NWO; Totalitarism/Libertarianism; leftism...

Remove all ads!

I'm calling bull****.

The 'communist criminals' as you say didn't have power in Spain until Russia was sending them weapons. Fanco/the other guys with him started the rebellion before communism had its arse into gear - against the Republic or so-such.

And how do you think we should deal with the fascists who raped and murdered entire cities...? Oh - but it's all justified because they stopped communism! Yeah, I suppose massacring people is a great way to stop it...

It's all very nice to simplify things into the good nation-saving fascists vs the evil nun-raping communists - but it is absolute crap.

 

First of all, I'd like to say that I - similar to Chandos - feel that it is good to have someone like you here on the boards, Svyatoslav - good breath of fresh air and all that. Moreover, I like your style and appreciate your efforts to answer each and every post directed agaibst you - even if those are unobjective at times.

I haven't quite understood what the fuzz is all about, though. We can certainly discuss some tendencies found in today's world that move beyond the idea of national states and are - in my opinion - a result of a millennia old struggle. This would include points 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 of the wikipedia article. The extrapolation to the other points, though, seems to be a bit arbitrary and hence seems to be more adjacent to an agenda of the author than to real life. The context in which gun ownership is linked to private property in point one could give you a clue. And concentration camps for "free-thinkers". C'mon, please!

Now, the points that I think are objectively real seem to hold enough explosive contents anyway, so maybe it is enough to stick with them rather than taking a voyage into dream space.

Your main arguments which I extract from your well phrased posts are that a) we Europeans live in a totalitarian world today without b) noticing. It appears to be sufficient to merely discuss a), so we don't have to insult each other with statements about who's more brainwashed by right- or left-winged media. An answer to a) leads to a statement regarding b) in any case.

Does the state meddle too much with our lives – like displayed in the millions of examples you have provided? Three things that stuck to my consciousness were the prohibition of the display of religious symbols, the risk of getting jailed for displaying symbols of National Socialism and spreading the respective ideology and, yeah, well, the risk for getting jailed for denying your children the compulsory education. All shockingly happening in Germany today.

Display of religious symbols is not prohibited – unless you work in the civil service or as a teacher, of course. Why’s that? It’s because the state feels that the opinion of the individual is a thing to be highly valued. Since each state - and by no means only the totalitarian regimes – is trying to influence their subjects, it is understandable that the state dictates the opinion to be spread by representatives and the educational system. This is a necessity we call “building the political consciousness”. The contents of this political consciousness may vary, though – a purely democratic process, not really a totalitarian one.

Display of Nazi symbols along with shouts of “Sieg Heil” is a German speciality that can hardly be generalized across Europe. It could be worthwhile to discuss why we think of this prohibition as necessary and correct – indeed, it would be interesting to see how our European neighbors would be reacting if we abandoned this prohibition and let thousands of Germans roam our streets with swastikas and SS-uniforms. The point is that this special restriction of displaying your opinion in Germany is to be accounted for by the German history and not really a sign of a loss of freedom of speech that will eventually reach the whole of Europe.

Then there is home schooling. I have the feeling that you will correct me on this – but I don’t see how you favor home schooling over compulsory education based solely on the notion that “parents ought to raise their children as they see fit”. Firstly, I’m under the impression that you would not look too kindly upon children being raised in homosexual environments without giving them the opportunity of hearing the word of god throughout their youth. Or children being raised in a leftists environment (whatever that means) without giving them a good taste of what it means to be, say, Elbonians, what their Elbonian heritage means and what duties and responsibilities come along with being Elbonian. Again, correct me if I’m wrong here.

Secondly, you are under the impression that the state is raising the children in Germany. That is blatantly untrue. Raising a child covers a bit more than educating a child, that’s trivial. We could discuss how much influence a school really has over an impressionable child and we could discuss where to draw the line between building a political consciousness and brainwashing. A state without agenda, on the other hand, is not a state anymore, mind you, but little more than an administration. I think we can agree that we want a state to have a definite opinion.

I just remember the point of charging husbands for not doing homework as a clear sign of a totalitarian state. I don’t find this argument holds under closer scrutiny. Is charging people a fee for driving a car a sign for a totalitarian state as well? Thought so.

Frankly, I don’t see what the fuzz is about and where you are denied to express your thoughts and live according to the dictum of your cultural heritage. It is good to see that you are thoughtful and have invested quite some time in finding your nationalistic views. Let me assure you that many people in Germany who claim to value their nation have not a really clear idea about what the cultural values of Germany really are. It is good to see that you are an exception.

