Total Posts:151|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Real IRA

AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 9:23:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well, I'm in the process of doing a project on these guys (exploring their beliefs, motives, etc., for intercultural studies) and I've already hit on something fascinating so far as I can see, rather in line with everything I've been saying on here as of late.

The Real IRA (RIRA) are basically just murders with the aim to "spread terror and disruption". Now, what would be your opinion on such an aim? Politically justified or what? Joke.....

The leader of the RIRA is the husband of Bernadette Sands-McKevitt, the sister of Bobby Sands, one of the most idolised revolutionaries my country has ever known.

Now, what of it, you ask? Well, it's very f*cking significant. This is a group who, quite frankly, hasn't the first f*cking clue what it's doing. No proper political statement has ever been issued besides the aim to "spread terror and disruption," and so what are they doing?

Control. Control is the answer. That's what it's all about - as long as these people can do something, they feel as though they are in control. And then this is right across the board, pretty much every "ideology" is really only about control, and f*cking dumb for the most part.

Take the frustrated atheist, for example, on his crusade against God; take the anti-government protesters with no idea of what comes after, just that government must go. And I mean government might be seen as one of our twin gods, no; in our "polite society"?

And then really think about what it is that you're preaching. Is there really a logical basis - I mean a truly logical basis - or are you possibly just trying to stupidly control as those folk in the RIRA are?

The only (and I mean only) sensible political agenda is to alleviate these people of their burdens, of their stupid need for control. And then how? Collectivism. Complete and utter, final collectivism. Or am I wrong? I mean whatever about feasibility, but that's what we should strive towards with our every political thought. Otherwise, you're just playing a stupid game, one whose variables will never properly be accounted for, leaving chaos at the reins eternally. Am I wrong?

"Hurr durr no capitalism is right, just get rid of government and it's all OK"
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 9:24:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm probably gonna get murdered for this project, lol, so I said I'd post this preliminary just in case.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 9:29:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Oh, Bobby Sands died on a hunger strike. His sister, then, Bernadette, is since pretty much just a maniacal child.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 9:41:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I mean this stuff is even evident with dogs if you really look at them. This is canine intelligence. If my dog is chained up outside for too long after barking to be let in, he'll run around the house like a lunatic when he does get let in, as though to allow himself to believe that he has huge control over this domain. Is it not time to cop on a small bit? I mean whatever about improving conditions for yourself, but if you're just mad about taxes or something like that and think, "Oh, I'll abolish government, that's what I'll do," then you are stupid as f*ck. You have a dog's brain for all your "sophistication".

My grandfather, God rest his soul, used be a prominent figure for backing and gaining support for local politicians. He was often regarded as the king of where I'm from as a matter of fact. But when this dude, and a rather prolific dude I must say, used pass out his opinions on paper door to door, with no real interest of getting into politics in the sense my grandfather was accustomed to, my grandfather used rage and rage, without a clue of what this dude was actually preaching, just because it was outside his sphere of experience and his blind raging was, to him, a mode of controlling that. I mean.... dumb. But that's what you're dealing with. And he was by no means an imbecile, but a highly respected individual, well above average intelligence, too, I'd say. DUMB. And I hate to say it, but it's true. Time to cop on.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 9:52:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
"By the people, for the people" - how much more sensible are you getting than that? Oh, "Money as a vote"? Yeah... right.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 9:56:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
This is profoundly stupid and pseudo-philosophical. I am tempted to bite, but usually debates with you end in diatribes and you making nonsensical, irrelevant statements, or inadvertently making concessions by dropping our debate and moving on to something new.

If I do bite, would you actually debate or would it end like the above?
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:10:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 9:23:10 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, I'm in the process of doing a project on these guys (exploring their beliefs, motives, etc., for intercultural studies) and I've already hit on something fascinating so far as I can see, rather in line with everything I've been saying on here as of late.

The Real IRA (RIRA) are basically just murders with the aim to "spread terror and disruption". Now, what would be your opinion on such an aim? Politically justified or what? Joke.....

The leader of the RIRA is the husband of Bernadette Sands-McKevitt, the sister of Bobby Sands, one of the most idolised revolutionaries my country has ever known.

