4,747 Forum Posts by "Slizor"
Some of my favorite philosophers are Bertrand Russel (analyitic philosophy) and Ayn Rand (Objectivism), and I love the philosophy of our founding fathers (Classical Liberalism), especially that of Thomas Jefferson.
I wouldn't look up Classical Liberalism on Wikipedia at the moment.
You're also thirteen. Wait until you realize the power of the invisible hand of the market and understand how ludicrous Marxism really is (in the sense that it cannot work). Marxism when taken straight from Marx is a good idea, and has some concepts to echo in a liberal capitalist society, but as a whole, it ignores basic human desires.
Haha. A 14 year-old capitalist telling a 13 year-old Marxist to grow up and "realise" things. I wouldn't be so quick to decide what "basic human desires" are......or to put your faith in "the invisible hand".
yeah schizo is where they are VOICES! not personalities, its where two or more people in your head, tell you what too do.
So do the voices go to hell?
I think the first post makes a lot more sense like this
One of my friends came over to my house a few months ago, we were talking about something and suddenly politics came up.
What the fuck is this brainwashed traitor thinking? This is the most fucking idiotic thing I have ever heard in my life, why the hell doesn't he move to Canada and shut the fuck up?
This is pretty much athe perfect example that propaganda can be used to such a degree, and is especially effective in a persons younger years
Why is it people are always able to recognise propaganda from the people opposing their views, but not propaganda on their own side?
As a general rule, most of the powerful economies in the world today have developed under a system of liberal democracy.
Most of the powerful economies in the world today, as they developed, developed a system of liberal democracy.
Don't you love when people make the mistake of confusing how something works with the way it "should" work? Or maybe they are just intellectually dishonest. Who knows?!
Don't worry about that, it's obvious Shadic thinks that fascism is classical liberalism. Oh, and bite me. Socialists, particularly Marxists, always argue for the collective ownership of businesses, or basically a business where all excesses are distributed to the working class. Is it excrutiatingly and mind-numbingly stupid? Yes. So change your ideology: don't complain that I'm misrepresenting it.
I didn't say you were misrepresenting what they would do, I said you were misrepresenting them and you are, you are misrepresenting the reasoning behind the policies. I mean, for fucks sake, you put forward a market-value based theory of value in regards to profit. Could you be any more off the mark?
You know what... I'm going to pretend to be a facist if you're going to be pretending you're a communist.
Remember to pretend poorly, it's not the same unless you don't understand the arguments that you're pretending to put forward.
He didn't murder her, he confirmed her death, it is different.
I'll remember this if I'm ever on trial for murder.
"By stabbing him, sir, I wasn't trying to kill him, just make sure he was dead."
I love the "Black Book" of Communism, it really is good academic procedure to consider how many deaths the policies of a Government caused. I only wish they would also do it with regards to other systems - have the official "murder rate" of Governments (like when someone dies because they can't afford to go to the doctors to get something sorted out, or when someone starves.
thething69, have you actually thought about your signature? It would seem like you miss the point somewhat.
You have to remember that UK is now a place where you can get charged for defending yourself and you're supposed to 'let the professionals' do it.
I'm one not too surprised about this.
Actually, you can't. People are allowed to use "reasonable force" when defending themselves - that doesn't include shooting someone in the back with a shotgun when they are running away.
We have the same law here in Georgia. I hate it, i think it infringes on bussiness owner's rights. if a customer doesn't like someone smoking they can leave.
Business owner's rights? What bollocks is this? Does someone suddenly get more rights when they own a business? Crazy Americans and their right-wing bollocks.
As for the smoking ban, you guys do realise that without the smell of smoke you'll actually be able to smell a pub? That's not a good thing.
Goddamn UN haven't done a thing in africa for as long as i remember.
About 13 years then?
Be fair here guys, this is politics at its most base. This has sod all to do with anything and, while good for a few jokes, is ultimatly irrelevant. It seems to me like an out and out accident (or a most unsubtle attack of a friend) does this really need discussion?
St Valentine is a shit, St Paddy is where it's at.
He's coming soon to bless all irish people with the ability to drink far in excess of their bodyweight.
Pretend that his family were mauled in a horrible car accident, leaving him with a family consisting of a one legged dog.
