lord of flies

"the Mexicans" what the **** is this? seriously tho what am i looking at. it looks like we have someone who doesn't like it when immigrants march for their rights and for the expansion of legal immigration, but just "loves" the "Mexican culture" that she (?) grew up "surrounded by." lmao @ the idea that the recent anti-SB1070 protests are about hispanic supremacism. wtf?

Reminder that this game is a best-seller and sold the absolute most of any game on the 360 on Amazon a couple weeks ago. Who are you going to trust: Purkake, a well-known spammer who posts dumb gifs in every thread, or me + Amazon, a socialist-capitalist pair who agree: G.O.T.Y. G.O.T. ****ing Y.

Agreed. Capitalism and imperialism suck.

Here, let me put it this way: even if we assume such a ban would be ineffectual (btw it wouldn't), how could it possibly hurt? Whoa, cool, irrelevant cases. The fact that I have established is that the Supreme Court can and has overridden the rights of the populace in the interests of the ruling class, especially in times of war. Coincidentally, the Holocaust occurred during a time of war.

Because I've cracked open a history book. lol high school civics gives the most childish view of American politics in the world. Remember when the courts decided that Abraham Lincoln arresting all those dissidents wasn't OK, and when the court decided that jailing all those socialists wasn't OK, and when the court decided that jailing all those Japanese people wasn't OK? Because I sure don't. Ban their party, ban their slogans, ban their symbols. btw don't care Violence is part of politics, this is a fact. But neo-nazis apply violence against minority groups and LGBT people; it's not part of some sort of defensible larger policy or goal, just reactionary behavior. Were the Founding Fathers wrong for fighting against the British imperialists with violence? What about the people of Africa when they tried to defend themselves from imperialism?

The FACT is that it doesn't matter how much your "legal system" is "able to effectively protect the fundamental rights o' various groups o' people," it does not matter when fascists take charge. Fascism is about the destruction of traditional post-enlightenment governments from within and has proven highly effective at it. The very idea that a political system can "effectively protect the fundamental rights" of its citizenry when the leadership no longer wants to is absurd.

Let me check, hmm, okay, hold on. Nazism was banned in Germany in 1945... it's now 2010 and The Left, KDP, etc. still legally operate... so at least 65 years. Uh, yeah they would have. The principles of the state cannot be made untouchable or immortal any more than the state itself can be made so. Germany didn't ban the Nazi Party because everybody believed that would be "wrong." When the Nazis came to power, of course, they started banning all the other parties. Do you think that if genuine fascists came to power in the USA they wouldn't do the same?

Slippery slope arguments don't work, since history implies the exact opposite thing. The Nazis were allowed to run free in Germany, do you remember how that ended? Letting these people speak their minds in an open way only encourages them, you don't need to look farther than groups like C18 and ANM to see that. Whereas, banning the groups has historically worked to significant efficacy without simultaneously undermining other groups rights to free speech. Does modern Germany have problems with everybody losing all their political rights? No. No they do not.

Yes, I mean, just look at Germany! Because they banned nazism, all their freedoms disappeared and there are no protests in the country... wait...

Neo-nazis are not a joke. The NSM has murdered people. They believe in the forcible deportation of all non-whites from the United States. They are a racist, criminal hate gang and no, their speech is not OK.

Thousands of counter-demonstrators resist Nazis and LAPD allies

"Pretty damn awful"? Hmm... no. Fly away, troll.

Just beat the game. Greatest game ever status: CONFIRMED. An amazing plot, full of some hilarious moments and some sad ones. Just one note: play on Easy. The higher difficulties aren't so much "harder" as they are "slower," with normal enemies taking upwards of eight headshots to kill on Normal difficulty.

With all due respect, read my previous post. They bought a donor egg. The fact that you don't understand how surrogate mothers normally work doesn't reflect poorly on Pearl and Phil's unconventional relationship, merely on your own intelligence.

Soviet "imperialism" was used to spread socialism and (more specifically) Marxist-Leninism. Victorian-era colonialism and modern neo-colonialism were used to spread capitalism. Would you care to point out what part of the above statements was incorrect, so that I can go about proving it? The DDR was a communist state foisted on the citizens of East Germany and was in many ways meant as a punishment for WW2. Blah blah blah -- prove it. Specifically, prove how external factors such as political rights, personal freedoms and economic development have no relevance whatsoever to people's outlook on life and overall happiness. Um, I already did. Or do you think that the Philippines provides its citizens with more political rights, more personal freedoms and a better economy than that of Japan? Because if so, lol.

Blah blah blah, look at how wrong this post is. Here's the false premise: that all imperialism is equivalent to 19th century colonial exploitation, which is your claim, not mine. Yeah, that's why less than half the people in those groups in the Ukraine and Hungary approve, while Lithuania barely scrapes out a majority and Russia can't score both. No, they aren't comparing their lives today to their lives twenty years ago. They are polled "are you satisfied with your life," once in 1991 and once in 2009. It is a useless question that produces meaningless results, which anybody who has even the most basic awareness of facts would know. I've already explained that this kind of statistic is useless and why: "are you satisfied" is a poor metric of anything actually real and has far more to do with someone's emotional state. Take a look at this ranking of countries by "satisfaction". Notice anything unusual, like the fact that apparently the Philippines is apparently a better place to live than Japan and South Korea?

Wrong, extra wrong, and super wrong. What a surprise. This situation will neither result in the genetic problems of incest, nor does it come from psychological abnormality, since Pearl and Phil hadn't met until he was 21 (people naturally have an aversion to sex with their family members, but "family members" is defined by upbringing).

Uh, I don't report people when I'm "losing an argument" (feel free to find a case of this, you will find that it Never Happened). In this case, I (jokingly) mentioned reporting 213374U because he has been extremely evasive and has decided to carefully avoid actually responding to my points. If you think that he was "winning" the argument because of that, then I weep for you. Alright, 213374U, since you've effectively surrendered on that point, here is my response to your last post with an actual argument in it rather than pure evasion. Nice red herring. What does the USSR engaging in imperialism (assuming it did) have to do with the understanding of capitalism as a world system which must systematically spread itself across the globe or perish? The last statistic there shows that the more people experienced real, living socialism, the more they want it back. How can you read that any other way? No. Suppose there was a document which studied actual lifestyle differences between Nigeria and Sweden, and found in every metric that life in Sweden was better, but found that subjective happiness (i.e. response to "are you happy") was better in Nigeria. You would still be wrong to claim that things are better in Nigeria because of it. You are basing your argument on questions that are useless for any real data, but absolutely refuse to accept it just because "it's in the same document." Useful statistics and useless statistics can appear in the same document, actually.

Is this a confession to trolling I see? Mods? I asked you first.

lol okay whatever. I thought we were talking about the violence of communist countries, not asking for some very high standard of "success."

Your evasion is only difficult to detect in your own twisted mind. I actually wrote out an entire post in response to your post, but your evasion is pissing me off, so I'm not going to respond to your posts until you answer the original question or admit that you were wrong. I have proffered evidence for everything that I've said that was fact, but you're relying on a style-over-substance fallacy and thus avoiding backing up your own arguments (supposedly based on fact, not that anyone could tell from reading your posts). lol okay then there are no successful communist states that were founded on murder either. How do you like that?

Yugoslavia.

List of correct things in this post:"Commiedom is ... infinitely superior."

That you don't understand the US prison system or basic human morality at all? That you think that putting a thin veneer of civility on the suppression of ones own citizens en masse by claiming that they're criminals is at all relevant to questions of morals?

The only place in Cuba where torture takes place is Guantanamo Bay.