"Congratulations. You're a dishonest kid. You'd prefer to twist somebody else's words to support your views. But considering you're already labeling yourself as a fascist just shows how ignorant you really are."
So you would rather have me get rid of Churchill's name and right my own?

"And if you really expect a sob story about how you get "persecuted" for you political beliefs to move me, you're sillier than I thought."
I expected nothing of the sort. If after 6 years not one liberal fuckhead at school has been moved by my fight (actually thats not true, some chicks have pittied me. But I have only been able to befriend die-hard conservatives), why should I expect some random guy who only knows the bad side of me to sympathize. The point of the story was to explain to you why nurture has taught me to defend, and fight for what I believe in. Something you call immature .

"But there is nothing quite like a little junior mass-murdering fuckhead that brings out the softie in me."
Your calling me a fuckhead. Is that just because I am fascist? And your calling me ignorant.

"Don't worry kid. You, like many of us, will wish you could go back in time and slap the shit out of your past self in ten years or so."
I honestly hope not, cause that would have meant giving in to the fuckheads who have been torturing me since the day I declared myself a fascist.

It seems foolish top me to deny cultural and yes, genetic differences exist between the broad phenotype groupings that we rather imprecisely label "races". Thing is, variation between individuals is much more pronounced than variations between "races". Therefore, attributing characteristics of a "race" to an individual is essentially stupidity personified.

Bob. Me and Jack are in the middle of something. Save your liberal propaganda bs until Jack has acknowledged that I am right.

You openly declare yourself of the political persuasion that was responsible for the Holocaust. Good show. I've got a lot of contempt for true believer Communists too, if that makes you feel any better. The Fascists in Germany and Italy racked up a body count, but Stalin managed a rather impressive total himself.

Even Jean Le Pen has enough sense not to call himself a fascist.

Your ignorance is based upon how you don't understand what a fucking quote is. You're changing somebody else's words, and then claiming they said them. Yes, you should put your own name, because those are your words. That would defeat your purpose, which is to have your words attached to Churchill's reputation, in order to increase their supposed credibility with others.

The credibility, however, has been destroyed by your patent disregard for intellectual integrity.

Fasces, are you going to claim that variation between individuals within a race is less than variation between "races"? What is the practical utility of racism?

"You openly declare yourself of the political persuasion that was responsible for the Holocaust. Good show. I've got a lot of contempt for true believer Communists too, if that makes you feel any better. The Fascists in Germany and Italy racked up a body count, but Stalin managed a rather impressive total himself.

Even Jean Le Pen has enough sense not to call himself a fascist. "
As people have commonly mention, I am not really a fascist. Just a right wing authoritarian. I just call it fascist simply to put a name to it, but I am to much of a supporter of capitalism to be related to Mussolini and Hitler. Also Hitler was a Nazi nor a fascist.

Franco and Pinochet is where its at.

Quote: to repeat (a passage, phrase, etc.) from a book, speech, or the like, as by way of authority, illustration, etc.
a phrase doesn't mean the whole fucking speech, it just means part of it. So if you can take part of it out, why not take out 2 extra fucking words? I do know what a fucking quote is, and you can't deny that Churchill said these 24 words within a 26 word passage.
"Show me a Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brain."

You change a quote, and it ceases being a quote, dipshit.

I don't know how simpler I can break it down for you. You're dead-ass wrong, and you're just making yourself look like a petulant kid by insisting that you're right. With this kind of stubborn ignorance, you're going to fit in with the skinheads really well, son.

First you call me a fascist fuckhead and when I call you up on it, you ignore that part of the argument. Yours also failing to acknowledge that your just as stubborn as I am. Proof of that is that we have been fighting for 2.5 hours and you have yet to bring a new point to the table.

new relevant point that is.

See, I'm holding you up to an objective standard here. This isn't even in the wild wooly realm of politics where there isn't an absolute standard. I don't NEED a new point, I'm trying to demonstrate how you're being willfully dishonest. And you're trying to weasel out of it. Be a man, admit you butchered a quote (that wasn't even said by Churchill, roffle). Own up to you mistakes. Like an adult.

Or you can continue to cover your ears and yell nonsense. Your choice. You're still be the same amount of wrong once you get done yammering.

I'm starting to wonder if you're the new persona of Diplofool/TMW at this point, because you remind me a lot of him.

If you wanted me to admit that I misquoted Churchill. I already did:
"you probably don't believe me though, simply because I partially misquoted Churchill."
"How does partially misquoting someone make me ignorant?"

"that wasn't even said by Churchill, roffle"
Your going to talk about how he borrowed the quote from Guisot?

also I am going to say I won this fight, simply because you logged off, therefore surrendered before me :p

A right wing authoritarian who believes some races are superior to others. Sounds scary. What are the implications of your ideology Faces349, in a practical sense?
For example, Hitler believed Jews were inherently weak and lacking in morals (as a consequence of their genetics, and not just culture): thus the practical implications of this is that they should be wiped out.
I don't think you are a Nazi, but what do you really believe Faces349? How does your beliefs about race inform your political/social/moral ideology?

"Thing is, variation between individuals is much more pronounced than variations between "races". Therefore, attributing characteristics of a "race" to an individual is essentially stupidity personified."

Well said Bob Genghiskhan.

So now I'm misquoted. I said the races are different, not one is superior to the other.

Jews are lacking in morals. They plagued our world with the monotheistic bullshit 2/3 of society now falls under. However its just their culture, not genetics, I don't hold anything against them and don't want to exterminate them.

I am a Authoritative Capitalist. Which I call fascism for short. is that misusing the term? yes. However right wing dictatorship, what other then fascism falls under that?

I said the races were different, from both genetic (nature) and culture (nurture) reasons, however the differences are rather minor, and as orathaic said in a different thread, diversity is good for the species.

