Page 8 of 28 [ 442 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 28  Next

Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

17 Feb 2019, 5:51 pm

RushKing wrote:
Do you know how many people capitalism has killed?

Enlighten me.
RushKing wrote:
This is a loaded question. How are you defining freedom of speech?

I define free speech as....free speech. The only exception being no calls for acts of violence. De-platforming is attempting to stop free speech if it's not your platform or your organisations platform. It's called disturbing the peace. Like for example, if antifa is preforming a speech, what will happen when people show up to block them from speaking. Something tells me, given the nature of the beliefs they hold, they will start physically attacking people.

This conversation seems to be leading nowhere. I understand you are for communism, I'm not.



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

17 Feb 2019, 6:51 pm

Why would you bring up that number if you don't know capitalism's death toll?

Are you arguing out of good faith?



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

17 Feb 2019, 6:55 pm

Crimadella wrote:
I define free speech as....free speech. The only exception being no calls for acts of violence.

This exception taken to its logical conclusion, would basically ban all political speech. Yikes!



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

17 Feb 2019, 7:15 pm



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

17 Feb 2019, 7:28 pm

I read the article, history of communism. I tried to find a death tole for capitalism, I couldn't find any, you are the one that asked me, figured you maybe had a source.

The free speech thing, that is the current law, we obviously have political speech, what political speech do you see as 'calls for acts of violence'. Example. "Someone needs to kill this guy", "someone go punch this guy in the face"(A famous one frequently used by people taking up far left ideologies.) They often target completely innocent people, if that's not you then that's not you, I'm not suggesting you do that. I'm talking about the group of Antifa's that claim they aren't a group yet organize as a group.

The problem I have cam to understand with attempts to further limit speech is, where do you draw the line, what speech is considered hate speech and what speech is not. It's hard to draw that line and constantly causes socialist countries to dive further and further in to banning words and ideas, punishable by law. Freedom of speech is very important to protect. Yes, some people may say harsh things, even racist thing, the upside to that is if you dare say it to the wrong person or someone else hears you verbally abusing someone that can't fend for themselves, odds are someone is going to step in and kick some ass. I've even done that, they weren't being racist, but they were insisting they were going to jump the guy, I stepped in and let them know they will be fighting me also.

I'm not trying to put you down or anything, we have a deference in opinion. You think communism could work in america, I don't see it that way. We definitely have issues that need to be resolved, maybe some day possibly a shared wealth system. The problem is how do we get there without complete chaos or ending up in a government body which still hoards the majority of wealth. It's a dangerous move to give government such power over people because of the corruption factor. People are corrupt, you will never get rid of corrupt people, they will weed themselves into any system. One of the theorized pluses to capitalism is it's easier fight off corruption compared to a communist or socialist society.



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

17 Feb 2019, 8:33 pm

Crimadella wrote:
The free speech thing, that is the current law, we obviously have political speech, what political speech do you see as 'calls for acts of violence'. Example. "Someone needs to kill this guy", "someone go punch this guy in the face"(A famous one frequently used by people taking up far left ideologies.) They often target completely innocent people, if that's not you then that's not you, I'm not suggesting you do that. I'm talking about the group of Antifa's that claim they aren't a group yet organize as a group.

This is a problem I have with liberalism. Politics and violence cannot be separated from each other. Every political system ever has required violence to function. How do they think laws under capitalism get enforced?

Because of this, basically all forms of political speech could be considered as calls for violence. Maybe the law interprets this as direct calls for violence by people who aren't law enforcement. But that isn't consistent. This would be a huge hole in liberal philosophy.

I'm not saying calls for violence are always equal or justified, but calls for violence (under my moral system) may be permitted under curtain circumstances.



Last edited by RushKing on 17 Feb 2019, 9:03 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

17 Feb 2019, 8:56 pm

RushKing wrote:
Crimadella wrote:
The free speech thing, that is the current law, we obviously have political speech, what political speech do you see as 'calls for acts of violence'. Example. "Someone needs to kill this guy", "someone go punch this guy in the face"(A famous one frequently used by people taking up far left ideologies.) They often target completely innocent people, if that's not you then that's not you, I'm not suggesting you do that. I'm talking about the group of Antifa's that claim they aren't a group yet organize as a group.

This is a problem I have with liberalism. Politics and violence cannot be separated from each other. Every political system ever has required violence to function. How do they think laws under capitalism get enforced?

I'm not saying calls for violence are always equal or justified, but calls for violence may be permitted under curtain circumstances.


I don't understand what you mean. Are you suggesting that when laws are broken and police make arrests that is considered political acts of violence? I'm just guessing. Explain how you view politics and violence cannot be separated, to me they are two completely different things, without any connection. Give me examples of what you are talking about.



