What's new
By:

Lol OBAMA and his "liberal" democrats securing tyranny

Why does Boehner pronounce his name "Bay-ner". Everyone can see what it really says.


































"Booner". What the hell were you thinking?
 
ElRoach0 said:
So you accept that by the same token, Marxism is Republican in nature?
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm afraid from the way you're setting up your axiomatic universe, you just don't understand anything.

People throw words around recklessly, and are generally either ignorant of word roots, or history, or logic, or much of anything else.

Karl Marx wrote a book, which laid out a theory of economics, government, and social progress in general. His theory does not exist in nature, and the Universe knows nothing about it, and disregards it entirely. . . . though Marx claimed he was describing a natural law of some sort. But in his whole description of that natural law or principle of progress he forgot his theory of inevitability just enough to go on at great length preaching about how some elite humans must intervene in nature and make sure it works out that way. So, of course, Marx was an idiot, and anyone who believes his teachings is worse than religious, and has been intellectually doped up and mesmerized out of the whole class of intelligent existence. Ideologically pure Marxists who will lie for their cause, or kill for it, have lost some of the essential positive characteristics of humanity. Saying they are delusional or degenerate human beings would presuppose they actually understood better at some point in time, but as I describe it, they have omitted one broad category of positive development humans should hope for. I think we all need to hope for that, and few of us really pursue it. I see other religious or political ideologues fail to do it, as well.

Check out our thinking to see if it is valid before we take a huge stand on a dream.

Yes, we have some Republicans, including the present RNC staff, who are faithfully pursuing Marx's dreams today. And so are some Democrats. They might not realize Marx preached their fond goals or objectives in particular as part of the path towards the ultimate paradise of Stateless equality among humans, but yes Marx preached that materialism must displace religious belief in God, and a lot of other things these folks are seeking today in their aims for social progress.

There are some Democrats who consider Marx a tool of Oligarchal interests, and some Republicans do as well.

But the core principles traditionally or historically embraced by both parties were not "Marxist". The progressive insinuation of Marx's ideas into their use of their parties has been gradual and persistent. I think it would be a good time to review Karl Marx, his financial backers and early devotees, and those who gave him legitimacy in our universities, and perhaps discuss whether those dialectical principles really are supported by evidence within nature, and ask the question, then, why we need to promote an ideology to make it work.
 
ElRoach0 said:
So you accept that by the same token, Marxism is Republican in nature?
Click to expand...

So, to address this more directly. . . .

Marx was not "American", and was financed by people who feared American Principles. Namely limited government, equal basic rights, no aristocracy or "nobility", representative elected officials accountable to the voters, and such. They were nobility, oligarchs, whose interests were all threatened by further "American Revolutions" around the colonial world. So they decided to front run a political ideology that would feign all the virtues inherent in the American Experiment. They had to figure out a way to work it, so it would be long-lasting and effective in dividing the people into manageable factions. Therefore, the invention of classes, and class warfare, and the incorporation of Hegelian dialectics.

But Marxism is a lie. When property rights are no longer vouchsafed to all, only the "nobility" will own property. When the government rises to unlimited power, it will belong to those "nobility".

And, no, sir, they will not voluntarily relingquish their wealth or power.

If you want humans to have rights, you would do better to study the ideas of the founders of the American union. Their strategies were build upon direct experience with virtually unlimited power in the hands of those "nobility".
 
That's the funniest and most tragic aspect of Marxism, imo. No, they will not voluntarily relinquish their wealth or power. In fact, they won't even relinquish their wealth and power when commanded to do so "for the good of the many," and you'll end up having to murder them. Super good fun times...
 
Gameface said:
That's the funniest and most tragic aspect of Marxism, imo. No, they will not voluntarily relinquish their wealth or power. In fact, they won't even relinquish their wealth and power when commanded to do so "for the good of the many," and you'll end up having to murder them. Super good fun times...
Click to expand...

It's okay tho-- the principles of Socialism have permeated the rest of the world since Marx's teachings, and they'll continue to influence US legislation until the end of time. Socialism is one of the best things to have ever happened to capitalism. Marx was a genius.
 
The Thriller said:
Cops need to have bayonets in order to...

Uhhhh...

