Ask me about Communism.

[Trenitay]

Just because there was no consideration for it, doesn't make it Communist. Communism equals terrible. Terrible does not equal Communism.

[Killian Kalthorne]

As far as I am concerned it does. Communism is the enemy of freedom. China will always be the enemy.

[Trenitay]

Now, that's just irrational. Saying China will always be the enemy, is like saying we'll always be in this solar system. Just because that's the way it is now doesn't make it the way it will always be.

[Killian Kalthorne]

As long as the Communist Party is in control of China I will consider them the enemy and they should be treated as such.

[Trenitay]

I'd say that as long as that particular Communist party is in charge in China that they will Communist only in name.

[Masterfade]

Name one person who was executed in the US that was solely charged as a drug smuggler in the last 20 years, LoF. Name just one.

 

 

Heroin smuggling is considered a much graver crime than murder in many parts of drug-infested Asia. The Brit could probably get away with a far less severe punishment if he had slaughtered, say, a local tour guide.

Edited December 29, 2009 by Masterfade

[I want teh kotor 3]

LoF, I noticed a great discrepancy in your arguments: Economically, you think everybody should be helping everyone. In this, you seem to care about people. But you hate rights, and so do not care about people. So which is it? Are we all evil creatures who deserve to be punished for existence, or should we all be helped and uplifted?

[taks]

So which is it?

hypocrisy. no ideology is without it.

 

taks

[lord of flies]

LoF, I noticed a great discrepancy in your arguments: Economically, you think everybody should be helping everyone. In this, you seem to care about people. But you hate rights, and so do not care about people. So which is it? Are we all evil creatures who deserve to be punished for existence, or should we all be helped and uplifted?

I merely believe that rights are a collective fiction, created to serve a more perfect social order. As such, no right can be called "fundamental" or "inalienable." Rights are not universal, they are not inborn or created by natural phenomena. They are useful tools to create cohesive legal systems, and have little to nothing to do with actual morality.

What part of him being MENTALLY ILL do you not understand? Being MENTALLY ILL means that he did not know what the consequences were. that he was incompetent to stand trial. He was unable to aid in his own defense. HE WAS MENTALLY ILL!

Many criminals are "mentally ill." Turns out that doesn't matter, because justice is retributive, not rehabilitative. He committed a crime, he was punished for that crime. It is as simple as that.

 

I don't see why you're freaking out about it, it hardly represents some institutional problem on the scale of the United States prison system, and you defended that in a conversation, if I recall correctly.

[Dark_Raven]

Do the crime in another country and pay the price. You break their rules, well you have to suffer their penalty. Death for smuggling drugs is a little extreme but that's China. They probably don't suffer dope heads like the Western world does because they are over extreme in their laws.

[I want teh kotor 3]

LoF, I noticed a great discrepancy in your arguments: Economically, you think everybody should be helping everyone. In this, you seem to care about people. But you hate rights, and so do not care about people. So which is it? Are we all evil creatures who deserve to be punished for existence, or should we all be helped and uplifted?

I merely believe that rights are a collective fiction, created to serve a more perfect social order. As such, no right can be called "fundamental" or "inalienable." Rights are not universal, they are not inborn or created by natural phenomena. They are useful tools to create cohesive legal systems, and have little to nothing to do with actual morality.

 

So I have no right to live, and anyone should be able to run into my house and shoot me?

 

EDIT: wow, that came our wrong. Not a death threat. Fixed to make that more evident.

Edited December 30, 2009 by I want teh kotor 3

[lord of flies]

So I have no right to live, and anyone should be able to run into my house and shoot me?

 

EDIT: wow, that came our wrong. Not a death threat. Fixed to make that more evident.

Human life is valuable in and of itself, and the government should try to ensure that you live a long life, but that does not mean you have a "right" to live.

 

If the government chooses to recognize such a right, it is because rights-based ethics are a good way to build a cohesive legal system, and human life is valuable, not because you actually have some fundamental right to live. After all, your life can easily be taken away without your consent, even without government or institutional intrusion. You don't even need another person to help.

[Killian Kalthorne]

That is why I will not support a socialistic/communistic legal system. Why I will not support socialism or communism in any shape or form. Individual rights are paramount to me. If I worked hard and played it smart that I become a millionare I do not want the government to take that hard work away from me. i do not want that fortune that I made for myself and my family to be taken away from my heirs by the government. I would fight for these rights with my last breath, LoF, and I will fight against socialism and communism with all my heart. If our government does end up socialistic and communistic I will take up arms against it.

 

The tree of liberty may need to be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

[Guard Dog]

Don'r worry Kill & KOTOR, this discussion is all academic anyway. LoF and those like him are a tiny fraction of a minority, and even if his ilk ever did gain any political power those of us who view individual rights as sacrosanct are the ones that own guns and are willing to use them.

[I want teh kotor 3]

So I have no right to live, and anyone should be able to run into my house and shoot me?

 

EDIT: wow, that came our wrong. Not a death threat. Fixed to make that more evident.

