"Mom" and "Dad" are now bad words.

#126
#126
LouderVol said:
They go back to governments because that's what they are. I even brought up that democracies and republics are also forms of government. Doesnt mean they are similar enough to explain one with another.

You said Nazis used commie 101 tactics. I pointed out that that was clearly wrong. And instead of just saying "sorry I used the wrong term" you have continued to double down. And yet again you twist what I am saying to avoid dealing with your mistake.
Click to expand...


Nazis did use communist tactics just as sometimes republics use democratic tactics and socialist tactics.

Sorry u can't grasp that.

My mistake was not clearly articulating what @AM64 did. The end game is totalitarianism and whether it is done by socialism or communism is simply how they choose to get there and which they feel serves their purpose best.
 
#127
#127
Septic said:
good grief.

Same sex and interracial marriage are victimless at worst, how ****ing stupid are you to conflate consenting adult relationships with pedophilia?

You should be embarrassed by making such a mind numbingly stupid statement, sadly I’m not sure you’ll connect the dots on why.
Click to expand...

Define adult.

If its 18 then why can someone not gamble or drink yet?

I only ask because this will be the next step as our society moves to acceptance of pedophilia which I believe it will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#128
#128
NEO said:
Define adult.

If its 18 then why can someone not gamble or drink yet?

I only ask because this will be the next step as our society moves to acceptance of pedophilia which I believe it will.
Click to expand...

Because someone decided that 18 was the magic number where responsible decisions could be made, I suppose. But what difference does an arbitrary number make to this conversation? Adult has been defined for you.

Where the f*** do you live were pedophilia is "moving towards acceptance?"
 
#132
#132
NEO said:
Nazis did use communist tactics just as sometimes republics use democratic tactics and socialist tactics.

Sorry u can't grasp that.

My mistake was not clearly articulating what @AM64 did. The end game is totalitarianism and whether it is done by socialism or communism is simply how they choose to get there and which they feel serves their purpose best.
Click to expand...

I have to confess that I'm just a clodhopper engineer, and I tend to look at the end result without getting hung up in esoterica and sale pitches. If the state owns you, it just doesn't much matter if you own property or are assigned a spot of state owned land. If you fail to toe the line, it doesn't matter much which state agency investigates (gestapo or KGB) and helps you see the light; a death sentence is the same regardless of the "people's" court. I guess I also don't really see why we bother taking up time in universities with theories of governance when few methodologies really work in polite society and the end result is simply how much nicety is allocated to the power used for control. Do a history and move on; there are plenty of books available for people who want more depth.

It seems like we'd be better served looking into things like how the Chinese totalitarians manipulate the companies that are manipulating our globalists who in turn are stealing our future. As far as our own social tendencies are concerned, the government needs to butt out, and let society heal or tear itself apart over various forms of stupidity - even if the party of education and science doesn't seem to understand science at all. But that goes back to the Constitution and the thought about federal vs local power grab. It doesn't take much intellect or power or observation to conclude that a one size fits all approach developed at the federal level will leave more people at odds than when left up to local views.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737, RavinDave, 82_VOL_83 and 2 others
#134
#134
Septic said:
Because someone decided that 18 was the magic number where responsible decisions could be made, I suppose. But what difference does an arbitrary number make to this conversation? Adult has been defined for you.

Where the f*** do you live were pedophilia is "moving towards acceptance?"
Click to expand...

Obviously, if the age for making responsible decisions were a factor, the setpoint would be closer to thirty than twenty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83 and NEO
#136
#136
Septic said:
Right.

eyeroll.gif
Click to expand...

Do you not see any adult guiding a child toward a sexual preference as a basic pedophile? Remember we are a society that has concluded corporal punishment is considered cruelty and inappropriate; therefore, even parents can be considered offenders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO
#137
#137
AM64 said:
I have to confess that I'm just a clodhopper engineer, and I tend to look at the end result without getting hung up in esoterica and sale pitches. If the state owns you, it just doesn't much matter if you own property or are assigned a spot of state owned land. If you fail to toe the line, it doesn't matter much which state agency investigates (gestapo or KGB) and helps you see the light; a death sentence is the same regardless of the "people's" court. I guess I also don't really see why we bother taking up time in universities with theories of governance when few methodologies really work in polite society and the end result is simply how much nicety is allocated to the power used for control. Do a history and move on; there are plenty of books available for people who want more depth.