Now, what of it, you ask? Well, it's very f*cking significant. This is a group who, quite frankly, hasn't the first f*cking clue what it's doing. No proper political statement has ever been issued besides the aim to "spread terror and disruption," and so what are they doing?

Control. Control is the answer. That's what it's all about - as long as these people can do something, they feel as though they are in control. And then this is right across the board, pretty much every "ideology" is really only about control, and f*cking dumb for the most part.

Take the frustrated atheist, for example, on his crusade against God; take the anti-government protesters with no idea of what comes after, just that government must go. And I mean government might be seen as one of our twin gods, no; in our "polite society"?

And then really think about what it is that you're preaching. Is there really a logical basis - I mean a truly logical basis - or are you possibly just trying to stupidly control as those folk in the RIRA are?

The only (and I mean only) sensible political agenda is to alleviate these people of their burdens, of their stupid need for control. And then how? Collectivism. Complete and utter, final collectivism. Or am I wrong? I mean whatever about feasibility, but that's what we should strive towards with our every political thought. Otherwise, you're just playing a stupid game, one whose variables will never properly be accounted for, leaving chaos at the reins eternally. Am I wrong?

"Hurr durr no capitalism is right, just get rid of government and it's all OK"

Fvck it, I know this will most likely not end in a sophisticated way or in a way where I might learn something, but I feel like someone needs to set you straight, because you're just as annoying as charlesb, yet your even worse at pseudo-philosophy and at least charles justified what he said, you are just drawing comparisons and saying "If the IRA does this, they must think this and be doing this", you are drawing comparisons based on one small piece of information. Let's get down to the meat and bones of your idiotic rants.

The IRA's goal is not to just randomly spread chaos, and you have to be either a major idiot or making up things for your own purposes and ends. The IRA has been and still today is interested in uniting the 32 counties in to one independant Ireland. They are fighting for Irish independence from Great Britain fully, and they have started disarming and primarily do peaceful negotiations nowadays, so how you can claim all they want to do is spread chaos, when they clearly are willing to put their guns down to gain their political end is beyond me.

http://www.start.umd.edu...

Now, you claim atheists and people who protest against an oppressive government or control, but you assert this without proving it. Just because I don't worship some fictional deity thousands of feet above the clouds somewhere doesn't mean I want control, in fact I think you use your god as an excuse to claim you have no control over your actions or your life, as you're just doing what you were destined to already do before you were born, your destiny is based on what your fictional deity wants, right?

Collectivism does not alleviate people of anti government sentiment, it worsens it.. Why would strengthenign government by having them tell us how to live our daily lives and destroy our culture make us like them more? Why do you think you're entitled to impose your moral and cultural beliefs on me through your ill-founded collectivism? It is YOU who wants control over MY life, MY culture, MY ideas, I just want control over MY OWN LIFE, is that TOO MUCH TO ASK FROM YOUR NEO-FASCISTIC IDIOTS?
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:14:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Ultimately the idea that individualists want control is absurd. I am entitled to have control over my own life, it is you, the collectivist, who wants to destroy cultures, ideas, and innovation so you can have the now brain dead and collective masses be under your control so you can use them for the nation's supposed gain through slaughtering millions in conquest or so anyone that dares think different from the cookie cutout of a person you want will be persecuted.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:15:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:10:18 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 9/29/2013 9:23:10 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, I'm in the process of doing a project on these guys (exploring their beliefs, motives, etc., for intercultural studies) and I've already hit on something fascinating so far as I can see, rather in line with everything I've been saying on here as of late.

The Real IRA (RIRA) are basically just murders with the aim to "spread terror and disruption". Now, what would be your opinion on such an aim? Politically justified or what? Joke.....

The leader of the RIRA is the husband of Bernadette Sands-McKevitt, the sister of Bobby Sands, one of the most idolised revolutionaries my country has ever known.

Now, what of it, you ask? Well, it's very f*cking significant. This is a group who, quite frankly, hasn't the first f*cking clue what it's doing. No proper political statement has ever been issued besides the aim to "spread terror and disruption," and so what are they doing?

Control. Control is the answer. That's what it's all about - as long as these people can do something, they feel as though they are in control. And then this is right across the board, pretty much every "ideology" is really only about control, and f*cking dumb for the most part.

