Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Invisusira's playground

Moderators: Aergis, Invisusira

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Fri Feb 01, 2013 9:34 am

Well, its not like the UK was the only one who knew how to take land with the cunning use of flags.
Image
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11143
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Fri Feb 01, 2013 10:28 am

Dantriges wrote:but she listeded the "assertion that no Jew can be member of the race" under the non-senseless points? Wow, at least she is honest that she is a racist nutjob glorifying nazism. :roll:
Again, I could be wrong, but I think you are missing her meaning. I don't think she is defending that position, she's saying it wasn't senseless in the way that it was purposeful and based on their logic. As opposed to it being senseless because it's stupid, which is an alternate definition.

I just think she's trying to hi-light the risks with that style of government. That calling it senseless actually attempts to make the holocaust seem less evil than it really was. Because if it was the senseless acts of a deranged psychopathic leader, then it's not a reflection of anything more than that. She's saying that the Nazi party didn't stump on notions of committing atrocities, but rather that they were the actions of leaders trying to hold to a set of ideals that the populace to a large degree bought into. That these atrocities weren't senseless, they were a byproduct of that sort of belief system which is a danger that people should heed today.

If my interpretation is correct, it's still a stupid article because I don't think anyone believes that Obama was trying to downplay the holocaust, and it's very poorly written. It seems that many people took her words as a defense of nazism and that's totally the author's fault. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong and it was a defense of nazism, but that seems illogical given the broader context.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Fri Feb 01, 2013 10:55 am

I agree with Fridmarr. It wasn't really senseless, because the genocide had a purpose, at least based on their logic -- still very poorly written and comes as incredibly off.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11143
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Dantriges » Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:11 am

I think I just agree with you on the point that the article was written very badly. Perhaps or probably she didn´t defend nazism but if you publish your thoughts to a wider audience you should be more careful with your words, especially if they can be mistaken easily for being racist comments.
Dantriges
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:39 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:32 am

Dantriges wrote:I think I just agree with you on the point that the article was written very badly. Perhaps or probably she didn´t defend nazism but if you publish your thoughts to a wider audience you should be more careful with your words, especially if they can be mistaken easily for being racist comments.

Especially given how this will play out, which some editor there should have realized. Conservatives will now be labeled forever as pro Nazi jew haters. Of course that's absurd given that nazism is pretty polar opposite to conservatism, but it will be considered a given and unchallengable. Just add it to the long list of other groups conservatives "hate"... :roll:
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Paxen » Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:59 am

The american right wing doesn't really have much credibility on freedom issues, as long as it contains social conservatives.

In the end, the right wants freedom on some issues, and not on others, and the same is true of the left.
Paxen
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:38 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Dantriges » Fri Feb 01, 2013 12:09 pm

Seems they should exercise their freedom of speech a bit more carefully.

You can say what you want but we reserve the right to think of you as a total nutjob afterwards. :D
Dantriges
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:39 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Paxen » Sat Feb 02, 2013 2:01 am

Fridmarr wrote:Of course that's absurd given that nazism is pretty polar opposite to conservatism, but it will be considered a given and unchallengable.


That's an exaggeration. Some elements of nazism is directly opposed to current US conservatism ("socialism as being based upon a commitment of an individual to a community"). Some values are not conservative values but are still values that are right-wing ("domination of society by people deemed racially superior, while purging society of people declared inferior, who were said to be a threat to national survival", nationalism). Some values they shared with current conservatives ("Nazism favoured private property, freedom of contract, and promoted the creation of a national solidarity that would transcend class differences.") Hitler claimed that Nazism was neither right-wing nor left-wing, and it seems to me to be correct.

That you like to think of conservatism as an ideology of Freedom for everybody does not make it true.

(Quotes from Wikipedia).
Paxen
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:38 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Nooska » Sat Feb 02, 2013 5:45 am

It just reminds me of the saying; Freedom of Speech doesn't mean you are obligated to speak (loosely translated) - or better "the right to speak is not a duty to speak"
Main Characters:
Nooska, Blood Elf BM/SV Hunter on Argent Dawn (EU)
Morosin, Bloody freezing orc death knight on Argent Dawn (EU)
Niisca, Shady forsaken "priest" on Argent Dawn (EU)

Keeper Emeritus of the BM hunters guide on Elitist Jerks and the wowhead version untill patch 5.3.
User avatar
Nooska
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:55 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Sagara » Sat Feb 02, 2013 6:26 am

"My right to wave my fist around stops at the other guy's nose." - popular
When that day comes, seek all the light and wonder of this world, and fight.