Lastly, I’ve got a question concerning the title of the thread. I’m not a political scientist, but isn’t the term “totalitarianism” a bit outdated? The normative offspring of the classification of a state as being totalitarian is the positive of the pluralistic western democracy. Since this positive is not included in empirical, analytical observations regarding its own standards the
Term „totalitarian” can be applied a bit arbitrarily and is hence a bit void of real meaning. Furthermore, we clearly have a separation of legislature, executive and judiciary in Western Europe – so maybe you do not really want to talk about totalitarianism but rather about the same contents as in your tolerance thread? Somehow both threads lead to how it is lamentable that some of us are not allowed to express themselves freely in this world. As can be seen in all those threads, some of us think this is due to leftist brainwashing and others think that this is due to right-winged gibberish asking for tolerance from others where none is granted by one self. I’m not sure that there is some room for manoeuvring between those positions.

 

This comment belongs in AoLS. This is an example of a political post. It is the reason why AoLS was created in the first place.

 

Does the fact that Picasso was a communist makes him unreliable or does it mean that the massacre never took place? Or do you believe that it was justified because they were communists, socialists or whatever?

From their point of view they allied themselves with those who would help them defeat the communists conquerors of their countries. Also do you have mixed feelings towards Vlassov mainly because he was an anticommunist Russian and not an Esthonian for example? Afterall, he did exactly what the baltic volunteers did, he allied himself with those who seeked to exterminate the russian people and it would seem more logical to me to bash him much more than any baltic volunteer.

So, if i understand you correctly, communists must not have civil rights.

This is exactly what happened but since you said that Franco and Pinochet, who based their rule on terror and on secret police, are no more totalitarian than democratically elected leaders, I have nothing more to say on this matter, it will be in vain.

It isn't an illusion, it's a reality. Just look how many laws and policies have fallen or never passed because of the protest of people. The EU constitution is the most recent example. Do you think that you could do something similar in a nationalistic state?

 

I don't know, it depends. When are you getting banned for trolling?

So, just because they are entering a country labeling themself as free instead of staying in an oppresive regime, they are insurgents out to destroy us? Yes, you are not a Xenophobe, indeed.

Actually, it's affecting the Orthodox and Conservative Müslims, who are not allowed to wear their traditionalistic clothes, more than it's affecting the Christians, who are not allowed to what, wear their crosses in a chain? El oh el!

I didn't say I did support it, but I can see how they are thinking. And, by your way of thinking, it should be legal to walk around with swatzikas in school. After all, invidual freedom.

And I never claimed it as such. However, if you don't like how it is in Germany, move somewhere else. That's what's great with the free world.

Ahh, yes, the government spouts propaganda in school, not allowing any views opposing their own. Please, tell me how the nazi party is growing strong in Germany again. Magic?

Yes, that is exactly what I ment. I can't believe you managed to find out my secret agenda to take over the world. Damn you!

Actually, if people don't like it, they can try to, I don't know, do something about it? Compared to what you've been brainwashed to, we DO have Elections here in Western Europe, it's just that those are issues people don't care about. Like it or not, that's how it is.

*bleep*

Wrong again. You don't know my views, and if you did, you would know that I am a Syndicalist.

Reality?

Oh, I don't know, but someone who uses Ann Coulter in the way they do, they must be Socialist. Yes, all hail Comrade Murdoch and his Red Army of Reporters! VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!

Please, do that too, instead of saying it and then dismissing it due to it being no proof.

No, it's called equality. In Spain, the women are largely oppressed because they are often supposed to stay home, instead of earning money. Besides, he said he would enforce this if he were elected, and now he does. If you didn't like it, you voted for someone else.

Not very.

Social-Democratism is NOT opposed to the invidual, FYI.

Yes, but he is not close to being a Communist. Nethier is Kim Il Young, Fidel Castro, Raul Castro, or the Chinese Government.

Did I say so? No. Notice the Neo in Neo-Nazism? Yeah, that means new, for those of you who don't know latin.

How about stop talking bull****, then maybe will listen? You have done nothing but spouting lies and bull****.

I live in a Social Democratic nation. Ever heard of Göran Persson? Yeah, I thought not. I am still in school, but you have NO idea what I'm studying. Politics and History. Yeah, strange, isn't it?

You do, very ignorant actually.

No, but I thought I would stoop to your level a bit. Sorry, will try to avoid it.

Yes, he only takes in foreigners for prestige and to delete all traces of Spain. Let's rename it Foreignland, where we oppress Christian and rape whites.

And if they don't like how he is helping the people, THEN VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE!! It's not so ****ing hard to understand.

Who says I do? I just don't want to force my ideas on people who are not Christians. It's called respect, and you need to get used to it.

Yes, it does.

Sorry, but I'm not going to call you grown up. You sounds like my Neo-Nazi classmates I used to discuss with five years ago. The same way of discussing, the same lack of intelligence.

We can. Meet Chevalier, Hacken Slash, and Blackthorne TA. They are all conservatives and members of this forum, and I've never called one of them a Nazi, because they use valid points, while you use the dung of a bull to discuss.

