Home Politics & Debate
Group Chat may be taking place on the Discussion Boards this evening while we swat some bugs with our software. Head to this thread for the latest information on what's happening, and what to do if Group Chat doesn't go ahead. Thanks for being patient while things are a bit uncertain. :)
Want to discuss Coronavirus/COVID-19? Head to the dedicated subforum .

Definition of racism and descrimination...

1246

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Since when was the comment part of a discussion about political theory?

    klintock called Aladin a fascist. I'm pointing out that it may be authoratarian, but thats not the same as fascist.
    I suggest that you read the thread up to the point at which the comment was made.

    Errr...I did. You're still wrong.
    I don't take it "purely" by that definition. You seem to be having difficulty with the fact that some words have more than one inflection.

    Fascist means only one thing MoK.
    If I describe a political movement as facist them you would be correct. I didn't. Nor did I describe a theory as such.

    You've lost me. :confused:
    I agreed with klintocks comment about Aladdin's approach to racist opinions.

    They're authoratarian - not the same thing as fascist.
    It is? I thought that you had a better grasps of political history than that Blagsta.

    I appear to have a better grasp than you...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That would be an option in your "ideal" system then, would it?

    Errrr...no. :confused: Its a situation we have now MoK. I thought your grasp of politics was better than this...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What's with the constant reference to "purely"... both you and Blagsta have used it...

    It's isn't "purely" a political ideology either and both of you have completely missed the point which was being made.

    As you say context is relevant and perhaps you need to look at the context it was used in.

    Advocating the oppression of an opinion through violence is facist tendancy - or do you disagree with that?

    No, it isn't. Fascisn is way more complex.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock called Aladin a fascist. I'm pointing out that it may be authoratarian, but thats not the same as fascist.

    Sure it is. All governments are the exactly the same. All that changes are the parties that benefit or suffer and how far they go in their desire for control.

    Facism apparently goes a lot further than other systems. I don't agree with this, I think it's just a lot more obvious than say, western democracy, which does a marvellous job of hiding total control under the guise of being free.
    They're authoratarian - not the same thing as fascist.

    All governments are authoritarian, they demand total obedience with no exceptions, accept no limits on their powers save for those they haven't claimed yet because they don't feel they need them.

    Al's position is one that set "a" of values is wrong, and set "b" of values is a better set, so we should use the fiction of the state to acquire the force to impose set "b" values on everyone else.

    You can't see why this is identical to fascism?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well I have just gone and clicked the 'view post from person on ignore' to reveal Klintock's latest rantings, seeing as the thread seems to be revolving about my earlier comments.

    All I will say Klintock is that:

    a) you don't appear to have the slightest fucking clue what the word 'fascism' means

    b) discussing the issue with you is pointless anyway since incredibly (and hilariously) you don't believe there is such thing as verbal abuse or that people can be offended, insulted and hurt by words. Isn't that right?

    Yeah I thought so.

    Goodbye. :wave:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So theres no point is arguing with me because you can't insult me......

    Added to your affinity for expressing a desire for physically harming those who you don't agree with, I suggest you seek help.
    a) you don't appear to have the slightest fucking clue what the word 'fascism' means

    It's one man using violence and threats of violence against another for a stated aim. Exactly the same as all other government.

    "What marvellous luck for governments that men do not think"

    Adolf
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    So theres no point is arguing with me because you can't insult me......

    Added to your affinity for expressing a desire for physically harming those who you don't agree with, I suggest you seek help.



    It's one man using violence and threats of violence against another for a stated aim. Exactly the same as all other government.

    "What marvellous luck for governments that men do not think"

    Adolf

    Why not refer to violence/oppression as something other than fascism, because arguments like this go nowhere...fuck all point in us all arguing over semantics every day.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock, you can't just bandy words like "fascist" around - it has a specific political meaning. Using it without knowing what it actually means makes you look even more foolish than you normally do.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock, you can't just bandy words like "fascist" around - it has a specific political meaning. Using it without knowing what it actually means makes you look even more foolish than you normally do.