That would be worth a laugh.
It'swednesday 1:00am and I don't have anything to do until friday. It's pissing it down outside (the rain is beating on my skylight) and I've got a few beers in the fridge.
Ahh, a good Valentine's Day.
It's also common sense that when you go out hunting, you let people know where you are before they shoot.
It's common sense that you shout to say you're shooting before you shoot - or else you may , like, kill a quail or something.
There's much to be said for contributing nothing to a discussion.
Further evidence of the Conservative bias of the US media. As soon as it happens everyone's all "it was only an accident" - Clinton would have been impeached for this!
hospitals be destroyed? what about accidents. I was in wrestling and the other guy broke my collarbone. thats not my fualt so why should i suffer for it? its fucking stupid
You made the decision to wrestle, live with the consequences.
People these days - expect something for nothing, they do.
Also, Hugh Grant speaks with loads of pauses, umms, and other throwaways. He's like, "Oh, uh...yes...well...I'm doing my little, uh, shtick. Am I not, well, charming?" And he only has one facial expression. I guess he's an acquired taste.
Isn't that what you, uh...well...yanks like to hear about us, um, limeys?
On a rather different note I'm alone in the house for quite possibly the first time as I'm ill and everyone went out on the piss. I'm scared.
You know, I'm yet to find someone who calls for political correctness. Weird.
If "Liberals" and "Conservatives" stopped arguing then there could be real political debate and thought - and no one wants that! To be happy people need to entrench the views that they heard on the radio and think they agree with. Once this self-definition is complete they must deride anyone else who is not part of "their" group because there's nothing like a common enemy to build unity.
Don't try to think, just repeat after Fox News, or CNN.
So I'd have to say that empires as they were are no longer possible. In other words, there can never be another Rome.
The modern use of the word "imperialism" isn't the same as the old usage. It is obvious that the US is not conquering territory and keeping it for their own (i.e. how the US came into being.) Instead, political imperialism is where one state tries to control the other state, for example Cuba before the revolution. This form of imperialism is not for economic gain, but geopolitical gain (although the control of economic resources is a geopolitical thing) based on a neorealist world view that looks, quite directly, after its own interests but realises that the global political order is based on liberal internationalism.
I think the problem people are having with actually engaging with this argument is a failure to recognise that words have more than one meaning. Apart from one person on this board people are not saying that the US is like the British or Roman Empires.
We could always discuss economic imperialism...
That was not an insult. I think the American need for more English training is about on par with the Brit need for more critical thinking training. Questions?
Moping and talking bollocks...how do you fit it all in one day? Us Brits have a fine tradition of critical thinking - I mean we actually have political debates over here! Locke, Mill, Smith all looked at the world critically and created something new. Even Marx could be claimed as British!
If you are instead trying to refer to me through the veil of "Brits" then I would make a pretty safe bet that I'm far more schooled in Critical Thinking than you are. However, if you're not trying to refer to me then you are clearly delusional.
My question is, are you delusional?
If that is true then the UK should focus on critical thinking.
*Yawn*
Don't mope, it's unbecoming of you. Anyhow, I thought you were "the bigger man" who didn't "stoop" to random insults. Obviously intellectual honesty is not your strong point, although I fail to see what could be.
The American standard of english, in my experience, is very poor. I'm not saying that the average Brit uses better English, I'm not even comparing it to other countries, I'm just saying it is poor. Why you choose to attack me I don't know - do you support the US public education system?
I personally think the US needs to focus on writing - there are enough examples around this board to show you why I think this.
That is, quite honestly, some very poor reporting. If you look at the PISA study 2003 Germany (a country that is still dealing with reunification) does significantly better than in 2000 - overtaking the US - by using the 2000 figures (which are suspect in themselves) she is manipulating the statistics. She also mentions exact figures for ranking, but PISA does not give exact rankings because the stats are not quite directly comparable, it gives rough estimations. In the 2003 report Germany ranks between 10th-15th of OECD countries, with places like Finland and New Zealand beating them (i.e small countries.) Plus, she uses the President of the German Association of Private Schools as a source!
Not to mention that she is from the Christian Science Monitor - hardly a reliable source of news. Ten minutes of research and her argument falls apart. Bravo, good source.