No, because you talk and act like a Nazi. And you know what they say about the lady who looked like a tramp...

 

First of all, I dont see the need to use quotation marks for people who raped nuns and killed prists.
To say Franco started a Revolution before communism had "its arse into gear" is a gross misinterpretation.
How do you explain commies were deeply organised in Spain? You know, armies can not get ready out of the blue like that.
Communism was fastly spreading in Spain; there was the terrible example of Russia already, and a good Christian like Franco had the duty to annihilate it.

They did? Fascists killed a lot of commies, that is much is true - gladly - but they did not rape women. That seems like a speciality of commies.
Just look at the numbers of the Spanish Civil War, and then take a look at the 20 millions Russians/Ukrainians/Belarussians murdered by commies, or the dozen millions Chineses...

No, it is not, because it is historically accurate.
Anyway, I dont see why we are calling Franco or Pinochet fascists. They were good Christians fighting the red plague, that is all.
---------------------------------------------------

Darkthrone,

You are one of the few who makes objective criticism regarding my views, for which I am glad. Let me try to refute your claims now, because I think some things got a bit misunderstood.

I can agree with that. It is good that you can certainly see that tendency, because any who deny it, either is blind or has a personal agenda in hiding the path the World is taking.
However, as I said before, these points were a good summary, not exactly the real truth of the issue. There might be a bit exaggeration in some point, but overall I agree this tendency is quite real.

I agree. Discussing objective and real examples is the best way to prove or disprove my claims. You singled some of them, but I see you are still not convinced with my arguments. Let me try again.

Ok, I both agree and disagree, depending on how we look into this. Let me go step by step.
First of all, you claim any state - or better goverment - ought to spread the ideology they see fit. Thus, it is understandable that they try to influence people by telling how their representatives and educational employers should act, in order for the population to look after their examples and, as a result, making the “building the political consciousness” possible. Am I assuming right?
There lies the danger of such position, because this is exactly how Gramsci envisioned society. As I already said, Gramsci was a commie, and I mention that, because it is a relevant information, considering he tried to create a new form of totalitarian communist state, which acts in a suble form.
When the goverment try to influence people's minds like that, they are going a step over than merely securing the policies of the State are being enforced. Why is that? Because they are using their power - and who has more power than the state itself, even more the welfare-styled state? Their power to indoctrinate people according to the ideology the see fit. And who provides the state such monopoly over violence - as Max Weber put? We, the civil society, by our taxes and willful submition to state issued laws. In other words, in such scenario the goverment is getting hold of the power conceeded to the state - which they represent, but dont own - in order to enforce the maintenance of their position of domination. Of course the state has the right - even the obligation - to enforce it's policies - which I think should be minimal - after all, the goverment was ellected to ensue that.
However, when the goverment spend too much means in order to influence people's views, they are rather using and abusing the power granted to them to make sure they remain in power for longer, instead of actually representing the population, which is the reason of their appointment.
This is where Gramsci fits in - and these social democrat politicians are well versed in Gramsci I assure you. The state no longer exists to maintain order and security for people, but as a tool for the spreading of the ideology of those in power - the goverment. We have a clear confusion between state and civil society, and even between state and goverment when we let this situation to happen. Because, the ending result will be that the party in power and the civil society will be one and the same. This is what Gramsci named "organised civil society".
Notice the state trys to influence our minds by all means possible. Do you really believe all those NGOs out there are not sponsored by the goverment? Most of these NGO serve to auxiliate the spreading of the message of those in the goverment, because otherwise they would not be able to.
It is not a totalitarian scenario, not a explicity one like URSS, but when the goverment applies it's forces to convince civil society of their ideology, to make the party and the civil society one entity, I call that a subtle attempt to make a totalitarian state, even if violence is not used.
I talked more about Gramsci in the tolerance thread, so I will finish it now. Furthermore, I realise this is not exactly what you meant - or so I think - but I wanted to share why I think your idea that it is "understandable" that a state tries to influence people's minds is very dangerous.
Ok, now to be more specific to your quote, I dont really think it is bad that a teacher or a goverment politician would use a cross pendant, if they are Christian, even more considering France has always been a Christian Nation.
Using a religious symbol is a display of personal faith, and the mere usage of it does not imply that he is acting against the goverment policies. Also, would you not be suspicious of a state that has as a policy the prohibition of religious symbols of it's subjects? How is that challenging or putting in check the order and stability of the goverment? Unless someone view religion as a poison, it does not.
Furthermore, dont you agree a teacher has a much farther direct relation to the goverment than say the president? I dont know how that works in France, but arent teachers approved in public contests? Say, someone who is teaching for 20 years, who is very religious, and has always used a cross, suddenly has to stop using it because a new goverment thinks this is reprehensible? But how much power should this new goverment have over this teacher? That is one major problem, burocrats being given more and more power to interfere in people's life like that.
As for the concrete situation in France, I should also note your argument is false. Children were also denied the right to use these symbols, not only "goverment subjects".
I guess I drifted too much. I will make other considerations as you answer those ones firstly.

