1 - 10 Next
Socialism is a smashing success. It's purpose is to give money and power to socialists, and it does that extremely well. It even gives them the chance to murder their enemies in job lots betimes. How can that be a failure? What? Socialism doesn't keep its promises and make things better for everyone? Ha ha ha that's a good one.
You make an excellent argument, Tinsldr2, and I couldn't agree more. Mr. Bowyer has the right idea too--the lakes of blood that a revolution in our times would require in a nation as industrialized as ours...Heaven forfend! Which is not to say that it will never be necessary. Thankfully we're not even close yet. It's still a tug-of-war. Quite frankly, so long as the People are armed, there's no need for a revolution, but once that essential liberty is outlawed, well, then the time has come. An unarmed People are sheep for the shearing, and it cannot be allowed to come to that. Until we reach that tyrannical milestone, I think there's still hope for the USA as presently constituted. After all, that was the last straw for the Colonies too, and pushed them into rebellion against the Crown: the attempt to confiscate their arms.
The only problem with this strategy is it's just not nice. It's like clubbing baby seals, they're so intellectually helpless. They think they know everything, therefore they are incorrigibly stupid, ruining whatever intelligence they were issued at birth by closing their minds. I suppose you like tossing baby ducks into a pond full of pike too!
Leave the others aside, but remind them that the partial-birth abortion was designed by a male doctor...so does that make it a patriarchal plot to murder their unborn children?
In response to:

Armageddon, Act I

Renaissance Nerd Wrote: Jun 28, 2014 2:50 PM
I liken this change to the Hellenic/Hellenistic Era; we've got the Romantic/Romanticist era instead. We ape a lot of the forms of the Romantic times before the Great War, but we've lost the spirit, and just like the Hellenistic Era, we're looking at at Stoic/Hedonist dichotomy, further complicated by religions all over the continuum. What's particularly sad is that there were warning signs long before the outbreak of the Great War: the American Civil War, the Franco-Prussian War, the Crimean War, the Boer War. These all should've warned the powers of the time what a modern war would look like, but they just stuck their heads in the sand and pretended it couldn't happen. Just like now; our elites are ever more lost in fantasyland, and not even warnings like 9/11 can penetrate the armor of their invincible self-imposed ignorance. I REALLY don't want another Great War, because the next one will be so much worse. Yet the peaceniks are determined to ignore all warnings until we land right into WWIII (or IV, if you count the Cold War). "It needs but one foe to breed a war, and those who have not swords can still die upon them." —JRR Tolkien
This is a natural change that has economic origins. The continual increase in specialization makes it ever more likely that we'll hire specialists instead of spreading it out over everybody. However I would have no problem with the return of a 'well-regulated militia.' It would be beneficial to the nation in many ways, not least in creating a greater sense of community at a local level. And that's exactly what it would need to be to work; every town, city and county would have a militia unit, consisting of every able-bodied citizen (and today I would include women as well). The states could provide guidelines and create normalized regulations regarding weapons etc, but the leadership of each unit would be locally chosen, and trained by the state National Guard (or other specialists hired for the occasion). The so-called militia groups from the 90s were not militia; they were not community-based at all, and had no connection to any polity. The benefits would be individual, as people learned to use weapons and understand them better, losing any atavistic fear of them, collective, as communities drew closer and criminals discovered a sudden dearth of 'soft targets,' and national, as it would make the invasion of the United States such a grotesquely expensive proposition that nobody would ever attempt it. It would make the whole world safer.
I think too the point should be made that by making themselves tools of the Democrats, the news media has (I believe inadvertently) become the purveyors of racism. The way they handle news tends to increase racism on all sides, and the service they provide for the Democrats made the KKK superfluous. Combined with the abortion lobby they're doing more harm to African-Americans than the KKK ever dreamed possible. Who needs to lynch or castrate black men when the women are convinced that abortion is their only hope in almost half of all pregnancies? The racism of the Democratic Party has never changed, no matter their tactics. I think it's possible that a lot of reporters could be reclaimed from their racist paymasters, but I have no idea what it'll take to penetrate the armor of their willful ignorance.
I've used the example in #5 many times, but it makes not a dent in a liberal. They just reflexively say 'no they should be treated the same' without thinking about it at all. Yet it is the liberal argument that they're NOT the same. If all homosexuals are born that way, are an actual separate sex from male, then they SHOULD be treated differently and appropriately. But I don't expect any leftist of any stripe to actually think. They feel, therefore they are. Collectively, too. Plato's ant-like communism was prescient, we see the hive mind at work today. Join up, and one never need think again. All questions are answered, so no more questions are ever needed. Must be comforting in some ways, but no thanks.
In response to:

Elliot Rodger and the Left

Renaissance Nerd Wrote: Jun 03, 2014 4:12 PM
If we ever actually reached this mythical paradise of perfect equality, it wouldn't last five minutes. One guy would sit down and drink a beer, another would pick up a hoe and start gardening, and another would start trading his beer for other goods he wanted. One guy would end up with fifty women, and others would end up with fewer, based on nothing but personality, because we'd all have to look exactly the same too, be the same height, weight, etc. This is such ridiculous nonsense that the mind boggles, yet supposedly educated people can believe it. There is no cosmic equality; there never has been, there never will be. Justice is an approximation of equality before the law, and that's as far as human beings can get. The awful world Dworkin envisions is one he has no desire to visit, seeing as he has one of the most highly paid jobs in the world, compared to the labor he has to perform to earn his pay.
In response to:

Censorship Last Liberal Shot

Renaissance Nerd Wrote: Jun 02, 2014 1:31 PM
That is what science is SUPPOSED to be. It is not. It is a priesthood, and heretics must be dealt with. Almost any new paradigm you care to name had to wait for the last generation to die off before it became widely accepted. There are exceptions, like eugenics/racism; after WWII the scientific world fell all over itself to pretend that they never believed in such things, even though there was a time that racism was THE scientific theory, and anyone who disagreed with it was either a religious nut or a hillbilly. Reminds me of another scientific theory that holds the same pride of place today...
1 - 10 Next