29 years ago Soviet defector and KGB operative Yuri Bezmenov warned about the SJW phenomena. He describes modern America EXACTLY!
| Personally I always saw campus communism as a fashion statement before anything else. The fact that people actually feel affronted by it is absolutely laughable. |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
| He seems to go way ahead with his statement regarding equality, the majority still prefers the idea of equality and it's going to take at least a couple of decades for people to be "squashed" for having such ideologies. |
 |
| The problem with all these videos highlighting the dangers of SJWism and other brainfarts is that while on the one hand they achieve their objective, they also, probably unwittingly, promote alt-right ideology, blind patriotism, and various cancers of the diametrically opposite origin. It creates a pendulum. In all ages, it has. Accepting immigrants is not the mistake; the mistake is to accept them and then to treat them as guests rather than as new residents. Wanting equality for genders is not the mistake; ignoring facts, starting entire movements of one gender's superiority, in the process is the problem. The problem has always been 'stupidity'. Ideas are rarely stupid. Their implementation always is. |
Lelouch_Darsi said: Trance said: The problem with all these videos highlighting the dangers of SJWism and other brainfarts is that while on the one hand they achieve their objective, they also, probably unwittingly, promote alt-right ideology, blind patriotism, and various cancers of the diametrically opposite origin. It creates a pendulum. In all ages, it has. Accepting immigrants is not the mistake; the mistake is to accept them and then to treat them as guests rather than as new residents. Wanting equality for genders is not the mistake; ignoring facts, starting entire movements of one gender's superiority, in the process is the problem. The problem has always been 'stupidity'. Ideas are rarely stupid. Their implementation always is. The mistake in accepting immigrants is accepting those who have no respect for our constitution or we as a country represent. If you agree with our values and you can integrate into it, then that's fine. It should never be the case where we have to let go of our values in order to accept theirs. As for equality, we need to be specific as to what we really mean by it. Do we mean equal fundamental rights? Or are we talking about something else? The word is so damn vague. That's what I said. Ideas aren't guided by words, words are guided by ideas. The idea here is to provide equal opportunities and fundamental rights to both genders and that's all 'equality' is. No need to get caught up in bullshit semantics that go nowhere. |
Lelouch_Darsi said: I don't think you know what Communism is if that is the conclusion you came w/, especially if you think the Soviet Union was communist. Don't get me wrong, Communism is a terrible idea, but comparing globalization, which has lead to something akin to a world-wide oligarchy, as being "communist" is stupid.Since communism offers the most power to government possible it appeals greatly to those that want to rule the world. com·mu·nism ˈkämyəˌnizəm/Submit noun a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs. Under communism all would be forcibly made equal, at which point the theory is that the temporary government dissolves and people maintain this equality. Because the government never steps down, as is the case with the USSR, it would be more accurate to call it state capitalism, in which the ruling party has absolute control over all aspects of the economy. As for the rise of such philosophies in the West, you are probably going to see more and more of it as Western countries become increasingly less equal. Or, you will see authoritarian regimes that will use state sponsored media to keep the masses submissive, such as in Russia where 75% of their wealth is owned by 1%. These kind of lopsided distributions of wealth, fair or not, is what leads to resentment and eventually revolutions. This isn't to say they are good, but humans are inherently resentful of things they consider "unfair", and no matter how you justify it, when a growing poor class believes they have no hope of mobility, and look up at billionaires who are only getting richer, that resentment grows until it boils over. I would say that globalism is leading to a rise in communist ideologies, not because they share anything in common, but because the end result of globalism leads to inequality which makes people want to swing hard in the opposite direction. |
Pirating_NinjaNov 26, 2016 9:43 AM
 |