First of all, commie activists are fully protected under the law, and it can easily be proven with historical facts that communism did more harm than nazism. Why the double standards? If we should accept your argument that nazism is banished because it is evil, then communism should as well.
Secondly, I know band members from neighbour countries to germany who got their homes invaded by the police because of their "extreme" ideology. I say that to refute your claim that this is something particular to germany. I say this is happening in most places.

You make good points, but let me tell you what I mean.
First of all, it is not a matter of which is better: public education or homeschooling. The issue is that the goverment is depriving parents of giving their children the education they think it is the best, or the right one for them. The state is taking away an attribution which has always been of the civil society - parent's education - and assuming it is it's own. Thus, the state gets bigger, civil society gets smaller, which means so do our civil liberty and autonomy.
As you might see, my first concern is that this ensues an even bigger state and a smaller civil society, but that is not all. My other argument is how this situation is dangerous and imoral - although some people dislike this word. Let me explain why:
You might argue: "What is the problem with a bigger state?" I should think the answer is evident, but if someone does not mind having his civil liberty being removed from him, no logical argument can convince him, so try to think this way.
Children should be educated by their parents - if they are willing to teach them - simply because that is the best way to assure they will have an unbiased education, and as such, be more independant and free from imposed ideological motivations. Politicians have agendas, and the power struggle of today is a clash of ideologies and interests. This already should give you an idea how a state that obliges children to go under stated issued education might harm a child's upbringing. Sure, you might counter saying parents also have agendas, but their main agenda will always be the well being and care of their children - we are talking about 99% of parents here. No ideological position of a parent would make him do harm to his own child. He can err, we are all humans, and he can sometimes commit a mistake while bringing up his offspring, but his purpose will never be this, and more importantly, he will try his best to avoid doing wrong. A burocrat involved in the power struggle, someone who is only interested in the spreading of his ideological agenda, will always disregard the well being of a child that goes through the educational process, as long as she is being given the education that fits his interests.
I should once again evoke Gramsci, who said commies should infiltrate in civil institutions, schools being one of the key ones.
What best method to ensue a totalitarian state than brainwashing children since their early years? It is even better if we deny the right of parents to counter our official and legal version of facts and things. It is twice better, because violence does not even need to be used, making people passive to it.
Think about the Platao Republic, or the Spartanic State. Both were states - the first one imaginary, never was put into practice - that had total monopoly over childrens education. By the age of 7 the Spartanic state would take the children away from their parents in order to educate them according to the state ideology. In other words, to become a warrior to live and die in the name of Spartanic Glory. Platao Republic would work out simillarly - maybe BOC can help us here? What do these all have in common? The individuals no longer exist to live their lives according to their arbitral, but according to the state-issued ideology - the ideology a few burocrats who believe it is right ideology to live by. No longer we live as individuals, but as tools of the state - which is ironically something artificial. What best method to ensue this confusion between state and individual than by insitituting a single and official education? Sure, European Nations dont take children away from their parents and put them in an isolated place, so that they shall undergoe their education. But when they deny the right to the parents to challenge the official and legal education provided by the state, isnt the result the same?
I would even add that what is done today is even worse than what was done in Sparta. Spartanic Culture, values and mindset were based upon War and militarism. Taking a child away from her parents to give her proper military training was something rooted in people's world view and values, thus, it was the natural and right thing to do. "No one" challenged this procedure, because everyone "knew" this was the right thing to do. To live and to die for the the Glory of Sparta, to serve as a warrior in it's armies was the sole reason for existance.
Our society is totally opposed. It is based upon individualistic values. It is rooten in the notion that we are free from the state control to live our lives at our volition - I dont mean anarchist type of freedom, I guess I cleared that much already, but just so before someone decides to add "anarchist" to the long list on insults hurled at me. Thus, how are we supposed to accept that the education of our children be restricted to the ideology of some goverment burocrats? How are we to accept that our children be raised to live for the state, which is hardly much more than a place of selfish fights for power in our day and age?
Haha. I was thinking about ending it here, but then I re read your quote and realised I forgot to address two more issues. I shall briefly.
Regarding the homosexual enviroment, I dont think that would be a problem at all, because I dont think homosexual couples should be given the opportunity to adopt children. As to why, I think you already have an idea, but that is a different discussion.
About leftist education... If the parents are leftists, it is a certain thing their children will be given a leftist education. No other way around. I dont believe in a Nationalist state that would deprive these parents the right to educate their children. I do believe, however, Nationalism sentiment should arise within people, within the civil society. It is the duty of Nationaists, such as me, to convince my brothers and sisters as to why they should look after their ancestors, to build a future for us, in which our ethnicity and Culture is allowed to exist freely and proudly. If this sentiment arise from inside people, if it is the will of us that our state should garantee the maintanance of our Culture, blood, prosperity and values, then it is also our right and obligation to build up a state that ensues these.
I hope you understand though, that I am answering lots of people, and as such, I dont quite have the time to detailedly explain how I envision a Nationalist state, and how it should be built.

