marharth

Maybe you missed the part were he insulted me. I don't care if he wants to agree with me or not, but he currently has me ignored and I don't appreciate him acting like that in every single post in which he refers to me. He ignored me because he didn't like me or my posts. Now he just wishes to reply to me with insulting terms without having to deal with a counter argument. You are right, sometimes one cannot win. My overall point here is that everything the government does has something to do with force. Acting like that is always a bad thing is incorrect. Simply because the government requires you to do something for society, does not mean it is bad. I used taxation and laws as examples, that wasn't my overall point.

As much as I am loath to help out the 'non existent unnamed' if you violate someones Civil Rights there are federal penalties attached, from fines to incarnation. So the application of 'force' or coercion by the government is in effect even though the main thrust of the legislation is protective, it does have a coercive element. :wink: Didn't a moderator already warn you for doing something similar? If you want to ignore me then ignore me. Also csg, yes taxation is force. My point is that it is a necessary force. My overall point is that force is necessary in pretty much all laws.

I am kinda curious how the civil rights act forces me to do anything at all? And threatens me with violence? Really? Could you quote that particular part please? I seem to have missed it. I wasn't even the person who said that. I believe that was eodx9000's post. I was replying to what he said, and referring to taxation and other programs. I was replying to him because I found it strange that he would considering forcing people to follow a law like the civil rights bill would be a bad thing. I said "What is wrong with civil rights? Why do you consider a lot of those policies bad?" And he replied with "Every single one uses violence to force people into complying with something that is a moral or relative issue." Sounds pretty racist in my opinion. A good portion of the people here agree with him, so yea.

It is a bit funny how the same people who are saying "GOVERNMENT FORCE IS EVIL!" also support the draft. Just throwing that out there. I don't even know why I post here anymore since most of the members completely ignore logic and history. Half of the people here are supporting someone who straight up said they believed in a Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory. Since no one seems to notice, I will say it again. Society is built on taxation and threatening people with consequences. Sorry if you don't like that, but that it how the world works. A lot of you are replying to my posts based on emotion. Not even making real counter arguments or bringing up serious discussions. Simply because I use the word "force" you instantly consider it bad. You can say government force is bad all you want, but try and show me a large society that could work without it. Even when humans lived in tribal societies, there was still a leader figure that forced certain laws. Unless you wish to be blissfully ignorant of history, you can't honestly say that government force is not required.

I haven't read it. I am not claiming to know everything that is in it either. I don't think it is that big of a deal over all. Also why didn't you make the votes public MB? Could of been nice.

Even if there was some kind of conspiracy, is it really that bad that FDR wanted to help Europe from getting taken over by Nazi Germany, or later on the Soviet Union?

Seems like a good idea to me to force people to die in a unjust war. Also seems genius to pull the people who could help the future of the world out of college to go get shot at.

Then you have not been paying attention to my use of quotation marks, but that's like most people in general anyways. Every single one uses violence to force people into complying with something that is a moral or relative issue. Franklin D Roosevelt issued trade embargoes against Japan from middle eastern oil prior to Pearl Harbor, left Pearl Harbor wide open for an attack, and was racist towards Japanese people. Furthermore, Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamato knew of the consequence of attacking Pearl Harbor and remarked about how they awoke the sleeping giant shortly after the attack started. Intellectual property laws also use the threat of violence in order to enforce something relative. Like I said, I used quotes. To be blunt, I gave you the ability to disassociate yourself. Just like on the right, I'd be accused of calling all Republicans conservatives despite that I give them the same ability. But as for me, I see no progress in the willingness to use tools of violence outside of self-defense and objective offenses. That is kind of how laws work. You threaten someone with a consequence to be sure everyone is safe and treated fairly, and to keep order. FDR did not expect Japan to attack Pearl Harbor. Military intelligence pointed to other locations. Also once again, China was too important to ignore.