"How does your beliefs about race inform your political/social/moral ideology?"
They don't. My beliefs are simple, semi-social Darwinism blended with absolute market capitalism. Unlike the Social Darwinists of the past, I don't want to eradicate people simply because of the color of their skin, I like the idea of survival of the fittest. If your fit enough to earn a decent wage, you'll go far, if not go die in a hole, society has no use for you. The only responsibilities for the government are:
1. Free Health Care Clinics (not full on hospitals. If you want surgery, you gotta pay)
2. Road maintenance
3. Banks (the only thing I actually think needs to be regulated)
4. Police (To easily corruptible otherwise)
5. Military (Allthough PMC/Mercanaries can do the trick)
Then place it under a nice benevolent dictator (more like an oligarch, simply because that would be to much responsibility for one guy) and the country is as close to a utopia as possible given the economic problem.

Yes I see now I did misconstrue some of what you said. Sorry about that.
Race just means family tree. So your race is simply people who you are related to. The trouble with this is families interbreed - there isn't a sharp dividing line between races; it's a continuum. And these days especially people don't always neatly fit into a racial category. So the concept is wishy-washy and not that useful.
How do we choose this benevolent dictator? Doesn't free market capitalism work best under a representative democracy. Look at the worlds most successful economies: Western Europe, USA, Canada, Australia etc.

Ah, Franco was not fascist! He was a falangist, there is a difference. If you are as smart as you claim above, you should know that from your research.

Also, before you chastise me on my spelling, I'm on a phone.

...wat

I'm on a horse

I'm on a boat

Perhaps Singapore is a decent model of what you believe Faces349? Superficially it pretends to be a democracy (or so my Singaporean friends tell me). Would you like your country (USA I am guessing), to be more like Singapore?
In this free-market benevolent dictatorship of yours- will you allow freedom of speech. I would suggest you should not; otherwise it might not last too long. You will need to stop the masses from rising up.

I wasn't clear above - I am suggesting that Singapore is closer to an oligarchy than a democracy.

"es I see now I did misconstrue some of what you said. Sorry about that.
Race just means family tree. So your race is simply people who you are related to. The trouble with this is families interbreed - there isn't a sharp dividing line between races; it's a continuum. And these days especially people don't always neatly fit into a racial category. So the concept is wishy-washy and not that useful."
More or less agree.


How do we choose this benevolent dictator? Doesn't free market capitalism work best under a representative democracy. Look at the worlds most successful economies: Western Europe, USA, Canada, Australia etc.
China.
Political ideology doesn't mean shit when it comes to helping the free market, only two things are needed:
1. Relatively political stability.
2. The government doesn't overly regulate business.

If a dictator can maintain both of the applied, then elections will decrease the progress of the country, and have a negative impact to the stability, economy and progress of the nation.

"Ah, Franco was not fascist! He was a falangist, there is a difference. If you are as smart as you claim above, you should know that from your research."
When did I say I researched France. My research on him was about 3-5 minutes of skim reading his Wikipedia article.

"Perhaps Singapore is a decent model of what you believe Faces349? Superficially it pretends to be a democracy (or so my Singaporean friends tell me). Would you like your country (USA I am guessing), to be more like Singapore?
In this free-market benevolent dictatorship of yours- will you allow freedom of speech. I would suggest you should not; otherwise it might not last too long. You will need to stop the masses from rising up."
CANADA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THOSE REDNECKS TO THE SOUTH ARE WORTHLESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pinochet is where it happened. His dictatorship turned the GDP of the country from being 2/3 of the South American average to 1.5 times the South American average. And he did that with little regulation of business (followed the economic models presented to him by University of Chicago in the 70's, which suggested no government in business).
I don't know enough about Singaporean politics to answer the question, but I doubt its an oligarchy, I bet your friend is just someone who has realized the faults of democracy, and the illusion to freedom that it provides.

"In this free-market benevolent dictatorship of yours- will you allow freedom of speech. I would suggest you should not; otherwise it might not last too long. You will need to stop the masses from rising up."
I would, free-speech provides ideas, and ideas leads to progress. Also I want to show that dictatorship can benefit the people, is killing them the best way to do that?

China is an example of a country whose economy is improving but the standard of living is still well below those other countries I mentioned. China doesn't have freedom of speech, among other serious human rights issues.
I don't think a dictatorship can be maintained without violating human rights. Would you want the USA to be more like China? I would argue that if China is ever to truly join the ranks of the first world nations it is going to have to become more like the USA. Sure it has had extraordinary economic growth - but it started from a very low base. Eventually the strict controls it imposes upon it's people will become an impediment to sustained growth.

"free-speech provides ideas, and ideas leads to progress."
Agreed. But these free ideas mean change of government when it is called for. Goodbye dictatorship. Other smart people with good ideas are going to want their turn.

As Putin033 said when we were discussing this in a different thread: Most people will generally approve of dictatorship, if they see their standards of living go up as a result. (The example he used was only 2% of French resisted Nazi rule) (@Jack: This is not a quote)

As Orathaic said in the same topic, the people of todays world aren't controlled by guns, but by tv's.

With a good life and good propaganda, dissent should be low enough to keep the country stable. Also if the people don't have guns, it makes it easier to prevent them from rebelling (aka, 2nd amendment is crap)

"Agreed. But these free ideas mean change of government when it is called for. Goodbye dictatorship. Other smart people with good ideas are going to want their turn."
They can make a few changes, change the legal requirements of certain laws etc etc. But ultimately one man isn't going to change much, and I would much rather use a cheque then a bullet to shut him up. (If his ideas are good enough to become a threat, then hes good enough to make billions making propaganda videos to counter those ideas)