Hehe. I drifted away so much above that I think I have answered this already.
I only wish to re inforce the idea that a state agenda is very dangerous, and that yes, it's duties should be more administrative than of other nature.
Who should set the agenda is the civil society, the state should only garantee this agenda is respected.

So far I think your arguments have been good, even though I disagree with them, but here I think your argument is totally nonsensical and naive.
How can you even compare these two things? Imagine the police coming over your home, at sunday afternoon, after a very tiresome week. You are there, playing Baldurs Gate - since this is PC RPG forum, although I might have forgotten that - in order to relax a bit. Your wife is there cleaning up the kitchen - I am sorry if I am offending ultra sensitive feminists here by my "mysoginist" stereotype. Then the police come and say: "We had charges that you do not quite act like a good and PC husband should act. In the name of sexual equality, you should be helping her do the cleaning, for sakes! You are hereby condemned for ultra conservative behaviour, and ought to pay a fee for your hateful, intolerant and backwarded omission, according to what was decreed by our most fair and martyr of equality Mr Zapatero". This is so sick I lack words to express my indignation.
I dont oppose husbands that help their wives, not at all. But this should be something agreed between both of them, not decreed by the goverment. I should think women are independent enough to pick husbands that fit their needs. If they marry someone who is conservative and does not want to help in home service, then well, I am sorry, but that is their problem - they could always divorce anyway.
This is exactly what NWO is about. A bunch os self proclaimed "humanists"; "libertarians"; "progressive minds" that think they are morally so above others, that they have the right to forcefully annihilate behaviours they dislike - "backwarded"; "sexist"; "conservative"; "extremist" - even if that means taking away your most basic freedom, prying into your personal life on the most absurd level - like creating laws to determine how should husbands and wives interact between themselves. That is truly sick and indecent. And people say Franco was a totalitarian?!

Yes, my Nationalists views are very important to me, because I hold my people and Culture before everything else.
As to what the fuzz is, come on, you can not say honestly Nationalism is not bashed as the most evil concept created by "hateful extremists".
As for germans cultural values, I am not german, so I would not know for sure. However, as someone who knows a little bit about History and such, I would with all certainty bet these values are not the ones shared among the young german folk of today, emulating rap "singers" and overall american POP culture - no offense to americans, I am sure you know where I am coming from.

The defitinion of totalitarian state can be applied to one that has a great goverment, and a small civil society. When individuals are subdued to the arbitrary will of the state, it is indeed a totalitarian one.
Yes, you are right when you speak about pluralism and the tri partition of powers. However, by now you should have noticed I am working a lot with the concepts of Gramsci, and his idea of a masked and subtle totalitarian state, which does not need to use violence to enforce it's will on the population, but has the full control and dominance over it nonetheless.
I know it is hard to deal with the idea of brainwashing, because people always want to hold the illusion they are free of mind control and of outside ideology/propaganda. However, that is the whole idea of a gramscianist state, and given his ideological contribution to social democracies, I dont see why this possibility should be discarded.
---------------------------------------------------

It means he is an unreliable source. I also dont buy this massacre rhetoric. We have all seen what commies do when they get into power; to annihilate communism is not only right but a moral duty.

Yes, from my people's view they joined the crusade to exterminate/enslave us. I could conceed a point if those SS baltic units were fair average soldiers fighting for freedom - as I believe was the behaviour of most Romanian and Hungarian soldiers - but they were not. They were criminal murderes, in the same line of germans SS and UPA, or the Ustashas. They commited the most atrocious crimes and massacres.

He did not take part in any massacres and crimes. He was Russian, after all... Not only that, but did you know he was not given equipment by the SS till the latest stages of the War, only when the germans were really desperate? Even when he could finally engage in the fight, he revolted against the germans and helped to liberate Slavic territories from them.
Bandera was the worst kind of criminal. Kaminski was better, but not exactly a hero. One of them is Ukrainian, the other is Russian. Am I taking their defense? No I am not. I can not see double standards.

Yes, communists should not be granted political freedom, because they are murderes and rapists. Unless you could point out to me a single communist goverment that has not been a total criminal institution.