Can you give specific examples? New Deal Great Society Section-8 Housing Affordable Healthcare Act (the quintessential definition of corporatocratic legislation) "Civil Rights" / "Equal Opportunity" War on Drugs (supported by progressives with the same neocon mantra, in fact) World War II (FDR illegally declared war on by using interventionist measures prior to invasion at Pearl Harbor) Bosnia Vietnam (supported by LBJ) Iran & the Middle East (both sides are undoubtedly guilty of stirring up wars in the middle east just so their oil pals can get money) Guantanamo Bay (4 years later, no closure) Intellectual Property P.A.T.R.I.O.T. A.C.T. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. A.C.T. 2 N.D.A.A. A.C.T.A. C.I.S.P.A. S.O.P.A. P.I.P.A. (Whether started by, most are continued to this day by "progressives" that claim to be for progress when instead are actually for good old dictatorships.) Most of those are things that were continued by people who called themselves progressives. That or people like Obama, who simply acted like a progressive to get elected. They weren't actually progressives. Democrat does not equal progressive. What is wrong with civil rights? Why do you consider a lot of those policies bad? FDR might of provoked Japan a bit by stopping trade and some other things, but that was due to the importance of China. Entering WW2 is not an illegal war at all. Congress approved it and Europe needed. Do you think laws to protect IP are a bad thing? We require some laws for it do we not? Of course, it would help if the laws would be updated more frequently to match recent times, but that is another thing from not having it at all. For the most part you seem to be confusing progressive with democrat.

Can you give specific examples?

Yeah, sure. Job security is always a good thing, like airplane security and having a cam on every corner of a street. Britain should know more than anyone though, right? Thanks but no thanks. Pretty much this, really. The idea of "the weak" is a tool used to invoke emotion and as such, should be ignored. Yes, we all know government needs violence to run. Too bad though, the people you want to tax, are also the people wanting the same higher taxes while dodging them altogether. No one is forcing Warren Buffet or Bill Gates into not doing anything, yet they complain about not being forced enough. ;/ While neocons have done their fair share of damage, "progressives" have done even more while under the total mantra of being "progressive" instead. Hmm. The weak isn't the best term to use, true. I don't know what you mean with the rest of your post.

Again you couldn't answer my question and instead you parrot Chairman Mao again. I'am gona ignore you now because i can't read this Chairman Mao Crap anymore. When i wanna read such crap about the greater good i read Mao, i read Lenin, i read Hegel. Thanks for wasteing my time Chairman Mao. This just in, if you support taxation due to all of human history ever, you are Mao Zedong. Also taxation is communism now. Everyone government throughout world history was communist, nice to know. Also it would help if you asked a question. Kinda hard to answer one if its not there. Didn't see any question marks in your previous post.

Maybe I am wording myself wrong. Taxation is taking money from someone by force to help towards the greater good of society. Large governments have required taxation to run. It is the same concept. If you do not wish to contribute to society and help people not as fortunate as you, you should be forced to do so in some way. Sure, it messes a bit with the freedom of someone who is rich. But a homeless man or someone just making it by is still not going to be as free as the person being forced to contribute.

This isn't what i said but if you show that kind of reflex it tells me some kind of story. No. You not lazy because you use the internet, but you have over 3000 Posts and on nearly every topic i click her you make this clear leftwing statements about how money should be redistributed to "stand up for the weak". But what do you do? If you would be this care taking person, i bet this person would spend his time a more usefull way for the "weak" by raising money or work at the soup kitchen or give blankets than making 3000 Posts about how other peoples money should be spend. Than grap a broom. Do something. Why do you don't help them? Ahahahaha.... Dafuq? Seriosly? Chairman Mao would be delighted. This is completely wrong. No, we don't hung together as a society because we "sacrifices for the greater good", but because we voluntare to. No one stays in such a society where you have "sacrifices" for a long time. They run off cuba in masses and they runned off east germany in masses. I bet you never helped one of the "weak" you bother about yourself, i bet you never had a real job in your life and could experienced how hard money is earned, i bet you don't ever experienced how a community works in neighborhood or company. I bet all you do is spending your life in schools, maybee collage now, and debating on the internet how other peoples money should be spend. And this one sentence, the greater good, that could be from Chairman Maos little Red book and it was written in Chairman Maos little Red book also. This is collectivism, this is pure force and pure tyranny. If you wanna live in such a society, in such a sate, feel free to move to china. Goodbye How do you know I don't help people? Not really interested in telling you my personal life, but I highly doubt you have done anything close to what I do. What do people do in government systems and society? They work together, they have leadership that makes sure everyone is okay. They tax people in order to make society better. Taxation is taking money from someone and using it for others even if they are not willing. Did I really have to put that together for you?

