Are Bush Protestors Morally Equivalent to Obama Protestors

Post Reply New Topic

And in the end, all Ruyven is really looking to say is "might makes right". Which...he seems to be right. Though, you gotta admit: it's fairly cunning in execution in the matter of controlling the rest of the country in the matter.

And might makes wrong and might makes any damned thing it can make unless it generates enough pissed off people to squash it.

Yo, Sand, I'm really happy for you, and Imma let you finish, but I just got to say the media provides some of the best distractions ever to help people forget about such stupid things as election results and wars and BEYONCE IS THE BEST EVER.

Yes I am factually correct on the matter. That does not necessarily mean I am happy about it.

The reason I am correct is because there is a flaw in human make up. We cannot feel the pain we inflict on others as vividly as the pain we, ourselves, suffer. If we could feel the pain we inflict clearly and vividly, we would be less inclined to inflict it.

ruveyn

Nah. We'd just be more of a society inclined to do opiates like morphine/heroin.

I find that the anti-bush protestor actually kept thing civil against an adminstration which was crooked and alienated all but the inbred and ignorant of the bible belt. While the anti obama people are using defamtion and threats you know during the weimer republic did the nazi did the same thing against members of opposing parties using the brown shirts or SA so who is the real nazis.People need to realize hitler and the nazis were not socilist because solilism is a left wing philosphy and was what the soviet union was in a way so the nazi were actually extreme right wing in fact it would take you a long time to count the number of evil, right wing regimes and terror acts where left wing you can count on two hands or less.

Do you know what NSDAP (the initials of the Nazi Party) stand for? Natzional Socialistische Deutcher Arbeiters Partei. National Socialist German Workers Party. The rhetoric of Ernst Roehm (later killed by Hitler himself) was pure socialist nonsense.

ruven

Yes but hitler wasn't and he is the one everyone says obama is like hitler reorganized the party also obama is not strong arming the opposisition no he is trying for by partisanship but the rebuplicans are being big babies and deserve to be treated has such because they are not acting like civil,responsible adults and citizen of the united states.While during the bush administration the dems were actually finding against wrongs and unconstititutional acts.Not being against anything just because it was proposed by dems.

Hitler was very right-wing and marked himself out as an avid anti-Communist. This is why he was supported by reactionaries who feared a proletarian revolution like that in Russia. Stalin went to the leaders of democratic Western Europe asking that they join him in a collective security arrangement in order to contain the fascist threat posed by Hitler and Mussolini. Clearly, he was not a "socialist" in the traditional sense, or the Soviet sense. The German right wing used "socialism" in a different manner than we are used to thinking about it today, and it roughly matches up with most conceptions of fascism. From Bismarck onwards, the German ruling class provided various forms of social welfare programs as a means of securing their power and gaining the support of the working class. But the primary intent of these programs was to secure the power of the State and to keep it in the hands of a powerful leader.

From someone who usually seems to lack empathy, this is an odd sentiment.

Exactly what I was saying.

I belief it was national-sozialistische deutsche arbeiter partei.

"We cannot feel the pain we inflict on others as vividly as the pain we, ourselves, suffer. If we could feel the pain we inflict clearly and vividly, we would be less inclined to inflict it."

Actually, about this, i have a small theory. The farther you are from the person you attack, the less you feel his pain, mostly because you cannot "see" his agony and suffering. Which is why today we resort more and more to long-range weaponry than plain old swords or other "melee" weapons.

Not really. He doesn't lack empathy so much as he just realizes the nasty truth about things and he values bringing light to that truth forward first and foremost.

/Just a guess

It was also nationalist nonsense and the nationalist part was the most dangerous aspect, not the socialist part.

Ah nationalism and the effect or the nationist fervor one of the greatest evils ever unleashed on mankind.