Take the frustrated atheist, for example, on his crusade against God; take the anti-government protesters with no idea of what comes after, just that government must go. And I mean government might be seen as one of our twin gods, no; in our "polite society"?

And then really think about what it is that you're preaching. Is there really a logical basis - I mean a truly logical basis - or are you possibly just trying to stupidly control as those folk in the RIRA are?

The only (and I mean only) sensible political agenda is to alleviate these people of their burdens, of their stupid need for control. And then how? Collectivism. Complete and utter, final collectivism. Or am I wrong? I mean whatever about feasibility, but that's what we should strive towards with our every political thought. Otherwise, you're just playing a stupid game, one whose variables will never properly be accounted for, leaving chaos at the reins eternally. Am I wrong?

"Hurr durr no capitalism is right, just get rid of government and it's all OK"

Fvck it, I know this will most likely not end in a sophisticated way or in a way where I might learn something, but I feel like someone needs to set you straight, because you're just as annoying as charlesb, yet your even worse at pseudo-philosophy and at least charles justified what he said, you are just drawing comparisons and saying "If the IRA does this, they must think this and be doing this", you are drawing comparisons based on one small piece of information. Let's get down to the meat and bones of your idiotic rants.

The IRA's goal is not to just randomly spread chaos, and you have to be either a major idiot or making up things for your own purposes and ends. The IRA has been and still today is interested in uniting the 32 counties in to one independant Ireland. They are fighting for Irish independence from Great Britain fully, and they have started disarming and primarily do peaceful negotiations nowadays, so how you can claim all they want to do is spread chaos, when they clearly are willing to put their guns down to gain their political end is beyond me.

Why? Why do they want the 32 counties united?

http://www.start.umd.edu...

Now, you claim atheists and people who protest against an oppressive government or control, but you assert this without proving it. Just because I don't worship some fictional deity thousands of feet above the clouds somewhere doesn't mean I want control, in fact I think you use your god as an excuse to claim you have no control over your actions or your life, as you're just doing what you were destined to already do before you were born, your destiny is based on what your fictional deity wants, right?

Tywin Lannister will not beat death with his own flesh, but will control that to the best of his ability. "The family is all that survives". And then he loses his son Jaime Lannister (that son has lost control where he would have him control so as to "beat death") and he appoints his other son, the one he rather hates, to the position of hand of the king. This is politics, an absolute joke.

It's neither "pseudo-philosophical" nor "profoundly stupid," just glaringly obvious.

What is your justification, CA, for wanting to just tear down government?

Collectivism does not alleviate people of anti government sentiment, it worsens it.. Why would strengthenign government by having them tell us how to live our daily lives and destroy our culture make us like them more? Why do you think you're entitled to impose your moral and cultural beliefs on me through your ill-founded collectivism? It is YOU who wants control over MY life, MY culture, MY ideas, I just want control over MY OWN LIFE, is that TOO MUCH TO ASK FROM YOUR NEO-FASCISTIC IDIOTS?

What is government? You speak of it as though it is some entity that is separate to you. I'm talking about strengthening the people. And then what does control over your own life entail? You do realize you're stuck living with other people whether you like it or not, right? I mean if you take a plot and claim it your own, fortify it as your own, you're essentially prohibiting anyone from doing the same, right?

"I just want control over my own life".
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:18:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:14:04 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
Ultimately the idea that individualists want control is absurd. I am entitled to have control over my own life, it is you, the collectivist, who wants to destroy cultures, ideas, and innovation so you can have the now brain dead and collective masses be under your control so you can use them for the nation's supposed gain through slaughtering millions in conquest or so anyone that dares think different from the cookie cutout of a person you want will be persecuted.

Why do I want to slaughter millions and destroy cultures? And, uh, no... it's not; individualists just want control, and rather stupidly generally. Would you say Kim Jong-il was collectivist or individualist?
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:25:52 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Did Nazi Germany seek collectivist harmony with the rest of the world or did it seek independent harmony? And "independent" is rather synonymous with "individual," no? But yet I'm but a tyrant, tarred with the same brush as those who've sought to conquer. I DO NOT SEEK TO CONQUER, BUT UNITE. But to you, I do. Why?
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:34:23 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
You might perhaps consider separate states rather akin so separate corporations, don't you think, CA?