if they are not actually willing to help. And that is what he calls the reality. Yeah, that was the reality in Soviet Russia and many other hellholes on this planet. If someone is not "willing to help", what gives? You have the right to ,,don't give a crap". If you wanna help the "weak", do it on voluntary base. But you also choose that it is more comfortable to play videogames and hung around internet forums, debating about how the world should be runned. So let someone else to pay for the lazy, the poor, the lucky-less and low lifes to calm down your conscience. Take from this person by force, don't care about him and his needs and what he wants, just calm down the conscience. Hey, if you wanna stand up for the poor just do it. Give them food and blankets. Churches and Charities do such things without forceing anyone. I use the internet so I am instantly lazy a person who never helps anyone. Nice logic. Churches and charities are not enough obviously. Society is founded on the idea of everyone getting together and making sacrifices for the greater good. That is what taxation is, and if you really think society can run without taxation you know nothing about history or economics.

That gives power to nothing. It has to be mentioned as a power of congress. If its not, its not a power of congress. Otherwise all the 14 powers would be meaningless because the first line of section 8 would give Government all the power to do whats mentioned there. You are not to dumb to get that, you don't wanna get that. Standing up for the weak? They don't stand up for the weak. They take from others by force to give it to those who they declair as "weak". People which live the life of kings compared to the rest of the world. What have you done lately to "stand up for the weak"? Gave them food and blankets? Social behavior comes not by force. "The Congress shall have Power To" You have to forcefully take from others if they are not actually willing to help. Charity only goes so far. That is reality.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To borrow money on the credit of the United States; To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States; To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures; To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States; To establish Post Offices and Post Roads; To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court; To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations; To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; Postoffice is mentioned. Army is mentioned. But public healthcare isn't mentioned. So, thats it. Its not in the powers of congress and thats it. But hey, a communist takeover is still a reason to celebrate for the lazy and poor as long as they think they will get something for free. America is gone. Once fought his independence it was brought back into the oldworld empire. Was it really that hard to miss "general welfare" in bold? Damn libs, standing up for the weak!

Clearly there are people on the right who aren't like I said. My point was that if you look at the things the right wing stand for, at least in America at any rate, it is extremely hard to say they stand for critical thinking. I am talking as a whole group, not individuals. One of the topics I was referring to was the death penalty one. A lot of the people on the right were saying that revenge was the thing to do there, and putting the logical side of things second. Also not sure how it is in UK politics, but the right wing commonly appeals to emotion instead of logic. Most of the examples I can give have caused topics to be locked in the past.

Like I said, out here in CA, that's being done by the left in spades. Dumbing down the education system to the point where it's just a babysitting service. Like how exactly?

One of the huge sides of the right wing is following human emotion over logic. Just read over some of the older topics. The right is rather outspoken about a certain something that completely destroys critical thinking. Also this just in, liberals brainwash kids to make them think certain terms have to do with video games. Obviously the fault of liberals.

Oh look another useless Aurielius post. Seriously this had nothing to do with the thread at all. Way to turn it into a democrat/left versus republican/right thread.

What are you talking about? There are others who believe evolution is false, and they do not subscribe to the flat earth theory? Not believing in evolution is the same logic as believing in the flat earth theory. And I would bet this is going to get locked soon now.

Why is everyone acting surprised? This is a country that has children recite a speech of blind loyalty to something they know nothing about.

Obama appointed his cronies in the Supreme court such as Sonia Sotomayor. A woman who is a Member of LA RAZA. They hate the United States and wanna destroy them. What do you think they would say about such laws? Also, public healthcare is not mentioned in Section 8 of the Constitution and so its ILLEGAL. But they don't care, because THEY ARE CRIMINALS. And TRAITORS. Americans buy around 5 million guns each month. When comes the secound american revolution? You wanna continuing this?? A Member of an Organisation which wanna destroy the USA rules about that an unamerican socialist law is conform with the constituiton. What comes next? "Big Insurance companies" wrote the public healthcare law you poor fool. How hard is it to understand that you shouldn't trust extremely biased news sites? Also how many times do I need to post this. "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States" Past programs such as social security have been considered constitutional due to that. This healthcare bill isn't very good in my opinion, but it isn't the end of the world. Just a small thing compared to the rest of the crap going on.

This is pretty much impossible to fix considering the first amendment. Its going to be like this for a while.