I forgot to add...My idyllic commune's official name will be
Post-American Neo-Utopia.
Post-American Neo-Utopia.
Poll
Since joining BF2S's D&ST, have your political views strayed to the...
| Far Left | 9% | 9% - 6 | ||||
| Left | 7% | 7% - 5 | ||||
| Moderate Left | 19% | 19% - 12 | ||||
| Center (more or less) | 26% | 26% - 17 | ||||
| Moderate Right | 9% | 9% - 6 | ||||
| Right | 19% | 19% - 12 | ||||
| Far Right | 7% | 7% - 5 | ||||
| Total: 63 | ||||||
This post is just sheer awesomeness.Bertster7 wrote:
No you didn't. No it hasn't. No it doesn't.lowing wrote:
coulda swore I just did that.......oh well...........economic fascism as I meant it, is partial of the whole word fascism definition..Bertster7 wrote:
What is economic fascism? Define it, in your own words.
the part I was referring to is govt. control over private industry......It has happened and it fits in the definition of fascsim.
In any case, just to avoid any confusion and keep it nice and simple for you, fascism = right, Obama = left (by US standards)
The terms fascist and socialist are pretty much mutually exclusive.
You've called him both. That doesn't make sense. It's like complaining he's too short and then complaining he's too tall. If you compared him to Stalin at least that would show show degree of consistency...Those are the 14 characteristics of fascism as widely used by academics. They are not the charateristics of Hitler's Germany, they are the common elements between all fascist regimes. As you would know if you'd bothered checking his link:lowing wrote:
Try reading the definition of fascism, and not what someone wrote as the characteristics of Hitlers Germany.Kmarion wrote:
Now that I think about it.. some of those highlighted points are where the Right complains he doesn't fall in line with..lol.
They say..
He doesn't wear the flag pendant everywhere he goes. (1)
He is hurting the Military (4)
He waste money supporting the arts. Uni professors are indoctrinating students to be liberal. (11)
Weak on National Security (7)
Isn't tough on crime. (12)
Supports Unions. (10)The OED definition of fascism is:Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism.Which does not describe the current administration in the US at all. Authoritarian? Right-wing? It just doesn't fit.Fascism
/fashiz’m/
• noun 1 an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government. 2 extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.
Though, your views on Islam could easily be described as being intolerant and extremely right-wing and therefore fascist. But there isn't much of a case for anything based on simple definitions of fascism, because, as even Wikipedia tells us:What we have to go off when defining fascism, are papers by academics. The exact sort of paper Kmarion posted extracts from.Fascism is an authoritarian, nationalist and corporatist ideology, but there is no single established definition of fascism.I fail to see how it differs at all.eleven bravo wrote:
its like debating somebody with an 8th grade education
Pity I can only karma once in 24 hours.
sorry eleven bravo.
I can only prove I am not a racist based on what I have said and have not said, and I have never said anything that pins white people ( in this case) superior to anyone for any reason ( the definition of racism). No posts exists. That is the only proof I have. If you care to tell me what it is I can post other than what I have posted to convince you let me know.
The only proof that I have that you have no idea what the definition of racism is, are these same posts. Since you have never called me a racist in the context of the definition in any of your posts. You expect me to prove a negative and that is a standard not accepted in any argument and I will not accept it in this one, regardless of your trolling..
I can only prove I am not a racist based on what I have said and have not said, and I have never said anything that pins white people ( in this case) superior to anyone for any reason ( the definition of racism). No posts exists. That is the only proof I have. If you care to tell me what it is I can post other than what I have posted to convince you let me know.
The only proof that I have that you have no idea what the definition of racism is, are these same posts. Since you have never called me a racist in the context of the definition in any of your posts. You expect me to prove a negative and that is a standard not accepted in any argument and I will not accept it in this one, regardless of your trolling..
im sorry you cant play by your own rules of the game. best believe I shall reference this thread from now on anytime I see you bitching about somebody making a claim and not backing it up.lowing wrote:
sorry eleven bravo.
I can only prove I am not a racist based on what I have said and have not said, and I have never said anything that pins white people ( in this case) superior to anyone for any reason ( the definition of racism). No posts exists. That is the only proof I have. If you care to tell me what it is I can post other than what I have posted to convince you let me know.
The only proof that I have that you have no idea what the definition of racism is, are these same posts. Since you have never called me a racist in the context of the definition in any of your posts. You expect me to prove a negative and that is a standard not accepted in any argument and I will not accept it in this one, regardless of your trolling..
Tu Stultus Es
Already asked for your advice on what proof you require since yours postings accusing me of racism out of context with the definition of the word, is not acceptable and my failure to post anything that reflects the definition is not acceptable. not much more I can doeleven bravo wrote:
im sorry you cant play by your own rules of the game. best believe I shall reference this thread from now on anytime I see you bitching about somebody making a claim and not backing it up.lowing wrote:
sorry eleven bravo.
