Namutree

Utterly in awe of this post. Why is NATO bad for the USA? Because it drags us into alliances. Those alliances drag us into conflicts. I want America to stop wasting it's resources on wars that don't involve us; NATO makes that very difficult. Also, the existence of NATO makes it easier for stupid war hawks to downplay the costs of war.

Read Elerond's post. The only thing that he missed was that Hitler admired the organization, imagery and parades that the socialists had and eventually copied a lot of their elements, but at the same time he had a deep seated hatred for their international solidarity of the proletariat. He saw that as the end of Germany as a nation and the germans, which is why they were one of the first against the wall. Internationalism & class struggle are not traits inherent in socialism. Sounds like you are describing communism; which is something we all already know the Nazi's hated.

I would totally agree that fascism and communism are different.

No, but they get upset that radicals make them look bad. It's understandably embarrassing for them.

It's not thousand it's hundred thousands men and women who kill people and threaten all non-muslims and millions of Muslims that supports them. Have we ever heard from any Muslim officials any words of condemnation for Muslim terrorists? Did any Muslim ever told that Muslim terrorists should be excluded from Muslim communities? No, we don't hear it. All we ever hear is "we are not all like that"... reassuring as hell. Some do. I've heard condemnation of terrorism from Imams. Over in Dearborn MI almost everyone is Muslim, and the level of hatred for radicals is vehement among almost everyone I've met there. The Muslims are VERY conservative in Dearborn, but they keep it to themselves; kinda like the Mormons.

I agree with 90% of this.

Got us. You magnificent bastard. I'm glad that's over. Discussing the Nazi's is tedious anyway. I prefer to compare capitalism & socialism at their core. It's more interesting than comparing the obviously flawed implementations of the past anyway.

Or the health/stamina ratio could increase/decrease the lower/higher your stamina is. That's a cool idea.

Right now the Ranger is under powered. Making the class better by slightly improving the talents or health/stamina per level would be an easy remedy to the balance issue. If we are to accept that for some reason the Ranger cannot be in the middle; than the Ranger needs to be a bit OP. Josh has said more than a few times that there should not be any weak classes, and so no matter what the Ranger needs a buff.

What does the book say; that the Nazi's are capitalists, socialists, or neither?

I wouldn't call the Nazi's socialists just because they increased military spending. It was there disregard for property rights that makes me think of them as socialists. If they thought price control was good for the country; they would implement them. If they thought some one's land should be seized by the state for some project; they just took it. No regard at all for the rights of property owners. EDIT: Also, I wouldn't consider Reagan a socialist, but he definitely isn't a capitalist.

What two different words?

I had already said that the USSR was not a fair representative of communism. I went so far as to guess that Karl Marx would have opposed the Soviet Union.

Not because they regarded themselves as socialist though, it was a branding exercise entirely aimed at attractinglower socio economic people. And again, the socialist wing of the nsdap got liquidated faster than any other group. And again, Democratic People's Republic of Korea shows how what people call themselves has no relevance. No they didn't. They were opposed in some circumstances based on being authoritarian and not wanting challenges to their power, and from being a racist and supremacist ideology. They were not philosophically or practically opposed except to those they didn't like for those other reasons. A rich Jew was at risk of having his stuff seized, a rich German- so long as he didn't rock the boat- was fine and could accumulate wealth to his heart's content. (Somehow I expect I'm going to be told that authoritarianism is a fundamentally leftist tenet, Pinochet et alia be damned) There ain't a single 'capitalist' society that doesn't do that, only the extent differs. Mostly with agriculture rather than industry, but there's tons of pork barrel politics everywhere. In any case though, that was primarily to do with nazis being authoritarian and running their economy on a permanent low grade war footing than being socialist. I think there is some confusion here. I am talking about what the Nazi's DID; not what Germany was like. Big difference. Since Germany wasn't a socialist country before the Nazi's took power socialism was being introduced gradually. Many of the Nazi's had more than a bit of pro-socialist propaganda and they put some of their socialistic ideas into practiced. Yes, they didn't turn Germany into a 100% socialist society, but the trend was clear. They were moving the country into being more and more socialistic. EDIT: Spelling errors!

It's way to late for a change in direction now. Tweaks are possible, but whole new game concepts like potions that restore health; they would have to do a lot of work to make it balanced. It would also make the health/stamina divide pointless.

Flimsy excuse. See my reply to Sawyer in the thread Utukka linked. I saw it, now here's my response: 1) Josh Sawyer has not at all been above limiting player freedom in order to achieve game balance. Expect lots of things to be limiting for balance sake. 2) Free companions would totally break the game. I could just hire 5 five guys and throw them at any tough encounter with little thought put into it. Since their survival wouldn't be concern; suicide attacks would be incredibly OP. Making most of the combat mechanics & quests pointless. 3) Creating your own team is going to be more effective than using the allies Obsidian gives you. So it's worth the gold. 4) For those who care; free companions is lore breaking.

I never understood the term neo-nazi. Do they have glow in the dark uniforms or something?

If you're not an IE veteran; than the poe beta will crush you. Things will get better over time though.

It can serve as a warning for how out of control socialism can get. It also helps demonstrate that the "Socialist care about the poor; the capitalists only care about the rich!" narrative is BS.

No one I have ever seen says that the Nazi's are socialists just cuz' they don't like them. I call them socialist because: A) They called themselves socialists. B) They opposed the concept of private property rights. C) They heavily regulated industry's output and prices. There are more reasons, but then the list would go on forever.

Dang. I've never heard that definition for it before.

Sure I hear you about parts of the bible that clearly say " homosexuality is wrong " but there are also parts of the bible that say "slavery is fine " and " anyone who works on the Sabbath must be killed ", it doesn't mean modern Christians follow every part of the bible. Many churches use there own interpretation for certain things IMO there is no reason this same understanding can't be applied to the view on homosexuality? In other words its fine if someone is gay despite what the bible says? Many of the more silly parts of the bible like the Sabbath have been overruled by the New Testament, but not homosexuality. That part of the bible is still intact. Best thing to do is to simply wait for religion to go away. Promoting secularism will speed it up.

Says who? I know several Christian churches that openly allow gay people as part of there congregation. For them the most important message in the bible is one of peace, being a good person and loving your neighbour. They don't practice intolerance They may not be intolerant, but the religion is. Christianity is very clear on homosexuality; it is forbidden. As I already said though; the religion is dying so it doesn't really matter.

Yes, if there's any information on mainstream Christian groups wanting to kill homosexuals, I do want you to post links, since that is what you implied. Obviously, you can find any kind of lunatic on the internet, like Westboro Baptist Church. I take that back, I used the wrong words. Certain mainstream Conservative Christian groups in the USA don't say " gay people must die". I apologize for saying that. But they are brazenly and vociferously opposed to homosexuality and consider it an aberration. So they encourage homophobia as they refuse to accept it as part of the normal Christian lifestyle. And as I mentioned this is not all Christian groups in the USA Homosexuality can never be a part of the normal christian lifestyle. Christianity is on it's way out though so it doesn't really matter.

Italy was much better than the USSR, but Mussolini was just as bad as Stalin. All these socialists are the same. The difference is how cooperative a country is with the insanity of socialism.