failed. Better luck next time buddy ol' pal.
Quoting I think not
I'm off topic am I? Seeings how my posts have related directly to the thread, posts by other members and article I originally posted, perhaps you can explain to me how I somehow went off topic.
BTW Praxius, you're off topic. Payback's a bitch.
Maybe I went off topic because I said something that pissed you off, or you found offensive, or doesn't suck your ass because you're from the US..... maybe you need to get a grip.
Considdering it's my thread to begin with and I started off the debate, I think I know what the hell the topic is about. Nice attempt to make me look hypocritical, but you fell flat on your ass on that one. I can almost see your semi-proud facial expression when you posted that, thinking you might have pulled a smooth one over me, but you failed. Better luck next time buddy ol' pal.
Council Member
Posts: 1,737
Location: BC
Location: BC
May 26th, 2008, 04:09 PM
Certainly there have been more of them. 
Anyway, I don't really have a problem with dictatorships. Democracy is every bit as violent as dictatorships, we're just insulated here by our undying love for propaganda and our fantastic wealth we gained through pillage. When a dictator puts a person in prison its oppression when we do it we're upholding the law.
Quoting Colpy
Yes, because we all know US supported dictators are so much better
It is bull****...........
Your first hint should have been "state radio"......
BTW, the brutal regime of Burma is backed mainly by their allies in your hero-state......China.
No surprize there.
Your first hint should have been "state radio"......
BTW, the brutal regime of Burma is backed mainly by their allies in your hero-state......China.
No surprize there.
Certainly there have been more of them. Anyway, I don't really have a problem with dictatorships. Democracy is every bit as violent as dictatorships, we're just insulated here by our undying love for propaganda and our fantastic wealth we gained through pillage. When a dictator puts a person in prison its oppression when we do it we're upholding the law.
Mass'Debator
Posts: 4,224
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
May 27th, 2008, 09:20 AM
Whatever you say, it doesn't remove the fact that you screwed up above and trying to dismiss it with some other tripe like the above only makes it worse.
Oh by the way.... please stay on topic for once, as this has nothing to do with Burma refusing aid from US Warships
Quoting I think not
What? That we make more sense then you do? Yeah I noticed. Nice typical response I see in all forums over time "You're just like so-in-so" like that's going to hurt my feelings or something..... Hang on while I go dial my therapist.
Praxius, no you don't have to explain a dam thing, you're slowly becoming comparable to Logic 7.
Whatever you say, it doesn't remove the fact that you screwed up above and trying to dismiss it with some other tripe like the above only makes it worse.
Oh by the way.... please stay on topic for once, as this has nothing to do with Burma refusing aid from US Warships
Senate Member
Posts: 5,580
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
May 27th, 2008, 12:58 PM
Quoting Scott Free
How OLD are you?
Yes, because we all know US supported dictators are so much better Certainly there have been more of them.
Anyway, I don't really have a problem with dictatorships. Democracy is every bit as violent as dictatorships, we're just insulated here by our undying love for propaganda and our fantastic wealth we gained through pillage. When a dictator puts a person in prison its oppression when we do it we're upholding the law.
Certainly there have been more of them. Anyway, I don't really have a problem with dictatorships. Democracy is every bit as violent as dictatorships, we're just insulated here by our undying love for propaganda and our fantastic wealth we gained through pillage. When a dictator puts a person in prison its oppression when we do it we're upholding the law.
Council Member
Posts: 1,737
Location: BC
Location: BC
May 28th, 2008, 08:40 PM
Giving into unjustified authority isn't mature it's stupid.
Quoting Colpy
Appeal to ad populum won't win this argument.
How OLD are you?
Giving into unjustified authority isn't mature it's stupid.
Senate Member
Posts: 5,580
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
May 28th, 2008, 10:15 PM
I ask your age simply because your ideas are simply immature. I don't mean that to be insulting, one can hardly help being young.....and the condition passes.
Unfortunately, in some ways.
But
I was a Marxist at 16.
My son was a serious anarchist at 16.
Believe me, you grow out of it.
Your brain is not fully developed until around 25 years of age. Fact.
If you are young, well, I understand. Churchill said (paraphrased) "If you're not a communist at 16, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain"
I agree. If you are a teenage anarchist, well, at least you can string together a coherent sentence.
If you are over 25, you're an idiot.
Quoting Scott Free
So, if the authority of a duly elected government in a constitutional liberal democracy that operates strictly under rule of law is NOT justified...........what authority is justified?
Appeal to ad populum won't win this argument.