As to why I say that, read my long discussion regarding this matter so far.
By the way, in all the years of rule of Pinochet, something like 4 or 5 thousand people were killed or missed. I suppose the communist regime which killed/tortured the least number of people was Cuba, about 100 thousand people. But then Cuba has not a big population like Russia or China.
I pity the Chilean people if good Christians had not saved them from these thugs. I am very proud Miguel Krasnoff was an important man in the fight against the commies in Chile. A great Russian descendent of a great lineage of Russian heroes.

To begin with, a Nationalist state would never allow such a stupidity as the EU constitution come to pass, because Nationalist states dont sell National sovereignity like that.
And saying no to a refferendum is quite different to protesting.
Regardless, protesting or not, fact is the state keeps eating away people's autonomy.

[ September 27, 2005, 08:11: Message edited by: Svyatoslav ]

 

Actually, if you'd care to read the whole passage, it talks about taking a wife from amongst captives that would have otherwise been enslaved.

 

Asking out for help so soon? Cant handle me?

Ignoring your name calling... Well, yes. You can destroy a people willfully, or you can innocently. As waves of millions of people come to your land, it becomes hard to preserve your own people and ethnicity.
And dont give me that "poor immigrants running away from oppresive regimes" BS. I remember reading in the 9/11 thread many people saying how they saw muslims celebrating on the streets because of the plane crashing. So yes, my conclusion is they are quite hostile to Westerns/Western Culture. Unless all those posters are xenophobes as well.

So, wearing a cross is meaningless? Maybe to your type of Christianism it is.
Who are you to say these clothes mean more to muslims than crosses to Christians? Are you a muslim supremacist now?
Botton line still is, France is a Christian Country, has always been, and a good deal of Frenches would wish that to remain so.

What were they thinking? Because I can also claim to know what they were thinking, you know.
Your assumptions hold little value really, regarding their inttention and my supposed support of swastykas.

I dont see how this should be possible, as I dont live in germany. but I suppose you did not mean you individually...
It is funny, I could claim as much immigrants who complain about "intolerance" or what have they, to move somewhere else. After all, it is a free World and it is a quite simple matter.
I am also glad you chose to ignore the more philosophical considerations regarding this issue - you know, the autonomy of civil society, totalitarism of the state, and all that I have written to Darkthrone. You are certainly not up to the task.

Growing strong? Typical alarmist attitude. But I know how these tactics work: scare people needlesly, so they are forced to take preventive measures against the "rising evil", even though this evil is only rising in the feeble minds of either paranoid people, or people who want to assure their control is tight.

I hardly think your response made any sense to my sentence. But I suppose you were trying to be sarcastic.

I still have hope you will eventually get it, even if it takes longer than 4 or 5 attempts.
People do try to make something against it. Werent the parents jailed, because they tried? It seems the german goverment does not allow that people try to do something about it, like giving an education to their children which is not according to the NWO.

Haha. That is really funny. I did read your warning DMC, but this guy has just admitted he is a full blow socialist - he preffers the term syndicalist. so I am not really calling him names or anything like that, just pointing out his admission.

Yes, as posted some messages above, I did not coin this acronym you know.

Hey, I do like your sarcasm, it is a pity you are not funny.
Anyway, somewhere else I explained to Chandos how I view FOX, neo-cons, etc.
I am sure you saw that already. I am sure you passionatly look for my posts. Thus, no need to repeat them here.

I did not dismiss. You must be seeing things. Anyway, if I am not mistaken, someone above has already mentioned to have heard of such a thing. I saw that on the news a while ago, and I dont feel like wasting my time looking for something yourself could. If you think I made that whole story up, then so be it. At least that would make me a creative guy.

Are you Spanish? Because I would be curious to know the opinion of a Spanish woman instead. You know, too many people like Zapatero around who think they can decide themselves how much group X is "oppressed" and how to fix this "oppression". I am certain I dont need the opinion of one more person like that.
By the way, what kind of equality is that? Forced equality can hardly be regarded as desirable... But read what I have written to Darkthrone regarding this instead.
As to your last claim, I find very hard to believe he promised something as absurd and arbitrary as charging husbands who dont help their wives back in home, during his campaing. Promised to give support to women to pursue their careers? Most likely. Promised what you claim he did? Nah!
Now it is I that should be asking a source from you.

Hey, a friendly advice: You do much better when sticking to these two word responses. You know, it does not require much... er, thinking?

I suppose I should take your word for it, as opposed to the proofs I provided otherwise?

Kim Il and Fidel Castro no? Hehe, yes, they are big bastions of Democracy and free initiative. Dont really see the need to comment further on that.

Arent we getting even more funny? Anyway, your original post implied a slightly modified form of communism can not be considered communism. Isnt it so fortunate - for me - that just in the above quote you implied the same thing? I mean, sure, North Korea and Cuba are not communists...
I tell you, knowing what latin prefixs mean will not help you, if you can not properly use them.

