Best form of government?

Actually.....if they are valid...then i'd like to hear why.

The guy pisses me off so much. Hes already insulted the fuck out of ghandi, yet failed to provide any reasons why. He thinks in terms of ideas and not practicalities. He quotes "stereotypical" socialist jargon instead of speaking for himself. He is....a lost ideological 15 year old, I grant him that.

 

I like him too.

*hugs cooloner*

 

*curtsies*

 

Thats much nicer than *cumming on one's face*

Anyway, am i a bastard? Or do you guys just like chris because hes a stinkin commie? Please clarify.

"Can you please verify your stance on democracy please". I'm sorry but thats arrogant little shit talk.

Arrrgh, maybe i'm a bastard. I'm confused.

 

Um. Democracy is important to distinguish in contrast to a proposed theocratic state, and all the values therein oblviously, which is what we were attempting to discuss in this thread somehow. I won't speak for Chris, but I think that was his point with regards to his statement.

I like Chris because he brings concisive opinion to a discussion and he does it with room for open-mindedness. I don't think he pretends to be a young pretentious know-it-all whatsoever. He's a deep thinker. He's cool.

 

Actually.......I think he is simply against theocracy because it is lower in merit than democracy in his limited style of thinking.

I never actually called him a pretentious know it all whatsoever so you must see some sort of truth in my accusations or at least understand where i'm coming from. I don't think intelligence or knowledge should be mistaken for deep thinking. Give chris a few years and when he learns to apply knowledge in relation to his own experiences and he'll probably be the smartest person here....but i won't give someone the time of day who's living in book world. Sorry chris, I do wish you the best.

 

You're jealous. And spiteful because of it.

 

Dont assume please. I'm actually more jealous of you or cooloner because of your attitudes and knowledge but i'm not too petty to over-indulge in it. Anyone who blames Ghandi for the deaths of millions at the hands of the British during India's fight for independence is just being ignorant and just pisses me off. I don't lie. or hide under a mask, I say how i feel. Don't tell me how i feel.

 

You seem to get affected by anger far too quickly. I agree, I think Chris is wrong about Gandhi, but I don't think everything he ever says is wrong because of it. Anyone who blames Gandhi 'for the deaths of millions at the hands of the British during India's fight for independence' I think is wrong, and it may piss me off. But we were discussing Tibet, and Chris still had a point - no matter where it is that he's coming from.

It sounds like you can be a little pretentious yourself. I think you may be dismissing Chris, because you think that he is young, inexperienced with application, or may be wrong about certain things. Even if he was all these things, I still think Chris is a deep thinker.

It would be a credit to you, if you could in fact give someone who lives in a book the time of day - even you do in fact think they are just a 'little shit' when it comes to Gandhi.

So far, I haven't seen you express your concerns for Tibet clear enough for me to understand, and I'm confused as to what it is you really think about it because you've been attacking Chris by claiming that his opinions on the matter are 'pathetic'. If he pisses you off, that's fine. I'm glad that you've been able to make that public. I think it might be time to move onto something else.

 

...Funny, I was gonna say that about you, but then I decided not to take you so seriously, you might consider taking yourself less seriously...

My original post, y'know the one you deemed "awfully unformed", was the subject of a philosophy paper I did in college 17 years ago (obviously the verbage was different, but the point was the same). I kicked ass on the paper and in the course, not that that means anything, but I do *THINK* from time to time, usually too much

Anyone can come up with an argument that will make a statement someone else made seem absurd if they frame it in the right context, but what's the point?

 

You based almost your entire argument on what i have to say about "Ghandi" when in fact it is but one example of the kind of thinking I RARELY like from chris. Please don't dismiss me as an idiot....I don't hold vendettas just because of one facet of someone's ideas. Because you don't know fuck all about my motives this might seem spiteful, but I am quite passionate about the dangers of utalitarian thinking, because it has spelled tragedy for humanity since the beginning of history, and i'm confused why of anyone, a young idealist would harbour such a strange attitude.

Actually, I'm only still here because you're trying to tell me why and why not I shouldn't say what i feel. Chris is irrelavent at this point. You often express your distaste for someone's attitude but I don't intrude.

Heres some food for thought:
Maybe you assign yourself the right to tell others what to think more than you would like to admit to the point that you think you can assign others the right to tell others what to think....

And I say MAYBE...because i can't cross the pacific ocean in one night and get to know you personally. Seeing as you are endowed with such psychic powers, why don't you guess my mother's maiden name while your at it?

In relation to Tibet. My ideas are simple. Tibet's way of life before chinese occupation was a simple and effective way of life that was in some way akin to tribalism, whilst perhaps suffering slightly from the faults of Theocracy. Ultimately a western style democracy would destroy the spiritual framework that made tibet the centre of wisdom and culture that it was.

 

But you clearly made no distinction between anarcho-capitalism and real anarchism.As far as my political beliefs go, thats like saying a Christian is a satanist. A big no no.

Wouldn't that touch a nerve in you if I blatantly distorted what you believe in?

I have demonstrated before that I am capable of coming to a compromise where I am clearly wrong, but I feel like both you and aristartle clearly misunderstand my motives and where i'm coming from and I will stick to my guns on this one.

 

Lying in a field, I'm sorry if you think I was trying to tell you what to feel. That was not my intention.

 

Did i say that? I can't be bothered going back and reading my post but apology accepted. I was thinking more that you thought you knew how i felt and i didn't think you did.

What i have to say is not based on personal vendettas but ideas that I am really passionate about, but I could have gone about it in a better way. If I took a leaf out of my own book I wouldn't react with so much anger.

 

*hugs*

 

*hugs back*

 

*cums on cooloner's moose*

(by the way, is such off-topicalness a reprimandable offence?)

 

i'm too charming...

 

oh you.

 

Aww Jeez, I come back here, expecting to be majorly flamed, and all I get is this:

You're no fun any more.

I'm still waiting on your explanation of this distinction BTW, did I get right, huh, did I, did I?

Evidently I touched a nerve that somehow offended you in my original post, and if that's the case I apologize, that was not my intent. You're an articulate and knowledgeable dude, as is Chris and many others on here. It's enlightening to read the stuff you guys throw down, and to know younger folks are sophisticated in thinking about these issues. I was like that in "the day" ( or at least I like to think I was, it's been so long it's hard to remember ), but then I grew more cynical, hardened, and apathetic as I got older (don't let this happen to you, folks), but I'm not a total lost cause...yet...

There's a wild theory I heard somewhere that we are omniscient at birth, and as we grow older we become programmed by the paradigms imposed by our environment, so while we grow wise with age on some levels, we become more ignorant on others...how's that for an excuse for being "uninformed"