I can only prove I am not a racist based on what I have said and have not said, and I have never said anything that pins white people ( in this case) superior to anyone for any reason ( the definition of racism). No posts exists. That is the only proof I have. If you care to tell me what it is I can post other than what I have posted to convince you let me know.
The only proof that I have that you have no idea what the definition of racism is, are these same posts. Since you have never called me a racist in the context of the definition in any of your posts. You expect me to prove a negative and that is a standard not accepted in any argument and I will not accept it in this one, regardless of your trolling..
simple. you said I redefined racism. I am asking you to show me where exactly I ever gave a definition.
Tu Stultus Es
and I said pick every post where you use the word incorrectly...again nothing more I can say...you don't know the meaning of the word based on your useage of it compared to the actually definition....not much more can be said about it.eleven bravo wrote:
simple. you said I redefined racism. I am asking you to show me where exactly I ever gave a definition.
so you cant come up with any evidence where I specifically defined (or in your view, redefined) racism. typical typical typical.
Tu Stultus Es
I guess not, only your consistent misuse of the word is all of I have to offer. Probably good enough for everyone else.eleven bravo wrote:
so you cant come up with any evidence where I specifically defined (or in your view, redefined) racism. typical typical typical.
The fact that I have never made a truely racial comment should be proof that I have never made a racial comment, but I know in your world that is not good enough. lol
oh man this is priceless.
Tu Stultus Es
funny I was thinking the same thing as I tried to decipher your logic.eleven bravo wrote:
oh man this is priceless.
because you sure couldnt come up with anything to back up your nonsense. my logic though, its funny you should say that because Ive been using your style of argument this entire time, even directly quoting you.
Tu Stultus Es
...lowing wrote:
fas·cism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ Show Spelled[fash-iz-uhm] Show IPABertster7 wrote:
No you didn't. No it hasn't. No it doesn't.lowing wrote:
coulda swore I just did that.......oh well...........economic fascism as I meant it, is partial of the whole word fascism definition..Bertster7 wrote:
What is economic fascism? Define it, in your own words.
the part I was referring to is govt. control over private industry......It has happened and it fits in the definition of fascsim.
In any case, just to avoid any confusion and keep it nice and simple for you, fascism = right, Obama = left (by US standards)
The terms fascist and socialist are pretty much mutually exclusive.
You've called him both. That doesn't make sense. It's like complaining he's too short and then complaining he's too tall. If you compared him to Stalin at least that would show show degree of consistency...Those are the 14 characteristics of fascism as widely used by academics. They are not the charateristics of Hitler's Germany, they are the common elements between all fascist regimes. As you would know if you'd bothered checking his link:lowing wrote:
Try reading the definition of fascism, and not what someone wrote as the characteristics of Hitlers Germany.The OED definition of fascism is:Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism.Which does not describe the current administration in the US at all. Authoritarian? Right-wing? It just doesn't fit.Fascism
/fashiz’m/
• noun 1 an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government. 2 extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.
Though, your views on Islam could easily be described as being intolerant and extremely right-wing and therefore fascist. But there isn't much of a case for anything based on simple definitions of fascism, because, as even Wikipedia tells us:What we have to go off when defining fascism, are papers by academics. The exact sort of paper Kmarion posted extracts from.Fascism is an authoritarian, nationalist and corporatist ideology, but there is no single established definition of fascism.I fail to see how it differs at all.eleven bravo wrote:
its like debating somebody with an 8th grade education
–noun
1.(sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
now lets see, a govt. having complete power, ( all democrat control which he has used to ram rod his programs.
Last I heard Beck, Limbaugh et al. were still broadcasting.forcibly suppressing oppostion and criticism ( a proponent of the fairness doctrine ) check.
Pretty sure Kmarion has already said... not really.regimenting all industry and commerce ( now auto and health care industries are govt controlled for starters, he also decided to take control over how much a private citizen can make).
...emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism ( Hmmmm Henry Gates Jr. the nutty proffessor " the ( white) police acted stupidly" and the ft hood shooter " lets not jump to any conclusions"
Really?
I mean, really?
---
What you are doing here is looking for excuses.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
hahahah funny.lowing wrote:
The fact that I have never made a truely racial comment should be proof that I have never made a racial comment, but I know in your world that is not good enough. lol
Interesting someone bumped a thread from two years ago where people where saying lowing was racist and he was denying it lmao...some things never change, including lowing's denial apparently
A conversation about racism is full of racial comments, whether anyone is being racist or not.lowing wrote:
The fact that I have never made a truely racial comment should be proof that I have never made a racial comment, but I know in your world that is not good enough. lol
You fail. Epically.
the forum joke
Tu Stultus Es
In other news, Lost today was exploiting damaging cultural stereotypes perpetuated by reckless and irresponsible jingoism.
I see no need to address it because it's so far fetched is laughable ...lowing wrote:
didn't seem to matter when everyone compared Bush to being a fascist. Where were you with this concern?Varegg wrote:
Did you overlook the word dictator in your own post?
Now, try and address what it means as it is compared to what he has done. The point to my post. Or is the dictator hangup the only thing you can argue in that post?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
my style of argument? By mean asking you to qualify your accusations of racism? how outrageous!eleven bravo wrote:
because you sure couldnt come up with anything to back up your nonsense. my logic though, its funny you should say that because Ive been using your style of argument this entire time, even directly quoting you.
you ask the how you have redefined the term so I offer every single post you have made where you have used the term out of context from the definition..Sorry if you don't think this is proof.
yeah "really"Spark wrote:
...lowing wrote:
fas·cism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ Show Spelled[fash-iz-uhm] Show IPABertster7 wrote:
No you didn't. No it hasn't. No it doesn't.lowing wrote:
coulda swore I just did that.......oh well...........economic fascism as I meant it, is partial of the whole word fascism definition..Bertster7 wrote:
What is economic fascism? Define it, in your own words.
the part I was referring to is govt. control over private industry......It has happened and it fits in the definition of fascsim.
In any case, just to avoid any confusion and keep it nice and simple for you, fascism = right, Obama = left (by US standards)
The terms fascist and socialist are pretty much mutually exclusive.
You've called him both. That doesn't make sense. It's like complaining he's too short and then complaining he's too tall. If you compared him to Stalin at least that would show show degree of consistency...Those are the 14 characteristics of fascism as widely used by academics. They are not the charateristics of Hitler's Germany, they are the common elements between all fascist regimes. As you would know if you'd bothered checking his link:lowing wrote:
Try reading the definition of fascism, and not what someone wrote as the characteristics of Hitlers Germany.The OED definition of fascism is:Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism.Which does not describe the current administration in the US at all. Authoritarian? Right-wing? It just doesn't fit.Fascism
/fashiz’m/
• noun 1 an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government. 2 extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.
Though, your views on Islam could easily be described as being intolerant and extremely right-wing and therefore fascist. But there isn't much of a case for anything based on simple definitions of fascism, because, as even Wikipedia tells us:What we have to go off when defining fascism, are papers by academics. The exact sort of paper Kmarion posted extracts from.Fascism is an authoritarian, nationalist and corporatist ideology, but there is no single established definition of fascism.
I fail to see how it differs at all.
–noun
1.(sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
now lets see, a govt. having complete power, ( all democrat control which he has used to ram rod his programs.Last I heard Beck, Limbaugh et al. were still broadcasting.forcibly suppressing oppostion and criticism ( a proponent of the fairness doctrine ) check.Pretty sure Kmarion has already said... not really.regimenting all industry and commerce ( now auto and health care industries are govt controlled for starters, he also decided to take control over how much a private citizen can make)....emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism ( Hmmmm Henry Gates Jr. the nutty proffessor " the ( white) police acted stupidly" and the ft hood shooter " lets not jump to any conclusions"
Really?
I mean, really?
---
What you are doing here is looking for excuses.
I said the fairness doctrine is desired by thei s govt. even posted the link
Not sure how you can deny this
You quoted all of this and said absolutely nothing.
a conversation about racism is racist whether anyone is being racist or not???? hmmmmmmm, glad you are on eleven bravo's, and ruis's side of this. Because I certainly could not use your kind of logic in any conversation. Be sure to stay there. ALthough I agree that those other 2 agree with you.Jaekus wrote:
A conversation about racism is full of racial comments, whether anyone is being racist or not.lowing wrote:
The fact that I have never made a truely racial comment should be proof that I have never made a racial comment, but I know in your world that is not good enough. lol
You fail. Epically.
how convenient for you...could you at least explain why you did not voice your dictator argument when Bush was compared to a fascist?Varegg wrote:
I see no need to address it because it's so far fetched is laughable ...lowing wrote:
didn't seem to matter when everyone compared Bush to being a fascist. Where were you with this concern?Varegg wrote:
Did you overlook the word dictator in your own post?
Now, try and address what it means as it is compared to what he has done. The point to my post. Or is the dictator hangup the only thing you can argue in that post?
wtf is this shit? even a mod joining in the BS. troll moar jaekass. you guys fail so hard.
jesus can't you fuckin read? He never said it was RACIST he said it contains RACIAL COMMENTS which indicates your statement that you've 'never' written any 'racial comments' is clearly bollox.lowing wrote:
a conversation about racism is racist whether anyone is being racist or not???? hmmmmmmm, glad you are on eleven bravo's, and ruis's side of this. Because I certainly could not use your kind of logic in any conversation. Be sure to stay there. ALthough I agree that those other 2 agree with you.
Here we see lowing's excellent tactic of taking what someone says and changing it to make it seem outrageous, without using the original point and ignoring the meaning of it. *slow handclap*Jaekus wrote:
A conversation about racism is full of racial comments whether anyone is being racist or not.
blah blah blah ruis. get back on topic.