And then Nazi Germany was individualistic, no?

You might, too, rather sensibly consider a kingship as individualistic, no?

And then what of North Korea?

Oh, but these places are collectivist just because..... because you can say they are.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:36:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Yeah, you're right, I guess. I mean Kim Jong-il was the Supreme Leader of The Democratic People's Republic of Korea. That settles it, I guess; that name.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:40:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
It comes down to what's right. If you think you can secure for yourself better circumstances playing this individualistic game and that nothing matters otherwise, then more power to you. I can't argue with that, but your predictions as regards what tearing down government or whatever would entail. But then as regards morality, and I mean true morality, collectivism is obviously God.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:47:00 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
As a general rule, in civilised society, I'd say any plan for self-gain shouldn't exceed 3 small steps. Anything grander than that is nonsense. Abolishing government to spare yourself taxes, for example, is complete and utter nonsense. You are not accounting for the variables there. And then what are you doing? You're playing a mug's game like my dog running around my house like a lunatic to feel in control.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:48:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
And then the RIRA, too, are playing a mug's game like my dog, only one that's killed how many people?

Think about it.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 10:55:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
And so what I'm saying really is: shut the f*ck up.

If you're anti-war, be anti-war. If you're anti-torture, be anti-torture. But. What. The. F*ck. Is. Anti-Government?
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:44:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:15:27 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/29/2013 10:10:18 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 9/29/2013 9:23:10 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, I'm in the process of doing a project on these guys (exploring their beliefs, motives, etc., for intercultural studies) and I've already hit on something fascinating so far as I can see, rather in line with everything I've been saying on here as of late.

The Real IRA (RIRA) are basically just murders with the aim to "spread terror and disruption". Now, what would be your opinion on such an aim? Politically justified or what? Joke.....

The leader of the RIRA is the husband of Bernadette Sands-McKevitt, the sister of Bobby Sands, one of the most idolised revolutionaries my country has ever known.

Now, what of it, you ask? Well, it's very f*cking significant. This is a group who, quite frankly, hasn't the first f*cking clue what it's doing. No proper political statement has ever been issued besides the aim to "spread terror and disruption," and so what are they doing?

Control. Control is the answer. That's what it's all about - as long as these people can do something, they feel as though they are in control. And then this is right across the board, pretty much every "ideology" is really only about control, and f*cking dumb for the most part.

Take the frustrated atheist, for example, on his crusade against God; take the anti-government protesters with no idea of what comes after, just that government must go. And I mean government might be seen as one of our twin gods, no; in our "polite society"?

And then really think about what it is that you're preaching. Is there really a logical basis - I mean a truly logical basis - or are you possibly just trying to stupidly control as those folk in the RIRA are?

The only (and I mean only) sensible political agenda is to alleviate these people of their burdens, of their stupid need for control. And then how? Collectivism. Complete and utter, final collectivism. Or am I wrong? I mean whatever about feasibility, but that's what we should strive towards with our every political thought. Otherwise, you're just playing a stupid game, one whose variables will never properly be accounted for, leaving chaos at the reins eternally. Am I wrong?

"Hurr durr no capitalism is right, just get rid of government and it's all OK"

Fvck it, I know this will most likely not end in a sophisticated way or in a way where I might learn something, but I feel like someone needs to set you straight, because you're just as annoying as charlesb, yet your even worse at pseudo-philosophy and at least charles justified what he said, you are just drawing comparisons and saying "If the IRA does this, they must think this and be doing this", you are drawing comparisons based on one small piece of information. Let's get down to the meat and bones of your idiotic rants.

The IRA's goal is not to just randomly spread chaos, and you have to be either a major idiot or making up things for your own purposes and ends. The IRA has been and still today is interested in uniting the 32 counties in to one independant Ireland. They are fighting for Irish independence from Great Britain fully, and they have started disarming and primarily do peaceful negotiations nowadays, so how you can claim all they want to do is spread chaos, when they clearly are willing to put their guns down to gain their political end is beyond me.

Why? Why do they want the 32 counties united?