Lelouch_Darsi said: Pirating_Ninja said: I don't think you know what Communism is if that is the conclusion you came w/, especially if you think the Soviet Union was communist. Don't get me wrong, Communism is a terrible idea, but comparing globalization, which has lead to something akin to a world-wide oligarchy, as being "communist" is stupid. Under communism all would be forcibly made equal, at which point the theory is that the temporary government dissolves and people maintain this equality. Because the government never steps down, as is the case with the USSR, it would be more accurate to call it state capitalism, in which the ruling party has absolute control over all aspects of the economy. As for the rise of such philosophies in the West, you are probably going to see more and more of it as Western countries become increasingly less equal. Or, you will see authoritarian regimes that will use state sponsored media to keep the masses submissive, such as in Russia where 75% of their wealth is owned by 1%. These kind of lopsided distributions of wealth, fair or not, is what leads to resentment and eventually revolutions. This isn't to say they are good, but humans are inherently resentful of things they consider "unfair", and no matter how you justify it, when a growing poor class believes they have no hope of mobility, and look up at billionaires who are only getting richer, that resentment grows until it boils over. I would say that globalism is leading to a rise in communist ideologies, not because they share anything in common, but because the end result of globalism leads to inequality which makes people want to swing hard in the opposite direction. Communism in theory isn't the same as it is in practice. 0_0 You are basically saying that words don't have actual meanings, and instead you should just define them yourself when need be. It's not exactly "wrong" in the sense that it does happen, but nobody should be actively seeking to do it w/ pre-established words. Kind of at a loss w/ what to say when you seriously say something like this, so just gonna leave it at that. |
Pirating_NinjaNov 26, 2016 10:16 AM
|
Lelouch_Darsi said: Pirating_Ninja said: 0_0 Kind of at a loss w/ what to say when you seriously say something like this, so just gonna leave it at that. You are basically saying that words don't have actual meanings, and instead you should just define them yourself when need be. It's not exactly "wrong" in the sense that it does happen, but nobody should be actively seeking to do it. What's wrong with what I said? Scientists are happy to admit that theories don't work the same way as they do in reality. The reason for that is because theories usually don't take all factors into account. There is always a flaw or something missing. History has demonstrated that the theory of communism is false. What you're talking about is the end goal of communism, not the theory as a whole e.g. whether equality can actually be obtained by force or not 1) No scientists are not happy to admit that "theories don't work the same way as they do in reality" - You do realize that in order for a hypothesis (what you are really talking about) to become a "scientific theory", it must first go through multiple experiments and continuously be supported by more and more evidence. If a hypothesis doesn't "work in reality", then it would be rejected and never make it to being referred to as a theory. You have the order backwards, common use would imply a theory is hypothetical, scientific use a theory must have been tested multiple times. 2) History has not declared "communism false", rather history has shown that the idea of setting up a communist nation is not doable. Notice though that by implying that no nation has successfully transitions into what we define as "communism", you must then acknowledge that what the USSR was was not communism. 3) When referring to what the USSR had as communism, what you are then doing is redefining the term. i.e. if what Russia had was "communism", then the end goal of communism, theoretical or otherwise, is not in enforced equality. It would be easier then to use a more suitable term, such as State Capitalism, in which the state controlled and ran all aspects of the economy underneath an authoritarian regime as this more accurately describes what it was. Conflating what communism is does not help your case, especially when you compare it to globalism, a concept which is inherently unfair and fuels greater class divides which is at its core the opposite of communism. |
|
More topics from this board
» How many people have you told "I love you" to?Zakatsuki_ - Oct 18 |
21 |
by Edgeoftwilight
»»
19 minutes ago |
|
» If your 10-year-old self could see you right now, would they be proud of you or disappointed?fleurbleue - 7 hours ago |
19 |
by Exhumatika
»»
26 minutes ago |
|
» Have any celebrities really inspired you?RobertBobert - 48 minutes ago |
2 |
by Zarutaku
»»
27 minutes ago |
|
» Do the well-known stereotypes associated with people from your country actually apply to you? ( 1 2 3 )fleurbleue - Oct 8 |
117 |
by Auron
»»
38 minutes ago |
|
» If MAL was a physical city, what would it be like?IpreferEcchi - Oct 4 |
31 |
by Freshell
»»
40 minutes ago |