Socialism. your thoughts?

[ArmenianKid]

Did you even read that post or the previous posts where the wild west issue was specifically addressed? Or are you just spouting opinionated jargon because that's what socialists/statists do. You have no idea what anarchy means aside from media spoon fed image. The Wild West was not as wild as you think. Just read the posts, that has already been refuted. Your beloved socialist utopia won't come to be since you admitted that people must be forced to socialize as opposed to being anything voluntary. Not only do you lack in reading the posts of the relevant topic before responding but you also lack ethics.

i dont lack ethics i just have common sense. no matter how good a idea, no matter what way the vote goes there will always be a group of people that are agasint it. look at the communist party and the american nazi party granted i dont support either one of those partys but they both are forced to accept the democratic society. i was just useing those as a exmple.

[Anonymouse]

i dont lack ethics i just have common sense. no matter how good a idea, no matter what way the vote goes there will always be a group of people that are agasint it. look at the communist party and the american nazi party granted i dont support either one of those partys but they both are forced to accept the democratic society. i was just useing those as a exmple.

If you believe, as you said earlier, that people should be made and forced to comply with the wishes and dictates of the majority (in the example I gave of myself), then you believe it is ethical to use force on innocent people simply because they disagree. This is purely a matter of ethics my boy.

[ArmoBarbi]

He didn't say just disagree, but disgaree with the established government of their society. Not the same. We actually already do this pretty much all over the world. Its called following the law. If one breaks the law he is punished in one way or another (they try anyway...), which constitutes force, dont you think?

I love how people use "innocent people" for effect. Is it ethical to do so with "uninnocent" people? Is that what makes the difference in this case?

[Anonymouse]

He didn't say just disagree, but disgaree with the established government of their society. Not the same. We actually already do this pretty much all over the world. Its called following the law. If one breaks the law he is punished in one way or another (they try anyway...), which constitutes force, dont you think?

I love how people use "innocent people" for effect. Is it ethical to do so with "uninnocent" people? Is that what makes the difference in this case?

If person A has a dispute with person B then the belief is that they should submit to a neutral third party (government). But if person A has a dispute with government, there is no neutral third party that he can submit his case to, due to governments monopoly of jurisprudence. You have a gross misunderstanding of the law. As far as "innocent people" are concerned, anyone who is forcibly made to comply by government against their will, is an innocent victim.

[Thai-Samurai]

If person A has a dispute with person B then the belief is that they should submit to a neutral third party (government). But if person A has a dispute with government, there is no neutral third party that he can submit his case to, due to governments monopoly of jurisprudence. You have a gross misunderstanding of the law. As far as "innocent people" are concerned, anyone who is forcibly made to comply by government against their will, is an innocent victim.

Yeah, so in the next election, VOTE ANARCHY.

[ArmoBarbi]

You have said nothing I don't/mis understand. lol Keep dreaming... It's good to make a point when you respond to a person, outside of "you this or that".

P.S. Calling people innocent doesn't make them innocent - doesn't qualify as a serious response. Maybe it makes sense to a person who sees himself as a victim of his government. Anyone with this attitude is spoiled and unexperienced.

[ArmenianKid]

give me a soild meaning of the word innocent becuase it could mean many things.

[Anonymouse]

You have said nothing I don't/mis understand. lol Keep dreaming... It's good to make a point when you respond to a person, outside of "you this or that".

P.S. Calling people innocent doesn't make them innocent - doesn't qualify as a serious response. Maybe it makes sense to a person who sees himself as a victim of his government. Anyone with this attitude is spoiled and unexperienced.

Tell that the Armenians who were victim of the Turkish government, or the Ukrainians under Stalin, or the Cambodians, or the Rwandans that they were "guilty" not innocent. I do think you can't understand this quite simple concept. Don't try too hard. You should have quit a long time ago. Staying beyond comprehension levels is the hallmark of a fool.

[Anonymouse]

give me a soild meaning of the word innocent becuase it could mean many things.

It seems alot of the confusion and misanthropy of what we call 'modernity' is rooted in the misunderstanding of words in which your political masters make it their goal to distort the meanings of words.

Here is the definition.


Main Entry: in·no·cent
Pronunciation: 'i-n&-s&nt
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin innocent-, innocens, from in- + nocent-, nocens wicked, from present participle of nocEre to harm -- more at NOXIOUS
1 a : free from guilt or sin especially through lack of knowledge of evil : BLAMELESS <an innocent child> b : harmless in effect or intention <searching for a hidden motive in even the most innocent conversation -- Leonard Wibberley>; also : CANDID <gave me an innocent gaze> c : free from legal guilt or fault; also : LAWFUL <a wholly innocent transaction>
2 a : lacking or reflecting a lack of sophistication, guile, or self-consciousness : ARTLESS, INGENUOUS b : IGNORANT <almost entirely innocent of Latin -- C. L. Wrenn>; also : UNAWARE <perfectly innocent of the confusion he had created -- B. R. Haydon>
3 : lacking or deprived of something <her face innocent of cosmetics -- Marcia Davenport>

[ArmoBarbi]

Tell that the Armenians who were victim of the Turkish government, or the Ukrainians under Stalin, or the Cambodians, or the Rwandans that they were "guilty" not innocent. I do think you can't understand this quite simple concept. Don't try too hard. You should have quit a long time ago. Staying beyond comprehension levels is the hallmark of a fool.

I won't bother to argue with you. Think what you want of me. I think I have made it quite clear, although without resorting to degradation, what I think of you.