|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 06/10/2007 : 12:41:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Chippewa
|
Thanks for your well thought out involvement with the talk.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
 |
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2007 : 13:01:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Cune, one must look at the world picture as a whole. We are moving to a one world super state that will be corporate communism in its form. I am not judging this new societal structure, only pointing the facts out. |
Except we aren't.
| When the regulation control is centralized what its regulated is centralized. |
Great. We can agree that the US federal government sets standards for, for instance, auto safety. Any privately-owned or publically-traded company that wants to sell cars in the US must meet those standards. How you see this to mean that transportation in this country is "centralized" is baffling.
Southwest owns its own planes, and decides what routes it will fly. The profits it gets goes to the shareholders of the company. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2007 : 13:20:09 [Permalink]
|
Cune, people have been working towards world government since the end of the great war.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2007 : 13:48:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Cune, people have been working towards world government since the end of the great war. |
 What does this have to do with the US being a communist nation? |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2007 : 13:52:25 [Permalink]
|
The U.S. being a leader in the world will need to be in the fore front of establishing the new order.
Meld current China with current USA and the results will be the model.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2007 : 15:09:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
The U.S. being a leader in the world will need to be in the fore front of establishing the new order.
Meld current China with current USA and the results will be the model. |
You aren't making sense and offer nothing but paranoid and baseless speculation. You have yet to demonstrate in a convincing way that the US is "communist" and your list of features looks nothing like the economic or political system of this country. Even your moving-the-goalposts attempts have failed. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2007 : 05:54:46 [Permalink]
|
Cune wrote: | You aren't making sense and offer nothing but paranoid and baseless speculation. You have yet to demonstrate in a convincing way that the US is "communist" and your list of features looks nothing like the economic or political system of this country. Even your moving-the-goalposts attempts have failed. |
Yup.
I don't think Jerome is an actual troll, but he functions like one. I really do think he's just this stupid with regard to this sort of thinking and debate and honestly thinks he's engaging in thoughtful discourse.
This "big picture" shit is getting so old. If Jerome is willing to regard the estate tax as an indication of the loss of inheritence in order to force some vague idea of supranational corporate-communist government to make sense, he's obviously poor in common sense and critical thinking skills. Jerome, details do matter. The kind of "big picture" notions that you have are so vague as to be practically meaningless. To put it another way, they could be applied under such a variety of conditions, they are not useful analysis.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2007 : 21:26:11 [Permalink]
|
All it takes is an understanding that history is not factoids highlighted with pictures and graphs in a text book(relating back to the education post: comparing what history was to what history is). Purpose is not isolated in the time frame in which an action occurs. When one now is couched in current ideology one can not see the past or future outside of that ideology. This has been an amazing education. Thanks to all.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 03:25:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
All it takes is an understanding that history is not factoids highlighted with pictures and graphs in a text book(relating back to the education post: comparing what history was to what history is). Purpose is not isolated in the time frame in which an action occurs. When one now is couched in current ideology one can not see the past or future outside of that ideology. This has been an amazing education. Thanks to all. |
So in other words, we are too stupid because of our education, and only you can see reality due to the fact that you aren't "couched in current ideology" and are thus enlightened? What a pompous jerk you are! But typical: unable to prove any of your outlandish claims, you resort to blaming it on our inability to understand rather than the fact that you're, well, completely wrong. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 19:27:49 [Permalink]
|
Cune, outlandish facts which you seem to be unable to discern. Your response has mainly been its not true because is not true because it is stupid. You have yet to think about the prospect. You entered the talk with a closed mind and as evidenced by your last response it continues non-skeptical.
In your first post on this topic: "you're completely wrong"
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 20:36:16 [Permalink]
|
Jerome wrote to Cune: | In your first post on this topic: "you're completely wrong" |
You are so full of shit, it's unbelievable. Right after Cune said you were wrong, he wrote: "For instance..." and then cited two of your points and explained why he thought you were wrong.
You fail to back up most of your vague claims on this forum, and when you do back things up, they are always countered with reasoning and info including sources (something you hardly ever do). Cune is right on the money when he writes: | unable to prove any of your outlandish claims, you resort to blaming it on our inability to understand |
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 06/12/2007 20:36:38 |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 20:55:19 [Permalink]
|
Cune said "And other points only apply in the most superficial ways.". also in the first post.
Yet point 2,5,and 10 are completely correct and not superficial in any way.
With these points we have 30% communism.
The other 7 points are to degrees.
Yes, closed minded. At least 30% communistic and the reply was "you're completely wrong".
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 21:40:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Yet point 2,5,and 10 are completely correct and not superficial in any way. |
Point 2: U.S. taxes are low compared to other industrialized nations, so it's not "completely correct" but instead open to interpretation.
Point 5: Two words - "credit union."
Point 7: Have you demonstrated yet that the means of production is controlled by the State? If so, I must have missed it. Especially amongst all that squealing you did about foreign companies taking over.| With these points we have 30% communism. |
At most I'd say 12%. Just those three. Add in the other seven and you might get to 20%. And following along with your use of "completely correct," then yes, 80% wrong is good enough for you to have been "completely wrong." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 07:00:47 [Permalink]
|
I would still disagree that any of the points really apply. I mean, while it's fair to classify our federal income tax system as progressive, is it really that heavy? The original point of a communist state having a heavy progressive income tax is to limit the ability of a person to become rich, and instead redistribute that income to others. But obviously we have significant social stratification in this country, and a ridiculous amount of wealth. Out of context, point (2) applies, but in the greater context of what it means for a communist state, it doesn't apply at all.
As for point (5), Dave made a good point. But moreover, aren't our banks publicly-owned corporations? The federal government doesn't own Chase, it's a corporation. Same with Bank of America, or Citibank, or even smaller banks across the country. So while some elements of banking are controlled by the federal government, I don't think it's the same thing as what existed in the USSR, or even in countries with real centralized banking. (Try to find a bank in Syria besides this one! [Actually, there are a few others, but that's a very recent development...])
So again, I'm not convinced that the system in the US right now resembles in any way the typical communist systems of the past.
And of course, point (10) is hardly unique to communism. That is, while providing free public education to children may be a hallmark of a communist state, it can be (and is) a part of other types of governmental and economic systems.
And of course, you have failed to demonstrate in any way that the other points apply in any way whatsoever-- not even on a superficial level. As Dave noted, if features typical of a communist state intersect with features of a democratic capitalist state in only a few tangential ways, I think it's fair to say that you're completely wrong. |
| Edited by - Cuneiformist on 06/13/2007 07:15:53 |
|
|
 |
|
USA is a De facto communist state