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

17 Feb 2019, 9:11 pm

Police aren't legally suppose to result to violence unless you are resisting. I say legally because of course they do break the law, that goes back to the corruption factor. Getting arrested is not an act of violence, in most cases people are arrested for good reasoning, they broke a law or multiple laws. Like selling crack is obviously not good, so laws were passed. If you get caught selling crack you get arrested. That is justice, not an act of violence.

If you get arrested, even if you did no wrong it's best to not resist, then get a lawyer and sue the S*** out of them. Doesn't always work out right, but to combat corruption we are implementing more laws, like the dash cam in a cop car, if they turn it off the are vulnerable to law suits. They are starting to incorporate cams on their uniforms also. This is to record the events so others get to see and cops who do abuse their power will be held accountable for such actions.



Last edited by Crimadella on 17 Feb 2019, 9:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

17 Feb 2019, 9:13 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
AspE wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
There's too much dismissing ideas based on a perceived political agenda.

That and the 60+million people dead from the last time someone had the same idea.

Leninism-Stalinism? Whose promoting that?

Fascism. The communists helped save us from fascism, remember?



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

17 Feb 2019, 9:16 pm

Crimadella wrote:
I don't understand what you mean. Are you suggesting that when laws are broken and police make arrests that is considered political acts of violence? I'm just guessing.

Yes
Crimadella wrote:
Explain how you view politics and violence cannot be separated, to me they are two completely different things, without any connection. Give me examples of what you are talking about.

I think the Police example is pretty good.

Also more broadly speaking; don't you consider removal of choices to be violent?



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

17 Feb 2019, 9:26 pm

Crimadella wrote:
Police aren't legally suppose to result to violence unless you are resisting. I say legally because of course they do break the law, that goes back to the corruption factor. Getting arrested is not an act of violence, in most cases people are arrested for good reasoning, they broke a law or multiple laws. Like selling crack is obviously not good, so laws were passed. If you get caught selling crack you get arrested. That is justice, not an act of violence.

If you get arrested, even if you did no wrong it's best to not resist, then get a lawyer and sue the S*** out of them. Doesn't always work out right, but to combat corruption we are implementing more laws, like the dash cam in a cop car, if they turn it off the are vulnerable to law suits. They are starting to incorporate cams on their uniforms also. This is to record the events so others get to see and cops who do abuse their power will be held accountable for such actions.


I Had edited. Cops arresting people is not an act of violence, if you don't resist they typically just put you in handcuffs, that is not an act of violence.



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

17 Feb 2019, 9:29 pm

-Violence

behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
synonyms: brutality, brute force, roughness, ferocity, fierceness, savagery, cruelty, sadism, barbarity, barbarousness, brutishness, murderousness, bloodthirstiness, ruthlessness, inhumanity, heartlessness, pitilessness, mercilessness; More
strength of emotion or an unpleasant or destructive natural force.
"the violence of her own feelings"
synonyms: intensity, severity, strength, force, great force, vehemence, powerfulness, power, potency, ferocity, forcefulness, wildness, frenziedness, fury, storminess, tempestuousness, turbulence; More
LAW
the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,593
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

17 Feb 2019, 9:31 pm

AspE wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Leninism-Stalinism? Whose promoting that?

Fascism. The communists helped save us from fascism, remember?

I clearly don't, I must not be reading the same history.

The only thing sort of congruent with what you're saying was that the US supplied Stalin with vehicles on the eastern front and that battle helped grind Germany's military down. I'm still not sure whether that was a good idea considering that he killed tens of millions of his own people and it could have ended up with Hitler over-extended and us getting two for the price of one.

The other thing - any ideas whose actually promoting fascism, eg. national socialism, on this site?


_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.


RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

17 Feb 2019, 9:51 pm

Crimadella wrote:
I Had edited. Cops arresting people is not an act of violence, if you don't resist they typically just put you in handcuffs, that is not an act of violence.

You don't consider coercion as violence? I do.



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

17 Feb 2019, 9:56 pm

RushKing wrote:
Crimadella wrote:
I Had edited. Cops arresting people is not an act of violence, if you don't resist they typically just put you in handcuffs, that is not an act of violence.

You don't consider coercion as violence? I do.


No I don't. I get the angle you are trying to spin. Ask a lawyer if getting arrested is an act of violence. We will just have to disagree on that.

It comes down to compliance, if you comply, it isn't forceful or against your will. If you do not comply, yes, they can use force and that is your fault. So, how can get get arrested by free will....comply.



AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

17 Feb 2019, 10:24 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
I clearly don't, I must not be reading the same history.

The only thing sort of congruent with what you're saying was that the US supplied Stalin with vehicles on the eastern front and that battle helped grind Germany's military down. I'm still not sure whether that was a good idea considering that he killed tens of millions of his own people and it could have ended up with Hitler over-extended and us getting two for the price of one.

We would have lost the war without them. USSR lost more troops than any other nation in WWII.

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
The other thing - any ideas whose actually promoting fascism, eg. national socialism, on this site?

Yup.