    I'm simple, not a fool. What's this "specific political meaning" balderdash. Watch what's happening, ignore the name and hey presto! you see they are all the same. Oh, and it's a meaning so specific that it takes that guy 200 pages to show his opinion of what it means. Still his opinion, and only that.

    I have pointed out why there is no difference between fascism and western democracy or any other form of "governance" for that matter a good few times now. None of you have gone anywhere near the issue of similarity I raised.
    Why not refer to violence/oppression as something other than fascism, because arguments like this go nowhere...fuck all point in us all arguing over semantics every day.

    Violent oppresion is fascism, is monarchy, is democracy blah blah blah blah blah! I am saying they are all exactly identical (save for the PR/languaging).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You're right, you certainly are simple.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ah, I see there is a snag with the ignore function of vbulletin. Unfortunately the ignored poster's rantings can still filter through when somebody else quotes them.

    Sadly this has forced me to engage with Klintock again, as this time there isn't just the usual lunatic stuff to contend with, but bollocks and lies too.

    Kindly provide any evidence to support your claims that I wish to physically harm those I don't agree with- or STFU.

    There's a good boy.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kindly provide any evidence to support your claims that I wish to physically harm those I don't agree with- or STFU.

    Ok here is a small selection of your desire for violence;-

    http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showpost.php?p=1538516&postcount=17

    http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showpost.php?p=1538664&postcount=21

    http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showpost.php?p=1497117&postcount=5

    http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showthread.php?t=90231

    http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showthread.php?t=89345

    That's about all I can be arsed to drag up atm. You've advocated government action for all kinds of things Al, and as you know fuill well, they only ever use threats or violence to get things done.

    Every time you say "these people shouldn't be allowed to do...." you are advocating violence.

    ETA

    If your having "blackouts" and don't remember your deranged outbursts, I really would seek help.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Listen. If you have some kind of comprehension problem regarding semantics you should try to overcome it. In the meantime, I will ask you again. Where have I said I wish to physically harm those I don't agree with? Could you point them out to me? Because you haven't. Not in those links at any rate.

    So I'll ask again: show us the evidence, or STFU regarding lies about what I say or believe in doing.

    And please do try to use Planet Earth semantics and logic instead of (predictably) trying to redifine the meaning of various words.

    I thought you were a fan of good, solid facts. Well? Physical violence? Where have I advocated that? When?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Frankly, if you are burying your dead soldier or gay son and suddenly some cunts turn up at the funeral with placards reading "Thank God for 9/11/Iraq war"/ "God hates ******s", I think that far from them having a 'right' to express such things it should be your right to kick them repeatedly in the face until it is a bloody mess, and then have them jailed on charges of general cuntiness.
    On that evidence I don't think banning racist and hatred talk is going to make things worse- who knows, maybe things will actually get better if we were to adopt a zero tolerance towards it. Maybe we need to eradicate such filth instead of hoping people will not be influenced by it.
    Fascism, racism and homophobia are not. They are a cancer that must be destroyed.
    Frankly I don't see much difference from banning racist hatred talk and banning nazi/fascist talk. They're both as odiuos as each other. But then I have always thought 'freedoms' ought to stop at the door of fascism/nazism, and that their supporters shouldn't have the same privileges and rights as the rest of us. They're subhuman scum outside society.

    And so on......you go on and on in this vein over and over.

    Add in all the time you have said that the law should do something and you really are a very anti-social individual indeed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So other than the first example, when I was talking about someone picketing your son's funeral with homophobic messages (hardly wanting to harm people I don't agree with as a general rule, don't you agree :rolleyes: ) you still haven't found any evidence to prove your claims.

    Keep digging Klintock. The world could do with a trans-planet Britain-to-Fiji tunnel.

    Now if you excuse me...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Look, you asked me to show you an example of your attitiude towards using violence towards those you don't agree with. As you have a feeble try at justifying your violent attitude (at a funeral, you whine) that's all you do. Your in favour of using violence to get what you want, providing we can clean it up a bit and call it "legal" or something.

    i.e. your a fascist, violent nutcase who is almost totally lacking self awareness.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whenever Aladdin uses the word subhuman it always reminds me of Mein Kampf.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    Look, you asked me to show you an example of your attitiude towards using violence towards those you don't agree with. As you have a feeble try at justifying your violent attitude (at a funeral, you whine) that's all you do.
    You really do have some serious comprehension problems don't you.