How about refuting my claims, like Darkthrone proposed himself to do? You know, calling other people xenophobes can only you take this far... which is not much.

Yes. VERY strange... if not a bit sad.

I will let others decide this.

It is not as much a matter of avoiding as it is a matter of impossibility.

Why dont you stop trying to be sarcastic? I mean... forget about it.
The reason why he does it is irreleavant. Fact is he does, by his own words. Maybe he is a NWO agent, I dont know?

He is not helping the people much by bringing in millions of immigrants with no real justification.
Unfortunately, people will have to wait for the next ellections. There are shorter ways to do it though. Where is Franco?

You didnt show much respect in this thread so far. And I fail to see how following Christian ethos is imposing your will on others.

Three words will also do.

Meaning?

Haha. I think I managed to make you angry or something.
I am glad Chevalier, Hacken Slash and Blackthorne are all much more intelligent dudes than I am. You know, it would be bad if all conservatives were stupid nazies like me. It helps promoting our image.

No. What do they say?
I do know what people call people who love to make ASSumptions though.

 

Heading off to school in a few min, just going to tell you that you seems to know extremely little about politics. Syndicalism is an off-shoot of Anarchism, with Socialism tendesies. It is NOT a Socialistic movement.

EDIT: First class canceled.

Sure I can, but I know how it usually goes for trolls who promote genocide.

You know, from all the Müslims I know, none of them celebrated the attack. Must've slipped under my grasp, eh?

I didn't say it was meningless, but a lot of Christians decided it was more important after they were banned than before.

http://www.sorcerers.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/topic/34/254/2.html#000046

You didn't answer my question, should it be allowed?

Ahh, yes, I admit I rushed to the point there. I would like to reword it;
If the German population felt that they were treated so unjustly, that it goes against their others ideals and morals, then the politicans will see results.

Right, want to know my take in it? It's ****ing stupid. But why do I defend it? Because, a world where everything it like it's in Germany now is a million times better than a world where everything is like you would want it.

I'm not talking about a fake international conspiracy, I'm talking about facts. How about you take a look at the election results not this election, but the one before? More properly, the eastern part of Germany, actually.

Right, once again, worded poorly. With people, I meant the entirety of the German people.

I didn't coin the NWO either, but I still know what it is, and that is bull****.

Yeah, the same standard liberal media crap. I've heard it all, and I've shrugged it off as paranoid bull****, and I still do. Want some links to real leftist newspapers, and not those right-winged blogs?

Don't flatter yourself.

Right, dismissing it. Gotcha! Way to go to lower the standards even more.

Are you Spanish? Because I would be curious to know the opinion of a Spanish man instead. You know, too many people like Franco around who thinks they can decide themselves how much group X is "threatened" and how to execute these "commie-bastards, their families, their friends, their neighbours, and their dog". I am certain I don't need the opinion of one more person like that.

It's better than inequality. It's called protection of the oppressed, those things that Martin Luther King Jr. managed to pass. Or, was he a communist seeking to overthrow the white supremacy, too?

Needless to say that you are not mister überposter, either.

Wait, bull**** are counted as facts now? Wooh! How about this;
Sweden is Social-Democratic. Sweden is a democracy. Sweden does not hate freedom.
Read that three times over, and make sure you have finally understood things a 5-year-old could understand.

Did I say so? No, I didn't even hint on that. They are not democratic, certanly not, but they are not communistic either. They both have created states that are fascist corruptions of the communistic ideals, just like Lenin and his buddies did.

Look, it's really simple. Both Cuba and NK are states that have never been communistic. If they had actually been communistic, no suffering would be needed, and no people would have to be imprisoned. They are about as communistic as Engsoss.

Yes, stooping down to your level is below my intelligent and moral ability, you are right. Shouldn't have tried to implied otherwise.

How about refuting my claims, like others usually do? You know, calling other people Müslim Supremacists can only take you this far... which is not much.

See it as filling the gaps that Franco created with genocide.

Ahh, yes, once again promoting slaughter and genocide. Who were you calling me a bad Christian again?
And Franco is dead and buried, like he should've been ages ago, before he got the chance to kill many ****ing people.

I give respect to those that deserve it. So far, everyone on SP have my respect so far, with two exceptions.
You, and Boo the Great. But Boo the Great still was a fun troll, since he was a classic one.

It's not, but trying to illegalize things such as homosexuality(especially since we have crap to do about what they do in their bedrooms) is not considered high on my list of virtues.

That I just compared you to a group of monkies that now doesn't go to school, but sit in jail instead. I would do it again, but DMC have already expressed that he does not want such things on SP, so I won't.