Ummmm...

images
Click to expand...
nailed it. Babe's post about mobs with knives is preposterous, quite frankly. Why on earth an officer won't fire rounds at the assailant, instead relying on a bayonet (that wouldn't even immobilize the assailant in some cases) is beyond me. I'm much more scared of a pistol than a ****ing bayonet.
 
dalamon said:
nailed it. Babe's post about mobs with knives is preposterous, quite frankly. Why on earth an officer won't fire rounds at the assailant, instead relying on a bayonet (that wouldn't even immobilize the assailant in some cases) is beyond me. I'm much more scared of a pistol than a ****ing bayonet.
Click to expand...
you wont answer me, but do you even know what a bayonet is used for?
in closed quarter combats having a bayonet on your rifle/longgun. can save police lives. since when do we value criminal lives more then law abiding citizens and police. hands up dont shoot is proven false


but ooh wait

only black lives matter, blue and white lives dont matter.

yeah ban bayonets


take the high road again dal.

not saying every single cop should walk around with guns with bayonets.

but it should be in their toolkit. but they should also be trained in how to use it.
 
Last edited:
DutchJazzer said:
you wont answer me, but do you even know what a bayonet is used for?
in closed quarter combats having a bayonet on your rifle/longgun. can save police lives. since when do we value criminal lives more then law abiding citizens and police. hands up dont shoot is proven false


but ooh wait

only black lives matter, blue and white lives dont matter.

yeah ban bayonets


take the high road again dal.

not saying every single cop should walk around with guns with bayonets.

but it should be in their toolkit. but they should also be trained in how to use it.
Click to expand...

How does the rest of the industrialized world defend its populace and police force?

We here in Murika refuse to look outwards for solutions because... Because it is like admitting that we aren't all that exceptional or wonderful. It's okay to admit that we don't have all the answers.

With the weapons out there, rubber bullets, tear gas, tasers, etc I iust don't see any situation where bayonets are necessary. It's not the 18th century anymore.
 
dalamon said:
It's okay tho-- the principles of Socialism have permeated the rest of the world since Marx's teachings, and they'll continue to influence US legislation until the end of time. Socialism is one of the best things to have ever happened to capitalism. Marx was a genius.
Click to expand...

lol at Marx being a genius.
 
You know, I don't want to hear another damn thing about what guilt I have to carry from a Marxist. Maybe you need to think about the tens of millions dead and hundreds of millions of lives ruined from your ideology. A Marxist is just as good as a Nazi and should be shunned likewise.
 
Howard said:
lol at Marx being a genius.
Click to expand...
Maybe not a genius in the true sense like Einstein, Mozart or Goethe. but for sure a brilliant and massively influential thinker; more like Hegel, Nietzsche and Sartre in the way they changed the way people think and see the world because of the force of their ideas.
 
Jonah said:
Maybe not a genius in the true sense like Einstein, Mozart or Goethe. but for sure a brilliant and massively influential thinker; more like Hegel, Nietzsche and Sartre in the way they changed the way people think and see the world because of the force of their ideas.
Click to expand...

Influential? Obviously.

Intelligent? Without a doubt.

Somewhat of a lunatic? Yes.

The man flat out said there can't be peace until everybody agrees with his ideology. Sure sounds reasonable, huh?
 
The Thriller said:
How does the rest of the industrialized world defend its populace and police force?

We here in Murika refuse to look outwards for solutions because... Because it is like admitting that we aren't all that exceptional or wonderful. It's okay to admit that we don't have all the answers.

With the weapons out there, rubber bullets, tear gas, tasers, etc I iust don't see any situation where bayonets are necessary. It's not the 18th century anymore.
Click to expand...

not every single policemen. but like local swat should have bayonets in their toolkit
but some noob(meaning YOU) who doesnt know anything about weapons and (close quarter)combat says so.?
we should listen to you?
ok im sold your an expert at close quarter combats. bayonets are for 18th century.
 
DutchJazzer said:
not every single policemen. but like local swat should have bayonets in their toolkit
but some noob(meaning YOU) who doesnt know anything about weapons and (close quarter)combat says so.?
we should listen to you?
ok im sold your an expert at close quarter combats. bayonets are for 18th century.
Click to expand...