It seems like we'd be better served looking into things like how the Chinese totalitarians manipulate the companies that are manipulating our globalists who in turn are stealing our future. As far as our own social tendencies are concerned, the government needs to butt out, and let society heal or tear itself apart over various forms of stupidity - even if the party of education and science doesn't seem to understand science at all. But that goes back to the Constitution and the thought about federal vs local power grab. It doesn't take much intellect or power or observation to conclude that a one size fits all approach developed at the federal level will leave more people at odds than when left up to local views.
Click to expand...

This is my leaning also.

Hitler rose up to power and was very anti communist on paper. He was backed by the wealthy German land owners as they feared they would lose their land and businesses if communism took hold but the minute he took power he turned the term communism into Judeo-Bolshevism and then seized the entire Jewish population and their businesses so did they truly own their land and businesses? If he could have stolen those who is to say he couldn't steal the businesses of non Jews which is what many Germans felt. I know this because I am literally only 4 generations removed from Germany on my father's side and why I am speaking English now instead of German.

The other issue is we keep trying to compare terms like socialism, communism and fascism per their text book definitions to the real world applications and no country yet has been a pure anything. They have an over arching theme such as a Republic but within that framework floats other mechanics such as social programs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737 and AM64
#139
#139
LouderVol said:
Enough to fight a world war over. Plus several other civil wars and plenty of international conflicts.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying.

I see where you are coming from.

I will use this as my framing though: National Socialism (Nazi) rose to power due to the fear of communism. The wealthy Germans backed Hitler because of this. But once he rose to power he blamed the Jews for spreading communism and then stole all of their property and businesses and enslaved them via government control.

If a citizen was stripped of all rights for simply existing is that not communism?

He did and became exactly what he was supposedly against.

Then when he fell half of Germany was given to Russia.

This paved the way for Stalin.

Stalin then cloaked communism (and was supposedly against communism) under the guise of socialism.

Here is the actual textbook description:

"The political system of the Soviet Union took place in a federal single-party soviet socialist republic framework which was characterized by the superior role of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), the only party permitted by the Constitution."


So yes, wars were fought over socialism and communism but no matter who won they still appeared eerily the same in application.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737 and AM64
#140
#140
NEO said:
I get what you are saying.

I see where you are coming from.

I will use this as my framing though: National Socialism (Nazi) rose to power due to the fear of communism. The wealthy Germans backed Hitler because of this. But once he rose to power he blamed the Jews for spreading communism and then stole all of their property and businesses and enslaved them via government control.

If a citizen was stripped of all rights for simply existing is that not communism?

He did and became exactly what he was supposedly against.

Then when he fell half of Germany was given to Russia.

This paved the way for Stalin.

Stalin then cloaked communism (and was supposedly against communism) under the guise of socialism.

Here is the actual textbook description:

"The political system of the Soviet Union took place in a federal single-party soviet socialist republic framework which was characterized by the superior role of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), the only party permitted by the Constitution."


So yes, wars were fought over socialism and communism but no matter who won they still appeared eerily the same in application.
Click to expand...

The only real difference between communism and national socialism is the the Nazis allowed private property/business ownership. Other than that there isn't much of a difference between the 2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and NEO
#141
#141
hog88 said:
The only real difference between communism and national socialism is the the Nazis allowed private property/business ownership. Other than that there isn't much of a difference between the 2.
Click to expand...


I agree except for one thing.

Did they truly allow private property?

They stole the Jewish homes and businesses for no other reason than they felt like it.

The Jews were citizens.

On paper supposedly they owned property but did they really?

Do we go by what they said or what they actually did?