Worldie wrote:I used to like it [mean] back on Sylvanas.

Queldan - EU Stormrage (H) - Good night, sweet prince.
User avatar
Sagara
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:04 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fridmarr » Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:01 am

Paxen wrote:
Fridmarr wrote:Of course that's absurd given that nazism is pretty polar opposite to conservatism, but it will be considered a given and unchallengable.


That's an exaggeration. Some elements of nazism is directly opposed to current US conservatism ("socialism as being based upon a commitment of an individual to a community"). Some values are not conservative values but are still values that are right-wing ("domination of society by people deemed racially superior, while purging society of people declared inferior, who were said to be a threat to national survival", nationalism). Some values they shared with current conservatives ("Nazism favoured private property, freedom of contract, and promoted the creation of a national solidarity that would transcend class differences.") Hitler claimed that Nazism was neither right-wing nor left-wing, and it seems to me to be correct.

That you like to think of conservatism as an ideology of Freedom for everybody does not make it true.

(Quotes from Wikipedia).
Edited:
Actually rereading your post, you make my point for me. There's not much there that would be considered conservative. Right wing...sure, but not conservative as you point out. So, I don't think my comment is at all an exaggeration, and since I didn't say right wing, you seem to be in agreement. Just be consistent with that separation of right wing and conservative.

That said, the core tenets of nazism are pretty consistently left. It's not all left, but very little is conservative as even you point out.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9667
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Brekkie » Sat Feb 02, 2013 1:47 pm

Fridmarr has a different definition of "Conservative" than every single other Conservative I have ever met.
Theckhd wrote:big numbers are the in-game way of expressing that Brekkie's penis is huge.
Brekkie
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Sat Feb 02, 2013 2:36 pm

Brekkie wrote:Fridmarr has a different definition of "Conservative" than every single other Conservative I have ever met.


Image
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11143
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Paxen » Sat Feb 02, 2013 7:00 pm

Brekkie wrote:Fridmarr has a different definition of "Conservative" than every single other Conservative I have ever met.


Yup.

Another element that is a very conservative trait is the focus on women staying home and bearing/rearing children. Nazi Germany eventually employed female workers in their factories, but that's only years into the war when they were forced to do it by the realities of war.

Contrast that to the almost aggressive equality endorsed by communists starting with Lenin (of course, as with many other things it was undermined by the endemic hypocracy in the USSR - women were the equals of men when working, but they still did the majority of work in the household and were, with a few exceptions excluded from positions of power).

Fridmarr seems to think that Conservatism is the ideology of personal freedom - it's not, Liberalism (US: Libertarianism) is. Conservatism is concerned with preventing rapid changes and the defense of existing privileges.
Paxen
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:38 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Torquemada » Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:41 pm

Classical Liberalism is closest to Libertarianism, yes, but Conservatism still bases its tennets and morals on the rights of the individual. Both are largely the same in terms of fiscal policy, save that the Republican party has had to conform to Progressivism and defend the social safety net. Old people aren't going to vote for people who take away Social Security, etc.

Where they differ on social issues is based largely on the concept of which individual is being protected. Pro-life Conservatives believe in protecting the rights of the baby/fetus/unborn as life is the first and foremost important component of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Libertarians such as myself view the rights of the mother, an existing citizen, as holding precedent.

Conservatism IS about avoiding rapid change, which is why today it is about personal freedom. With the advent of the progressive movement under TR and Wilson, and much moreso under FDR, we see the implementation of big government as the solution, to make it easier for citizens. Modern conservatism when implemented holds that the every expanding, unfinanced government teat must be reined in, and that individual choice and freedoms should prevail over an expansive federal government.
User avatar
Torquemada
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:00 am
Location: Virginia

PreviousNext

Return to Arkham Asylum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest