26
   

Terrorist attack in London

 
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 10:26 am
@BillRM,
Never miss an opportunity to make an Anglophobic comment do you? It's not surprising seeing that your only achievement is your nationality, you certainly don't pass muster as a hominid.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 11:21 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
That's just an opinion, and not one based on logic either.
It is based on the well known history
of human nature, both qua the political predator
and qua the passive, docile victim.
Look at the history of the Capetian Monarchy:
innocuous at first, moving toward absolutism.

It is human nature that politicians wanna re-make society
in the image of what thay deem right; what thay like.
With time, there is progressively more intense political control.
The idea is that perceived bad is cured by having government
make the operative decisions, rather than a free citizen;
i.e., the notion that the answer to every problem is to
constrict personal freedom, by either prohibiting or mandating conduct of the Individual citizen.

I don't fear the UN; harmless, at least now,
but if world government actually took hold
the nightmares of the paranoid wud be manifested.
Government micro-surveillance and overhead from satellites
wud be universal; George Orwell.
I will not live to see it.





izzythepush wrote:
America isn't despotic, at least towards its own citizens, and it's fairly big too.
Its getting worse.
Obama will make it as bad as he can; he 's trying, but its not ez,
with Republican control of the House.
America was born in anti-authoritarian lust.
A new world government wud not be; the E.U. was not.






izzythepush wrote:
The main outcome would be that smaller, third world countries
would have a far greater say than they do now, and resources
would be more evenly shared out, meaning you wouldn't have as much.
The aliens 'd vote themselves American taxes.
That, of itself, wud be bad enuf,
but inevitably, despotism wud prevail, with no rescue, except blessed death.
Man wud be permanently re-defined, as a colony creature; the Borg.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 11:24 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

This coming from a citizens of the UK who cause a large percent of the problem in the middle east we are having now by drawing the political maps of the area after WW1 in a manner that even a bright child would should had known would not work out long term.
Well, it certainly depends on what you call "a large percent" .... ever heard of the Treaty of Lausanne, the United States' High Commissioner in Turkey, the League of Nations ... ?
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 11:35 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Your post imply that any government is necessarily bad. Pretty absurd.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 12:07 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Look at the history of the Capetian Monarchy:
innocuous at first, moving toward absolutism.
Well, the last Capetian monarch, Jean I, "le Posthume", died in 1316. You hardly can speak 'absolutism' in those years of the High Middle Ages. (Absolutism was underpinned by a written constitution for the first time in Europe in the 1665 Kongeloven ["King's Law"] of Denmark-Norway.)
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 12:33 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Not really. The Valois and Bourbon dynasties are considered sub-branches of the Capetians. Their rule in France ended in 1848. The Bourbons still 'rule' in Spain, however.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 12:46 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Not really. The Valois and Bourbon dynasties are considered sub-branches of the Capetians.
Under this logic, the House of Windsor would be a sub-branch of the Welfs, and Juan Carlos I of Spain a reigning Capetian monarch.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 01:17 pm
The Capetians were a pretty tame bunch. The Valois were even less effective. There was nothing approaching an absolute monarch in France until Louis XIV.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 01:37 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Juan Carlos I of Spain is indeed a reigning Capetian monarch.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 02:23 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
This coming from a citizens of the UK who cause a large percent of the problem in the middle east


Bill, Izzy didn't cause those problems. He wasn't even born then.


Quote:
we are having now by drawing the political maps of the area after WW1 in a manner that even a bright child would should had known would not work out long term.


This coming from a citizen of the US, a country that took those problems and set out to exacerbate the problems so that they could wreck millions of people's lives just to steal their wealth.

Isn't Bill being as hypocritical as Oralboy always is, Izzy?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 02:28 pm
@JTT,
Not just hypocritical, stupid as well.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 03:55 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Your post imply that any government is necessarily bad. Pretty absurd.
I wish I coud say that I am an anarchist,
but in candor: I am not, tho I like to approach it.

I must admit that government has some useful functions,
e.g. coining money n co-ordinating wars,
but governments have been beyond ineffably dangerous,
merely beginning with consideration of the commie n Nazi regimes (Saddam 's, for instance).
Like fire, government is a useful servant, but a brutal n lethal master.

I suspect that in time, eventually a world government will be established.
I don't wish to live to see that happen.
Then, it will be only a matter of time b4 it degenerates into a despotism
more severe and absolute than anything we 've yet been cursed to know.
It will be supported by intrusive technology executing
universal surveillance from above and from all directions,
including from within (subcutaneous). From that extinction of personal freedom,
only death will save us. That government need not fear Ike nor MacArthur.

I 'll admit that the government of Mayberry, North Carolina
was not necessarily bad, Olivier.

World government is much more dangerous than the Black Plague;
we shud not consider it at all, or deem it to be treated like plague virus.




David
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 04:09 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
Look at the history of the Capetian Monarchy:
innocuous at first, moving toward absolutism.
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Well, the last Capetian monarch, Jean I, "le Posthume", died in 1316. You hardly can speak 'absolutism' in those years of the High Middle Ages. (Absolutism was underpinned by a written constitution for the first time in Europe in the 1665 Kongeloven ["King's Law"] of Denmark-Norway.)
What I said was:
DAVID wrote:
Look at the history of the Capetian Monarchy:
innocuous at first, moving toward absolutism
Do u deny that
the French Monarchy was moving toward absolutism?????





David
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 04:24 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
World government is much more dangerous than the Black Plague;
we shud not consider it at all, or deem it to be treated like plague virus.


A real world plague would require some beefing up of WHO... But that's a tangent. A world government, if based on a world parliament, and if suplemental to national governments, would be easily fought off. It will never happen, not in the predictable future anyway.
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 04:29 pm
@Olivier5,
If there were a charter being written
for a world government, its preamble shud begin:
"ABANDON ALL HOPE, YE WHO ENTER HERE".
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 05:48 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
On the contrary, it could a great hope for all the downtroden in this world. Which is perhaps why it will never happen.
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 10:10 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
On the contrary, it could a great hope for all the downtroden
in this world. Which is perhaps why it will never happen.
That was the idea behind communist slavery; u must have loved that.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 May, 2013 10:55 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
Do u deny that
the French Monarchy was moving toward absolutism?????
No. Especially not during the Age of Absolutism.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 May, 2013 05:32 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
That was the idea behind communist slavery; u must have loved that.


The 'idea' behind communism was Marxism, not world government. Marx IMO articulated a very good critique of capitalism's problems, but proposed a chimeric solution to those problems. Yet, travelling in ex-USSR once, I was surprised to find that so many people regreted the USSR collapse. Nothing that came after was any good, apparentlty...
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 May, 2013 06:42 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Yet, travelling in ex-USSR once, I was surprised to find that so many people regreted the USSR collapse. Nothing that came after was any good, apparentlty...
There is always a certain percentage of population who want the good old times back, in any country, under any political regime ...
 

Related Topics

Report: CIA foiled al-Qaida plot - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Happy New Year from Pakistan - Discussion by djjd62
ISIS or Daesh - Question by usmankhalid665
Nothing about Brussels? - Discussion by McGentrix
Flavors of terrorists - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/03/2022 at 02:48:25