    Either that or you're just pretending you don't get it, because the hole is now far too deep to get out of and the spade has broken.

    So where is that evidence Klintock?

    You cannot back up your claims can you?

    Well, that'd be a first...
    Your in favour of using violence to get what you want, providing we can clean it up a bit and call it "legal" or something. i.e. your a fascist, violent nutcase who is almost totally lacking self awareness and blah blah blah YAK YAK YAK YAK!!.

    mouth4yh.gif
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You really do have some serious comprehension problems don't you.

    How does a government get people to do what it wants them to do?

    Force, violence, threats.

    How does a government get people to do what you want it to do?

    Force, violence, threats.

    So, if you are in favour of a government doing things for your benefit, you must be in favour of violence to get what you want.

    Simple, even a five year old could follow it.

    Now, whether you accept state violence as legitimate or not isn't relevent here. Or are you so mentally unhinged that you are going to say that "state" violence isn't violence at all?
    So where is that evidence Klintock?

    Aside from what i just said and -
    it should be your right to kick them repeatedly in the face until it is a bloody mess, and then have them jailed on charges of general cuntiness.

    Theres plenty more examples of that from you on the boards Al, but it's tangential to the point I am making. Off you pop and be violent, but don't deny it, you just look daft.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh dear... your capacity for reasoning and analysing takes a massive dip whenever it fits you, doesn't it?

    What other examples would those be? Really?

    Since you are claiming that I threaten anyone I don't agree with with physical violence, why don't you go and ask any of the hundreds of posters I have disagreed with on these boards alone (some of them on a nearly constant basis) and see if any of them can confirm I have threatened them with physical violence?

    Well?

    Stop lying. Stop digging. Stop making things up.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think what he means is that the methodology to achieve these forms of governments is the same, using threats of violence etc etc etc but you can't say fascism and communism and capitalism are all the same as they have different ideologies.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    I think what he means is that the methodology to achieve these forms of governments is the same, using threats of violence etc etc etc

    Except that that's an analysis only fit for a GCSE level essay, if that. The truth is way more complex. Klintock has a problem with the real world I think.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Since you are claiming that I threaten anyone I don't agree with with physical violence, why don't you go and ask any of the hundreds of posters I have disagreed with on these boards alone (some of them on a nearly constant basis) and see if any of them can confirm I have threatened them with physical violence

    I never said you wanted to do it personally, did I? :confused:

    Just that you are quite willing to employ others to do it for you through theftation.
    Stop lying. Stop digging. Stop making things up.

    Well, yeah.
    I think what he means is that the methodology to achieve these forms of governments is the same, using threats of violence etc etc etc but you can't say fascism and communism and capitalism are all the same as they have different ideologies.

    I am aso saying that they have an identical structure in the real world (as do barrett homes and McD's for that matter) that the political language is designed to hide, whether that be "divine right of kings" or "for the people, by the people" or anything else.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Except that that's an analysis only fit for a GCSE level essay, if that. The truth is way more complex. Klintock has a problem with the real world I think.

    I would say that your the one with the problem. Making something simple like "one man robs another" into something complicated like "not paying your fair share" is the sort of error your really, really good at making.

    By all means pull me up on the specific analogy I have used rather than get the point. Your good at that too. :rolleyes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:

    I am aso saying that they have an identical structure in the real world

    Errr...except they don't.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    I never said you wanted to do it personally, did I? :confused:

    Just that you are quite willing to employ others to do it for you through theftation.
    LOL!

    Nice one Klintock.

    I can now safely let the ignore function resume its work.

    Have a nice week.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Have a nice week.

    You too, you violent nutter. :p
    Errr...except they don't.

    Really? How come you think that?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:

    Really? How come you think that?

    Because they don't. As you would know if you bothered to learn something instead of wanking on about stuff you obviously know shit all about.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh but they do Mr. B.

    You are thinking that the political labels mean anything. As though a roomful of sergeants don't have a leader or something. I can only imagine how little you use them senses you have.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Can someone translate for me?
Sign In or Register to comment.