What kind of experience do you have in law enforcement/military again?

When should bayonets be used exactly? I want a specific example.
 
babe said:
Actually, I'm afraid from the way you're setting up your axiomatic universe, you just don't understand anything.

People throw words around recklessly, and are generally either ignorant of word roots, or history, or logic, or much of anything else.

Karl Marx wrote a book, which laid out a theory of economics, government, and social progress in general. His theory does not exist in nature, and the Universe knows nothing about it, and disregards it entirely. . . . though Marx claimed he was describing a natural law of some sort. But in his whole description of that natural law or principle of progress he forgot his theory of inevitability just enough to go on at great length preaching about how some elite humans must intervene in nature and make sure it works out that way. So, of course, Marx was an idiot, and anyone who believes his teachings is worse than religious, and has been intellectually doped up and mesmerized out of the whole class of intelligent existence. Ideologically pure Marxists who will lie for their cause, or kill for it, have lost some of the essential positive characteristics of humanity. Saying they are delusional or degenerate human beings would presuppose they actually understood better at some point in time, but as I describe it, they have omitted one broad category of positive development humans should hope for. I think we all need to hope for that, and few of us really pursue it. I see other religious or political ideologues fail to do it, as well.

Check out our thinking to see if it is valid before we take a huge stand on a dream.

Yes, we have some Republicans, including the present RNC staff, who are faithfully pursuing Marx's dreams today. And so are some Democrats. They might not realize Marx preached their fond goals or objectives in particular as part of the path towards the ultimate paradise of Stateless equality among humans, but yes Marx preached that materialism must displace religious belief in God, and a lot of other things these folks are seeking today in their aims for social progress.

There are some Democrats who consider Marx a tool of Oligarchal interests, and some Republicans do as well.

But the core principles traditionally or historically embraced by both parties were not "Marxist". The progressive insinuation of Marx's ideas into their use of their parties has been gradual and persistent. I think it would be a good time to review Karl Marx, his financial backers and early devotees, and those who gave him legitimacy in our universities, and perhaps discuss whether those dialectical principles really are supported by evidence within nature, and ask the question, then, why we need to promote an ideology to make it work.
Click to expand...

babe said:
So, to address this more directly. . . .

Marx was not "American", and was financed by people who feared American Principles. Namely limited government, equal basic rights, no aristocracy or "nobility", representative elected officials accountable to the voters, and such. They were nobility, oligarchs, whose interests were all threatened by further "American Revolutions" around the colonial world. So they decided to front run a political ideology that would feign all the virtues inherent in the American Experiment. They had to figure out a way to work it, so it would be long-lasting and effective in dividing the people into manageable factions. Therefore, the invention of classes, and class warfare, and the incorporation of Hegelian dialectics.

But Marxism is a lie. When property rights are no longer vouchsafed to all, only the "nobility" will own property. When the government rises to unlimited power, it will belong to those "nobility".

And, no, sir, they will not voluntarily relingquish their wealth or power.

If you want humans to have rights, you would do better to study the ideas of the founders of the American union. Their strategies were build upon direct experience with virtually unlimited power in the hands of those "nobility".
Click to expand...

Read;

babe said:
I realized the trap my own logic set, and how easily the bubble of "social team exclusivity" is burst. But I, like everyone else, have too much vested in said bubble, so I'm going to make it bigger. So "neener neener neener Roach0"
Click to expand...

It's not rocket science meets brain surgery.. don't pretend it's something only a select few will understand. It's very basic; social systems give and take from one another, or they perish. Monarchies fall unless the voice of the people is heard and represented(democracy). Socialism was almost wiped out, and then it adopted democracy to form the quantifiably most prosperous countries on Earth. Republics, like Rome, fall without a maintainable social safety net(socialism).

TL;DR, without learning from other forms of government, any one nation is doomed to fail.
 
DutchJazzer said:
more then you.
but if i start listing these kinds of thing you will just think it is a dick measuring thing.

so i concede your the expert
Click to expand...

Huh?

I'm just asking you simple questions:

#1 your experience in military/law enforcement.
#2 a specific example of when a bayonet would be used rather than the numerous amounts of alternative solutions currently available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top