A very bigoted statement...

Post Reply New Topic

Nice try, but FDR (at least in his mid to late presidency) was a lot more leftwing than Obama on economic policy. Obama has appeased the lunatics of the right in compromises, opening up the table for derpiving citizens of their social security cheques, and closed the table on single-payer from day one. The Centre-Right Prime Minster of Sweden agreed with ALL OF Obama's positions and the only French Presidential candidate who shared Obama's opinion on capital punishment was a far-right lunatic.

And Orwell is hardly leftwing, although I guess in you're crazy world anyone who doesn't salivate to thoughts of corporate neofeudalism is a "far leftist".

I would just like to say that the OP and John_Browning's statements display the true racism implicit in many ultra-conservative doctrines. If any failure of individuals is completely seperable from external conditions, as is tacitly assumed by many ultra-cons, than aggregate differences in achievement MUST be do to differences in innate biological composition, no matter how shared and recent the effects of natural selection have been on the neurological structures of the human species

But, I'd like to flip the OP question. Would Dark Ages Europe tuned out a better place had Muslims from Spain conquered the whole of Europe?

You know I really like? All these bigots and all these racists and all the anti-vaccine people, etc. have the same tactics: make sure you say your statements either in a vacuum where people cannot touch you, or say it when the important people aren't here.

All those people who are saying Obama is left-wing: what I want you to do is find a Communist in Europe, and you ask them what they think of Obama. They will laugh at you and talk about the ridiculousness of that statement. They do not believe Obama is Socialst or a Communist at all.

It is so embarrassing to me. I want the country cut up into sections to avoid all the red tape. I want to dissolve Congress and the Supreme Court and start a dictatorship. I want to crush the two-party system and install martial law, secret police with shoot-to-kill orders, and Draconian crime laws, including bringing back crucifixion. It really does not matter if the waste of society dies for the good of the community. I basically can pass for an NS with my ideology and even have the looks to be modeled as a Brownshirt in a propaganda poster. Yet what do I hear? Some eunuchs of the Republican party making me look bad. People who would sell out their own family to continue the platform. People who think Sarah Palin is credible. The Tea Party pretending to be separate from the Republicans. People who always talk about how bad blacks are, yet for some reason have no real remedy to fix the problem.

One last thing: NS Germany was a Romantic movement, and one of the first governments to pass laws protecting the environment. I once carried a spider on a piece of paper across the entire length of the Engineering building because I wanted it to be outside and it was just going to die if I left it there. Yet liberals make it all about THEIR cause, because Republicans only care about rich white people and are poor excuses of being to the right. Environmental protection was intially RIGHT-WING...

I am not an anti-Semite or racist. This is just about reality here and what the country needs to pick itself up again. But no, we fight stupid wars and everyone else wants our help to solve their problems despite that fact they were celebrating in the streets when about 3,000 people were needlessly killed and all the first responders got sick because they did their job and were heroes. Oh wait, that's right: that bill to help them was NOT APPROVED because Republicans were worried it might raise taxes. Eunuchs. Sheer, utter eunuchs. Republicans are a disgrace to conservatism and the right.

Last edited by HerrGrimm on 23 Apr 2011, 7:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I agree there's not need for the Rainbow Nation to go back to it monochrome days, as that will only deface of the work of Madiba and Desmond Tutu of ending Apartheid.

it would have been better for the jews.
and prolly for the scandinavian pagans
and for the aztecs it would have been a godsend.(geting a little later than the dark ages)
xtianity would prolly only survive in its trinitarian form in ethiopia and britain.
the xtian minority in the caliphate (or more likely caliphates) would most likely be monotheistic.
it sounds like a wonderful world

Countries normally have the capacity to rebuild themselves to some degree if there are people that are willing. Most African countries are rich in natural resources, yet even when you get the civil wars to stop and get some semblance of cooperation, things still don't get much better. In the case of South Africa, they were given a fully modern country that was in stellar shape compared to the rest of the continent, and the black majority was behind the new government, and not only did they fail to make any improvements but it's turning into another Zimbabwe, Uganda, or some other little African s**thole that you forget exists except when it is mentioned on CNN or BBC because some guerrilla group has sacked half the country.

Rudyard Kipling may have wrote "White Man's Burden" as satire, yet he managed to depict the core of the matter and how it needed to be handled far better than he would have ever cared to admit.

You calling them "so far to the left" is merely an expression of your extremism towards racism and the right. Hey, the right is easily forgivable and they are right in tons of things. But your racism is just stupid. Social Darwinists are scum.

this is the spread based on the test mp gave us


edit[I fixed the typo marshalls pragmatism was overrated.]

Last edited by JakobVirgil on 23 Apr 2011, 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

What exactly am I looking at here?

EDIT:


EDIT #2: That is actually a very easy answer. People with Asperger's are prone to be very zealous in their views (right or left), or at least that is what Tony Attwood says in his Asperger's book. I think Attwood actually has a part about hate groups in his book but I do not have it in front of me right now.

It was always funny to me. I mean, there's some guy who never got diagnosed in their ranks. There has to be, it is a better chance than you think. But as my grandfather said, "The Nazis were smart people." I'm just talking about NS here, not WN. There also has to be another person who sees the member and senses that. They might see the lack of eye contact or the funny gait or the downright bizarre behavior of some. But really, given how strict a person with Asperger's can be, there is a part of me that thinks they accept that because that guy has major devotion in honor.

Last edited by HerrGrimm on 24 Apr 2011, 1:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Fellow commies

I presume that is an authoritarian/libertarian, socialism/capitalism chart? If so who is the outlier on the Authoritarian Left there?

The point I was trying to make (although I was extremely drunk when I did it) is that the transition to multiparty democracy hasn't always been beneficial to all of the people concerned. There is a certain element of revanchism in 'black' politics in many of the African polities.

Although the likes of Ian Smith were racist (and undoubtedly so), surely most people here would rather have him than the likes of Mugabe?

no its the left-right pragmatic-idealist.
the man a bit out on the left is master pendant.
the one way out on the right is minarex.
the the very pragmatic slightly left fellow
is now that I am looking at it is a typo.

I think we have to remember that at the time DeKlerk ended apartheid, South Africa's economy was tanking as a result of international sanctions. I think if they had stayed on that course, they might well be as badly off as they are now, though they might have arrived there by a different route.

I could hold forth at length on this topic, but in a nutshell what often happened was that colonial powers were in such a rush to get out of dodge that they didn't really put any effort into the transition to native rule, the locals just had a government and all of it's problems dumped in their collective laps. Ironically, Rhodesia tried to do a gradual handover of power involving training their local replacements and such, but Robert Mugabe felt that he'd be better off taking the country by force and Zimbabwe is the continuing result of his greed. It's a complex subject with a complex answer, and that answer has noting to do with inherent differences between the races.

Right or wrong, South Africa had been built into a modern industrialized nation from a wilderness by European colonists. Regardless of the current economy at the end of apartheid, they had what they needed handed to them intact and with the trade embargoes and sanctions ending they had an excellent foundation to build on but have not done much with it but make it worse.

The left has thrown the race card into the discussion only because they have nothing better to offer up. It's not a matter of racism but simply one of realism.
What is, is and there's no way to sugar coat it without looking foolish.