Giving into unjustified authority isn't mature it's stupid.
Giving into unjustified authority isn't mature it's stupid.
I ask your age simply because your ideas are simply immature. I don't mean that to be insulting, one can hardly help being young.....and the condition passes.
Unfortunately, in some ways.
But
I was a Marxist at 16.
My son was a serious anarchist at 16.
Believe me, you grow out of it.
Your brain is not fully developed until around 25 years of age. Fact.
If you are young, well, I understand. Churchill said (paraphrased) "If you're not a communist at 16, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain"
I agree. If you are a teenage anarchist, well, at least you can string together a coherent sentence.
If you are over 25, you're an idiot.
Executive Member
Posts: 9,532
May 29th, 2008, 12:14 AM
[quote=Colpy;954939]So, if the authority of a duly elected government in a constitutional liberal democracy that operates strictly under rule of law is NOT justified...........what authority is justified?[unquote]
Where in hell have you been? "If the authority of a duly elected government in a constitutional, liberal, democracy that operates strictly under the rule of law is not justified..........what authority is justifiesd"? Where in the hell have Americans operated strictly under the law? Who gave the authority?
[quote=Colpy;954939]So, if the authority of a duly elected government in a constitutional liberal democracy that operates strictly under rule of law is NOT justified...........what authority is justified?[unquote]
Where in hell have you been? "If the authority of a duly elected government in a constitutional, liberal, democracy that operates strictly under the rule of law is not justified..........what authority is justifiesd"? Where in the hell have Americans operated strictly under the law? Who gave the authority?
Council Member
Posts: 1,737
Location: BC
Location: BC
May 29th, 2008, 02:26 AM
Democracy is consensus and consensus is violence because it requires acquiescence, that is, giving into what you may not believe or want simply because it isn't what the "majority" (currently about 14% of the population) wants. In this way you must give in. If you don't people with guns and body armour will show up at your door and inflict more violence on you until you do comply. This isn't a fair, noble or peaceful system; it is democracy; it is violence institutionalized. Is it better than a dictatorship or a kingdom? That depends only on who the "majority" is and where they stand according to you.
I'll put it into simpler terms for you. If Sharia law became the norm in Canada (as is likely one day) then being a Christian will become very much more difficult. The majority will want Sharia law, which means you will comply with it, just like now we have Christian law and everyone must now comply with it. Is that fair to you?
Now I see by your generous offer in your argument of my limited choices, that either I'm young or stupid if I'm an anarchist, that you understand the violent nature of our system well and are fully able, willing and eager to exploit it.
I will however offer some other options to your argument: I know what I'm talking about and you're a fool, you're comfortable with the system because you can't understand anything more, you're comfortable because it affords you an advantage, you have so fully complied that you have lost yourself completely, You need to feel right (and that which you subscribe to is right) about everything despite all countervailing evidence, etc... So you see there are more options than the two you are attempting to foist on me.
So, since I am older than 25 and not a fool, It seems logical to assume that means either you don't understand anarchism, are a fool yourself, or more likely, that both are true.
Quoting Colpy
I can see by your remark that you were not a serious anarchist or you would understand the concept. Unfortunately most "anarchists" are silly children, like you, that think anarchy is running through the streets vandalizing property.
So, if the authority of a duly elected government in a constitutional liberal democracy that operates strictly under rule of law is NOT justified...........what authority is justified?
I ask your age simply because your ideas are simply immature. I don't mean that to be insulting, one can hardly help being young.....and the condition passes.
Unfortunately, in some ways.
But
I was a Marxist at 16.
My son was a serious anarchist at 16.
Believe me, you grow out of it.
Your brain is not fully developed until around 25 years of age. Fact.
If you are young, well, I understand. Churchill said (paraphrased) "If you're not a communist at 16, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain"
I agree. If you are a teenage anarchist, well, at least you can string together a coherent sentence.
If you are over 25, you're an idiot.
I ask your age simply because your ideas are simply immature. I don't mean that to be insulting, one can hardly help being young.....and the condition passes.
Unfortunately, in some ways.
But
I was a Marxist at 16.
My son was a serious anarchist at 16.
Believe me, you grow out of it.
Your brain is not fully developed until around 25 years of age. Fact.
If you are young, well, I understand. Churchill said (paraphrased) "If you're not a communist at 16, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain"
I agree. If you are a teenage anarchist, well, at least you can string together a coherent sentence.
If you are over 25, you're an idiot.