No, not really. More entertained. You are like something a liberal have made and joined the forums to show how dumb conservatives can be, just like that webpage about Abandoning the Troops were the reverse.

See, first you tell me to stop using sarcasm, then you make a poor attempt yourself.

I don't see how genocide of innocents are considered to be a Good Christians, but screwed up view of morality does that to ya.

And then, I'll let you know that I have straight A's(Or MVG which we call them here in Sweden) on those very two subjects, Politics and History. Other subjects with top grades are Philosophy, Religion, and Swedish. Strange huh?

And don't go and blame it on our poor schools. Sweden have one of the best school-systems in the whole world, and that have been proved over and over.

[ September 27, 2005, 11:07: Message edited by: Rutkowski ]

 

Sorry if I missed something in one of your posts--I freely admit I only skimmed them--but are you suggesting that the fascists of the '30s and '40s, didn't engage in all manner of, shall we say, acts of a less than pleasant nature?

 

I'm not sure I entirely agree with that.As far as I can see there is no evidence he was religous
But other than that, I can sort of see where you're coming from. (quote provided )

And

But even so that doesn't excuse their actions, (or those of supporting western governments)

The "idea" of the law was to prevent religous discrimination,france does have some history of this, however this wasn't that law wasn't the way to do it

Link to article quoted
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/12/11/91027.shtml

Not as far as I'm aware, seems to work in a similar way to in other european countries.

And the different between the 2 ideoligies is:
Nazism is inherently anti-semitic + preaches world-domination.
Most (not all) of the harm caused by communism was due to the fact Stalin was a pyschopath.
(Under Lenin, those who failed to meet goals, were fired/sacked, under stalin, killed/ enslaved

And how do you ensure that the parents are unbiased in the first place.

This assumes the parents themselves are unbiased. Whereas with public education there is at least the chance that 1 of the childs teachers will be unbiased.

This really depends on just whos in charge of such a state.

This sounds awlfully reminiscient of apartheid and Hitler's concept of an Aryan race, which can only be a bad thing ( I can't think of a situation where it could be good)

From what I've heard of the NWO idea, the "laws" seem to fit with it, however I have never before heard it associated with "humanists"; "libertarians"; "progressive minds", quite the opposite usually

It was 130,000 in his first 3 years.

It worked though, the nationalist state wouldn't have given it's citizens/subjects the choice, rather refusing outright (again depends on the leaders)

It is in Roman Catholism, the main religon there (90% population)

It's the same reason why practicing islam/paganism in public places is seen that way.
Paranoia and fear of difference.

@Gnarlfinger

Yes,I know what the whole passage says but out of context statements are frequently used by strict christians to justify other stances, on various issues so I assumed it was fair game.

Edited out comments related to trolling and specific people (replaced with below comment , clarified who quoted what. (didn't realise it was necessary to specify who was expected to respond)

Argue against the rhetoric being spewed but please don't resort to name calling

And a definition of trolling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
You may not agree with what he says, but lets not resort to personal insults

[ September 27, 2005, 11:55: Message edited by: edorien ]

 

edorien, please don't mix several users posts when you quote them, it makes for a really confusing read. Clear it up, and I might answer your questions and claims directed towards me.

 

@Rutkowski

Regretfully I've encountered SOME (not all) who did celebrate them here in england, and of course there were the news images that showed one such celebration in new jersey.
That said his conclusion is entirely unjustified.

You probably should have said they were. There is no religous requirement for them to be worn, There is for the skullcap/hijab.
(ie I agree)

Honestly I'm glad the world is like it is at present. However the reduction of freedoms is a notable issue, in respect to some situations, however he could have chosen better examples, than home-schooling in germany.

You could have pointed to a lot more places than merely east germany, its happening in way to many places globally.

Better than inequality by a long shot, but sometimes positive discrimination can be a bad thing, as well.

Lets cut down on personal attacks please, if he attacks you just report it to a mod, not respond with more name calling

I'm not sure I would agree with that.
Assume time-travel exists(it doesn't but still)
Would you be willing to kill an innocent newborn on the belief/knowledge that he would become said monster.
Now the different between conducting the massacre and providing the resources for said coup, with full knowledge of what's planned is what exactly?
(Pinochet, and U.S / U.K governments)

Out of context quotes from the bible can be used to justify an awlful lot. (see comment about rape + bible in earlier post)

Now then with regards to syndicalism

Can see as much potential for corruption in this as in the facist rhetoric on the other side (not meant as insult, suggest better "politically-correct" wording please )
It sounds an awlful lot like Marx's orignal ideas
ie while a good idea on paper, it won't work in practice. Unions are really rather easy to corrupt.

The only things in the initial post that were directed at you basically amounted to:
STOP NAME CALLING
(but this applies equally to the others hence the lack of seperation between those comments and the other ones)