Human life is valuable in and of itself, and the government should try to ensure that you live a long life, but that does not mean you have a "right" to live.

 

If the government chooses to recognize such a right, it is because rights-based ethics are a good way to build a cohesive legal system, and human life is valuable, not because you actually have some fundamental right to live. After all, your life can easily be taken away without your consent, even without government or institutional intrusion. You don't even need another person to help.

 

So if we don't have rights, why does the government?

 

 

Don'r worry Kill & KOTOR, this discussion is all academic anyway. LoF and those like him are a tiny fraction of a minority, and even if his ilk ever did gain any political power those of us who view individual rights as sacrosanct are the ones that own guns and are willing to use them.

 

[Killian Kalthorne]

I don't own any guns but I do have friends that can give me access to an armory if necessary.

[lord of flies]

Don'r worry Kill & KOTOR, this discussion is all academic anyway. LoF and those like him are a tiny fraction of a minority, and even if his ilk ever did gain any political power those of us who view individual rights as sacrosanct are the ones that own guns and are willing to use them.

Poorly trained paramilitaries are hardly the threat you seem to think they are.

 

Besides, if there's a revolution, it will have an appearance of propriety. Your reaction would seem disproportionate and wild to most. A revolution here is not going to occur tomorrow in some kind of socialist putsch. It will be the product of a generation's work, and of months of hard labor before the actual act. In 1904, it would seem as bizarre and insane to think of a socialist Russia as it is today to think of a socialist America.

[Killian Kalthorne]

I would rather be dead than be under communistic rule, LoF, and I will die fighting, killing as many communists as I can before I do die.

[lord of flies]

I would rather be dead than be under communistic rule, LoF, and I will die fighting, killing as many communists as I can before I do die.

How sure of that are you? Honestly, people who post on the internet hardly remind me of the sort who would fight and die for their beliefs.

 

Would you rebel against the US government, if there was a lawfully elected socialist or communist government?

[Killian Kalthorne]

Would you rebel against the US government, if there was a lawfully elected socialist or communist government?

 

Yes.

 

Just as I would if a theocratic government was lawfully elected. Secular capitalism is pretty much where I want to be at and it is the only way to secure the freedoms and rights we have today, and the only way to expand those freedoms and rights in the future.

Edited December 30, 2009 by Killian Kalthorne

[lord of flies]

Would you rebel against the US government, if there was a lawfully elected socialist or communist government?

 

Yes.

 

Just as I would if a theocratic government was lawfully elected. Secular capitalism is pretty much where I want to be at and it is the only way to secure the freedoms and rights we have today, and the only way to expand those freedoms and rights in the future.

...no. No, it is not. Secular capitalism is not actually good at ensuring civil rights; direct political action is. Women's suffrage? Civil rights movement? Do think that the status quo (that is, secular capitalism) was responsible for these things? For ending child labor or slavery?

[Killian Kalthorne]

If the US wasn't a democratic secular capitalistic nation do you really think the civil rights movement would have succeeded? I have seen what communist countries do to those who protest against the government in order to bring change. They kill them. North Korea, USSR, and China all kill or place in brutal prisons those who protest their governments.

 

Tienanmen Square Massacre. NEVER FORGET. NEVER FORGIVE.

[lord of flies]

If the US wasn't a democratic secular capitalistic nation do you really think the civil rights movement would have succeeded? I have seen what communist countries do to those who protest against the government in order to bring change. They kill them. North Korea, USSR, and China all kill or place in brutal prisons those who protest their governments.

 

Tienanmen Square Massacre. NEVER FORGET. NEVER FORGIVE.

COINTELPRO, Operation Ajax, Operation PBSUCCESS, Kent State shootings... the list goes on and on.

 

Communist governments have reformed, actually (e.g. Socialism with Chinese characteristics, New Economic Policy, Perestroika). Perhaps there are two sides to this story?

[Killian Kalthorne]

Of course there are always two sides of the story, LoF, however I am primarily interested in my side of the story as you are on yours.

 

Oh, executing the mentally ill shows real reform. YES IT DOES!

Edited December 30, 2009 by Killian Kalthorne

[Guard Dog]

Don'r worry Kill & KOTOR, this discussion is all academic anyway. LoF and those like him are a tiny fraction of a minority, and even if his ilk ever did gain any political power those of us who view individual rights as sacrosanct are the ones that own guns and are willing to use them.

Poorly trained paramilitaries are hardly the threat you seem to think they are.

 

Besides, if there's a revolution, it will have an appearance of propriety. Your reaction would seem disproportionate and wild to most. A revolution here is not going to occur tomorrow in some kind of socialist putsch. It will be the product of a generation's work, and of months of hard labor before the actual act. In 1904, it would seem as bizarre and insane to think of a socialist Russia as it is today to think of a socialist America.

No sense of humor! Evidently you did not get it, you are the one who said there are no rights that are sacrosanct. Gun owners beleive the right to keep and bear is. So the ones who beleive in rights are the ones that own the guns. It was meant to be a little joke but I guess I did not set it up all that well. Besides, you strike me as a humorless fellow anyway.