Democracy is consensus and consensus is violence because it requires acquiescence, that is, giving into what you may not believe or want simply because it isn't what the "majority" (currently about 14% of the population) wants. In this way you must give in. If you don't people with guns and body armour will show up at your door and inflict more violence on you until you do comply. This isn't a fair, noble or peaceful system; it is democracy; it is violence institutionalized. Is it better than a dictatorship or a kingdom? That depends only on who the "majority" is and where they stand according to you.
I'll put it into simpler terms for you. If Sharia law became the norm in Canada (as is likely one day) then being a Christian will become very much more difficult. The majority will want Sharia law, which means you will comply with it, just like now we have Christian law and everyone must now comply with it. Is that fair to you?
Now I see by your generous offer in your argument of my limited choices, that either I'm young or stupid if I'm an anarchist, that you understand the violent nature of our system well and are fully able, willing and eager to exploit it.
I will however offer some other options to your argument: I know what I'm talking about and you're a fool, you're comfortable with the system because you can't understand anything more, you're comfortable because it affords you an advantage, you have so fully complied that you have lost yourself completely, You need to feel right (and that which you subscribe to is right) about everything despite all countervailing evidence, etc... So you see there are more options than the two you are attempting to foist on me.
So, since I am older than 25 and not a fool, It seems logical to assume that means either you don't understand anarchism, are a fool yourself, or more likely, that both are true.
May 31st, 2008, 06:33 AM
Quoting Praxius
Doesn't really suprise me all that mutch if the US had strings attached. Sounds like the capitalist mentality we've seen from the US as of late. There's been plenty of examples where the US didn't bother to even take action to save people and have only mutters responses like "We find this Troubling" and then back to their wars. But then finally they're offering to this disaster, but from a vessel of war and with strings attached..... hell even in the contract our country signed with the US when it comes to shipping troops across each other's borders they put loads of strings on that agreement towards Canada..... such as the US troops can enter our country, but don't have to take orders from our military, but our's has to take orders from their military if in their country..... how fokked is that?
It wouldn't suprise me in the least that the US would attempt to offer help at their greatest time of need in order to get some profit or benifit out of it that would suit them in the long run.
The Burma authorities have recently opened their borders to most aid workers now from other countries.... just because they're in the middle of a disaster, doesn't mean they should just blindly open their borders to everything under the sun that claims they want to "Help"
And you want to talk about governments not helping their own people out, go talk to the people in New Orleans.
It wouldn't suprise me in the least that the US would attempt to offer help at their greatest time of need in order to get some profit or benifit out of it that would suit them in the long run.
The Burma authorities have recently opened their borders to most aid workers now from other countries.... just because they're in the middle of a disaster, doesn't mean they should just blindly open their borders to everything under the sun that claims they want to "Help"
And you want to talk about governments not helping their own people out, go talk to the people in New Orleans.
Quoting I think not
Praxius, no you don't have to explain a dam thing, you're slowly becoming comparable to Logic 7.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,612
May 31st, 2008, 07:55 AM
When a liberal constitutional democracy.....(I'd like to see how one defines this critter) ostensibly subscribing to the "rule of law".... practices regime-change through supply of weapons and intelligence to a particular faction involved in the overthrow/rebellion taking place somewhere else in the world...that's perfectly OK!
When this amazing critter invades some other country on the pretext that this "rogue" dictatorship is being untruthful about amassing weapons of mass destruction and presents an "urgent necessity" to miltary action ....to preserve world peace....that's pefectly OK!
When this critter is then exposed as having decimated another country and having had ample opportunity to demonstrate evidence that was alluded to prior to the "invasion" of "ugent necessity" yet fails to provide this hard evidence and instead that nation is reduced to mayhem and on-going violence...well that's perfectly OK....
The Colpy Rules.
When a liberal constitutional democracy.....(I'd like to see how one defines this critter) ostensibly subscribing to the "rule of law".... practices regime-change through supply of weapons and intelligence to a particular faction involved in the overthrow/rebellion taking place somewhere else in the world...that's perfectly OK!
When this amazing critter invades some other country on the pretext that this "rogue" dictatorship is being untruthful about amassing weapons of mass destruction and presents an "urgent necessity" to miltary action ....to preserve world peace....that's pefectly OK!
When this critter is then exposed as having decimated another country and having had ample opportunity to demonstrate evidence that was alluded to prior to the "invasion" of "ugent necessity" yet fails to provide this hard evidence and instead that nation is reduced to mayhem and on-going violence...well that's perfectly OK....
The Colpy Rules.