If they had never stolen the Jewish property or enslaved them I would not label them as communist leaning but that is a huge game changer for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and AM64
#142
#142
NEO said:
I get what you are saying.

I see where you are coming from.

I will use this as my framing though: National Socialism (Nazi) rose to power due to the fear of communism. The wealthy Germans backed Hitler because of this. But once he rose to power he blamed the Jews for spreading communism and then stole all of their property and businesses and enslaved them via government control.

If a citizen was stripped of all rights for simply existing is that not communism?

He did and became exactly what he was supposedly against.

Then when he fell half of Germany was given to Russia.

This paved the way for Stalin.

Stalin then cloaked communism (and was supposedly against communism) under the guise of socialism.

Here is the actual textbook description:

"The political system of the Soviet Union took place in a federal single-party soviet socialist republic framework which was characterized by the superior role of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), the only party permitted by the Constitution."


So yes, wars were fought over socialism and communism but no matter who won they still appeared eerily the same in application.
Click to expand...
So did a lot of governments at the time. Heck we were even locking people away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO
#143
#143
NEO said:
I agree except for one thing.

Did they truly allow private property?

They stole the Jewish homes and businesses for no other reason than they felt like it.

The Jews were citizens.

On paper supposedly they owned property but did they really?

Do we go by what they said or what they actually did?

If they had never stolen the Jewish property or enslaved them I would not label them as communist leaning but that is a huge game changer for me.
Click to expand...

Both forms of govt were totalitarian and evil but yeah the NAZIs did allow non undesirables to own property.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, AM64 and NEO
#145
#145
hog88 said:
Both forms of govt were totalitarian and evil but yeah the NAZIs did allow non undesirables to own property.
Click to expand...


This is where I get hung up in the weeds.

If you say something on paper but simply have to deem someone undesirable (German who is Jewish sympathizer) than what is on paper is meaningless and I judge you by your actions and not your rhetoric.

Is an undercover cop pretending to be a drug dealer actually a drug dealer? The rhetoric says drug dealer but the actions say cop. Yes, he will pretend to sell you some drugs until suddenly he feels no longer like it and decides to bust you. You can say you are one thing and actually be and do something else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#146
#146
AM64 said:
Obviously, if the age for making responsible decisions were a factor, the setpoint would be closer to thirty than twenty.
Click to expand...
wtf does that have to do with consent?

Choices made by consenting adults is not the same as an adult and a child.
 
#147
#147
Septic said:
good grief.

Same sex and interracial marriage are victimless at worst, how ****ing stupid are you to conflate consenting adult relationships with pedophilia?

You should be embarrassed by making such a mind numbingly stupid statement, sadly I’m not sure you’ll connect the dots on why.
Click to expand...

You think those pedophiles believe they're morally wrong? You dont think they make the same argument as sodomites to justify their lifestyles? Talk about stupidity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and AM64
#149
#149
AM64 said:
I have to confess that I'm just a clodhopper engineer, and I tend to look at the end result without getting hung up in esoterica and sale pitches. If the state owns you, it just doesn't much matter if you own property or are assigned a spot of state owned land. If you fail to toe the line, it doesn't matter much which state agency investigates (gestapo or KGB) and helps you see the light; a death sentence is the same regardless of the "people's" court. I guess I also don't really see why we bother taking up time in universities with theories of governance when few methodologies really work in polite society and the end result is simply how much nicety is allocated to the power used for control. Do a history and move on; there are plenty of books available for people who want more depth.

It seems like we'd be better served looking into things like how the Chinese totalitarians manipulate the companies that are manipulating our globalists who in turn are stealing our future. As far as our own social tendencies are concerned, the government needs to butt out, and let society heal or tear itself apart over various forms of stupidity - even if the party of education and science doesn't seem to understand science at all. But that goes back to the Constitution and the thought about federal vs local power grab. It doesn't take much intellect or power or observation to conclude that a one size fits all approach developed at the federal level will leave more people at odds than when left up to local views.
Click to expand...

About sums up this whole forum of posts...Excellent summation in such few words which I did not even think possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737 and AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top