Why shouldn't they be united? They are nationalists who want independence and a sustainable, free state for the Irish people.

http://www.start.umd.edu...

Now, you claim atheists and people who protest against an oppressive government or control, but you assert this without proving it. Just because I don't worship some fictional deity thousands of feet above the clouds somewhere doesn't mean I want control, in fact I think you use your god as an excuse to claim you have no control over your actions or your life, as you're just doing what you were destined to already do before you were born, your destiny is based on what your fictional deity wants, right?

Tywin Lannister will not beat death with his own flesh, but will control that to the best of his ability. "The family is all that survives". And then he loses his son Jaime Lannister (that son has lost control where he would have him control so as to "beat death") and he appoints his other son, the one he rather hates, to the position of hand of the king. This is politics, an absolute joke.

None of that made sense to me, re explain it please.

It's neither "pseudo-philosophical" nor "profoundly stupid," just glaringly obvious.

What is your justification, CA, for wanting to just tear down government?

That they have done far more bad than good for the world, and even 'good' governments do whatever they can to tear down the individual and make everyone a cookie cutout citizen.

Collectivism does not alleviate people of anti government sentiment, it worsens it.. Why would strengthenign government by having them tell us how to live our daily lives and destroy our culture make us like them more? Why do you think you're entitled to impose your moral and cultural beliefs on me through your ill-founded collectivism? It is YOU who wants control over MY life, MY culture, MY ideas, I just want control over MY OWN LIFE, is that TOO MUCH TO ASK FROM YOUR NEO-FASCISTIC IDIOTS?

What is government? You speak of it as though it is some entity that is separate to you. I'm talking about strengthening the people. And then what does control over your own life entail? You do realize you're stuck living with other people whether you like it or not, right? I mean if you take a plot and claim it your own, fortify it as your own, you're essentially prohibiting anyone from doing the same, right?

How am I prohibiting anyone from doing the same? They can take their own plot of land, fortify it and make it prosperous too, just because I don't have to share the product of my own work via this plot of land doesn't mean I want chaos and destruction, as you so blindly claim.

"I just want control over my own life".

"I just want control over your resources, culture and thoughts"
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:46:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:18:50 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/29/2013 10:14:04 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
Ultimately the idea that individualists want control is absurd. I am entitled to have control over my own life, it is you, the collectivist, who wants to destroy cultures, ideas, and innovation so you can have the now brain dead and collective masses be under your control so you can use them for the nation's supposed gain through slaughtering millions in conquest or so anyone that dares think different from the cookie cutout of a person you want will be persecuted.

Why do I want to slaughter millions and destroy cultures? And, uh, no... it's not; individualists just want control, and rather stupidly generally. Would you say Kim Jong-il was collectivist or individualist?

He clearly runs a collectivist nation, North Korea is intolerant of religion, collectivized farms and economy, and you are basically forced to worship Kim over there. Does it sound like he gives to shi*ts if you are a buddhist and thereby a pacifist and don't want to fight in his army? Nope, he doesn't care at all.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:50:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:25:52 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Did Nazi Germany seek collectivist harmony with the rest of the world or did it seek independent harmony? And "independent" is rather synonymous with "individual," no? But yet I'm but a tyrant, tarred with the same brush as those who've sought to conquer. I DO NOT SEEK TO CONQUER, BUT UNITE. But to you, I do. Why?

Uniting is the same as conquering. The Nazis just wanted to unite all german states and Europe, right?

Unification is the same as conquering, even if it's supposedly peaceful (even though it's not since you would have to use laws and coercion to collectivice people, peace doesn't just have to mean a lack of chaos, it's a lack of coercion and subjugation overall). So you are in your own way an emperor, you wish to destroy cultures and conquer our minds and thoughts by collectivizing the masses, which is just as appalling as a man who conquers nations, if not worse.

Nazi Germany was original in itself and thereby individual, but did it treat it's people with respect and allow them to practice religion without inserting nazi propaganda in to the sermons and killing priests who spoke out against the state? No, it did not, the state wanted all people to unite for the common cause of conquest, genocide and persecution.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:52:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:34:23 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You might perhaps consider separate states rather akin so separate corporations, don't you think, CA?

In a sense, but not fully.

And then Nazi Germany was individualistic, no?

We are speaking of people here, did Nazi Germany allow it's people to be individuals and think independently and act independently of the common nazi doctrine? If not they were collectivist.

You might, too, rather sensibly consider a kingship as individualistic, no?

Elaborate.

And then what of North Korea?

North Korea is collectivist, as explained earlier. If the state force feeds you one common doctrine and you are not allowed to deviate outside of this doctrine, how is this individualistic? It is collectivist.

Oh, but these places are collectivist just because..... because you can say they are.

-facedesk-
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:53:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:36:48 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Yeah, you're right, I guess. I mean Kim Jong-il was the Supreme Leader of The Democratic People's Republic of Korea. That settles it, I guess; that name.

The DPRK is about as democratic and republican as the Peoples Republic of China is a republic.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:54:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 11:44:56 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 9/29/2013 10:15:27 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/29/2013 10:10:18 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 9/29/2013 9:23:10 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Well, I'm in the process of doing a project on these guys (exploring their beliefs, motives, etc., for intercultural studies) and I've already hit on something fascinating so far as I can see, rather in line with everything I've been saying on here as of late.

The Real IRA (RIRA) are basically just murders with the aim to "spread terror and disruption". Now, what would be your opinion on such an aim? Politically justified or what? Joke.....

The leader of the RIRA is the husband of Bernadette Sands-McKevitt, the sister of Bobby Sands, one of the most idolised revolutionaries my country has ever known.

Now, what of it, you ask? Well, it's very f*cking significant. This is a group who, quite frankly, hasn't the first f*cking clue what it's doing. No proper political statement has ever been issued besides the aim to "spread terror and disruption," and so what are they doing?

Control. Control is the answer. That's what it's all about - as long as these people can do something, they feel as though they are in control. And then this is right across the board, pretty much every "ideology" is really only about control, and f*cking dumb for the most part.

Take the frustrated atheist, for example, on his crusade against God; take the anti-government protesters with no idea of what comes after, just that government must go. And I mean government might be seen as one of our twin gods, no; in our "polite society"?

And then really think about what it is that you're preaching. Is there really a logical basis - I mean a truly logical basis - or are you possibly just trying to stupidly control as those folk in the RIRA are?

The only (and I mean only) sensible political agenda is to alleviate these people of their burdens, of their stupid need for control. And then how? Collectivism. Complete and utter, final collectivism. Or am I wrong? I mean whatever about feasibility, but that's what we should strive towards with our every political thought. Otherwise, you're just playing a stupid game, one whose variables will never properly be accounted for, leaving chaos at the reins eternally. Am I wrong?

"Hurr durr no capitalism is right, just get rid of government and it's all OK"

Fvck it, I know this will most likely not end in a sophisticated way or in a way where I might learn something, but I feel like someone needs to set you straight, because you're just as annoying as charlesb, yet your even worse at pseudo-philosophy and at least charles justified what he said, you are just drawing comparisons and saying "If the IRA does this, they must think this and be doing this", you are drawing comparisons based on one small piece of information. Let's get down to the meat and bones of your idiotic rants.

The IRA's goal is not to just randomly spread chaos, and you have to be either a major idiot or making up things for your own purposes and ends. The IRA has been and still today is interested in uniting the 32 counties in to one independant Ireland. They are fighting for Irish independence from Great Britain fully, and they have started disarming and primarily do peaceful negotiations nowadays, so how you can claim all they want to do is spread chaos, when they clearly are willing to put their guns down to gain their political end is beyond me.

Why? Why do they want the 32 counties united?

Why shouldn't they be united? They are nationalists who want independence and a sustainable, free state for the Irish people.

Oh, they're nationalists... yeah, that makes sense. These people are right in their mindlessly murdering innocent people because they want a "free state for the Irish people". In reality, Bernadette Sands McKevitt is just mindlessly perpetuating her brothers existence by any means she can, like Tywin Lannister in GoT, for example.

http://www.start.umd.edu...

Now, you claim atheists and people who protest against an oppressive government or control, but you assert this without proving it. Just because I don't worship some fictional deity thousands of feet above the clouds somewhere doesn't mean I want control, in fact I think you use your god as an excuse to claim you have no control over your actions or your life, as you're just doing what you were destined to already do before you were born, your destiny is based on what your fictional deity wants, right?

Tywin Lannister will not beat death with his own flesh, but will control that to the best of his ability. "The family is all that survives". And then he loses his son Jaime Lannister (that son has lost control where he would have him control so as to "beat death") and he appoints his other son, the one he rather hates, to the position of hand of the king. This is politics, an absolute joke.

None of that made sense to me, re explain it please.

See above.

It's neither "pseudo-philosophical" nor "profoundly stupid," just glaringly obvious.

What is your justification, CA, for wanting to just tear down government?

That they have done far more bad than good for the world, and even 'good' governments do whatever they can to tear down the individual and make everyone a cookie cutout citizen.

Ah, yeah. So let's just tear down government because government has done bad things. Good plan, mate.

Collectivism does not alleviate people of anti government sentiment, it worsens it.. Why would strengthenign government by having them tell us how to live our daily lives and destroy our culture make us like them more? Why do you think you're entitled to impose your moral and cultural beliefs on me through your ill-founded collectivism? It is YOU who wants control over MY life, MY culture, MY ideas, I just want control over MY OWN LIFE, is that TOO MUCH TO ASK FROM YOUR NEO-FASCISTIC IDIOTS?

What is government? You speak of it as though it is some entity that is separate to you. I'm talking about strengthening the people. And then what does control over your own life entail? You do realize you're stuck living with other people whether you like it or not, right? I mean if you take a plot and claim it your own, fortify it as your own, you're essentially prohibiting anyone from doing the same, right?

How am I prohibiting anyone from doing the same? They can take their own plot of land, fortify it and make it prosperous too, just because I don't have to share the product of my own work via this plot of land doesn't mean I want chaos and destruction, as you so blindly claim.

Um, aren't you prohibiting someone from building on the spot you've built on? Is it that you think resources are infinite or something?

"I just want control over my own life".

"I just want control over your resources, culture and thoughts"

I want shared control over everything for everybody, so nobody needs to be lost to such mindless insanity as I have documented.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:54:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:40:31 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
It comes down to what's right. If you think you can secure for yourself better circumstances playing this individualistic game and that nothing matters otherwise, then more power to you. I can't argue with that, but your predictions as regards what tearing down government or whatever would entail. But then as regards morality, and I mean true morality, collectivism is obviously God.

I have repeatedly shown indications that I reject god and religion, so please keep that out of the debate.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:55:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 11:46:30 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 9/29/2013 10:18:50 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/29/2013 10:14:04 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
Ultimately the idea that individualists want control is absurd. I am entitled to have control over my own life, it is you, the collectivist, who wants to destroy cultures, ideas, and innovation so you can have the now brain dead and collective masses be under your control so you can use them for the nation's supposed gain through slaughtering millions in conquest or so anyone that dares think different from the cookie cutout of a person you want will be persecuted.

Why do I want to slaughter millions and destroy cultures? And, uh, no... it's not; individualists just want control, and rather stupidly generally. Would you say Kim Jong-il was collectivist or individualist?

He clearly runs a collectivist nation, North Korea is intolerant of religion, collectivized farms and economy, and you are basically forced to worship Kim over there. Does it sound like he gives to shi*ts if you are a buddhist and thereby a pacifist and don't want to fight in his army? Nope, he doesn't care at all.

He runs a nation where he is king and where anyone who would defy that is put to death. You really think that's collectivist rather than individualist?
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:55:37 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:47:00 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
As a general rule, in civilised society, I'd say any plan for self-gain shouldn't exceed 3 small steps. Anything grander than that is nonsense. Abolishing government to spare yourself taxes, for example, is complete and utter nonsense. You are not accounting for the variables there. And then what are you doing? You're playing a mug's game like my dog running around my house like a lunatic to feel in control.

It's not about the taxes, it is about coercion and the government taking the product of my labor and then spending that on things I do not receive or want.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:56:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 10:55:44 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
And so what I'm saying really is: shut the f*ck up.

If you're anti-war, be anti-war. If you're anti-torture, be anti-torture. But. What. The. F*ck. Is. Anti-Government?

I think you know very well what anti government is.