B1rd wrote:

Rather than asking whether natural rights exist or not, the more pertinent question is whether they should exist. And the answer is yes, people should have the right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, and indeed no one needs those things given to them, they already have them without a government. The alternative is that "might makes right', and the state can legitimately subject people to unspeakable tyranny. It's easy to see who's right here when you advocate for people to be shot for the crime of doing nothing but wanting to be left alone.

B1rd wrote:

Thus it's everyone's moral imperative to stand up for what's right, even under threat of persecution. Otherwise you end up with what happened in the Soviet Union, where everyone's cooperation just made it easier to lead people straight into the gulags.

B1rd wrote:

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

Aurani wrote:

Let's look at it this way:
If you try to discuss something with someone and you have thoughts on the matter that are seriously, SERIOUSLY far off from the other person's point of view, there is no reason to discuss it any further. Lack of proper knowledge on the matter means you will NEVER be able to bridge that big of a gap and the discussion is always going to end up with someone going ad hominem.
The only reason to ever continue a discussion is if the other person's point of view is in the same ballpark, but you can't agree on certain intricacies of the matter being discussed.

So, if someone doesn't answer your post or anyone else's for that matter, know that it is because the person simply recognised how it will ultimately end for both parties.

B1rd wrote:

Problem with people who have radically different views than you is that they have fundamentally different presuppositions about the world. The other day I had a leftist tell me, honest-to-God, that hierarchies don't exist without Capitalism and CEOs aren't any more competent than your average worker.

But regarding what was said in this thread, I'm wondering if Vipper is going to just wiggle out of backing up his unprovable assertions, like how I don't know what I'm talking about regarding the Soviet Union.

Railey2 wrote:

Talking about unprovable assertions, do you think that a society without leadership could stabilize itself with nothing but the free market?

B1rd wrote:

But regarding what was said in this thread, I'm wondering if Vipper is going to just wiggle out of backing up his unprovable assertions, like how I don't know what I'm talking about regarding the Soviet Union.

B1rd wrote:

Railey2 wrote:

Talking about unprovable assertions, do you think that a society without leadership could stabilize itself with nothing but the free market?

You could have a society without any centralised governing body based on the underlying principle of the NAP.

Aurani wrote:

I don't know why you had to mention Nazis there, when the Soviets did the same thing.

Aurani wrote:

Yeah, more widely recognised by people who haven't read 2 books in their life. I won't deny that it's a valid statement, but it's a pet peeve of mine when you need to add an orange from another basket to your basket of apples, simply because you don't care. I like my things tidy, is all.

DaddyCoolVipper wrote:

B1rd wrote:

But regarding what was said in this thread, I'm wondering if Vipper is going to just wiggle out of backing up his unprovable assertions, like how I don't know what I'm talking about regarding the Soviet Union.

Your post suggested that people were just idly cooperating with Stalin's regime and giving his dictatorship more power, but that's completely lacking the context of his repressive government. People informing on their friends and such were only doing so because they themselves were threatened- similar to what happened in Nazi Germany where informing on Jews was highly 'encouraged'.

Besides, plenty of people would actively try and hide things from the state in the Soviet Union too, although it's hard to get any meaningful statistics- it certainly wasn't a case where everybody simply cooperated with the state, because if that were true, they wouldn't have to behave in such a violent and oppressive manner in order to get what they wanted. Forced disappearances etc due to the secret police,

Basically, you shouldn't be using the Soviet Union as an example of people refusing to do what was morally right despite threat of persecution, because the threat was significant enough to actually control people on a psychological level. Ideals of standing up to a tyrannical government are pretty, but not actually an option to the majority of people living in the USSR.

Railey2 wrote:

I don't think that would be stable, how would that be able to resist pressure from the inside (people will inevitably use aggressive and underhanded business strategies) and pressure from the outside (foreign invasion, foreign economic aggression)?

Not having a centralised governing body under these conditions just means that you are an easy target for everyone that doesn't play by your self-imposed, highly restrictive rules.

It's a fun thought experiment, but in the end it's also no more than a fantasy.

Endaris wrote:

Well, regardless how I look at it, doing the referendum was one thing. They got lots of international press and opened a good opportunity to accelerate the progress to even get serious talk on the topic going when the spanish government was literally keeping Catalonia under wraps before.
Actually trying to go with the head through the wall by announcing to declare independency...I don't know really what good is supposed to come from doing it that way.

DJ Enetro wrote:

and right now we are in ye midel OT, don't you think?

DJ Enetro wrote:

and right now we are in ye midel OT, don't you think?

ColdTooth wrote:

DJ Enetro wrote:

and right now we are in ye midel OT, don't you think?

By the time we reach ye newe OT, we're all going to pretty much suffer

Endaris wrote:

You don't have to witness it.
All you have to do is getting consumed.

Foxtrot wrote:

this place is such a joke

abraker wrote:

Foxtrot wrote:

this place is such a joke

throw something at us. A topic of discussion or something. You see shit only because there isn't something rolling. Start something and it will continue until the next distraction (new page, random meme post, etc), and push a bit more after the distraction to maintain course.

DJ Enetro wrote:

(inb4 I post about quality again and start the next OT!Civil war)

Everyone has equal responsibility, call it filial piety or something. Being nice to everyone else is the bare necessities.

Aurani wrote:

Foxtrot just wants her Blitzfrog to start posting in ITT.

Endaris wrote:

Fucking collab, I don't recognise my own posts anymore.

Foxtrot wrote:

mmh no. it's not like my opinion was different when things were rolling

abraker wrote:

Foxtrot wrote:

mmh no. it's not like my opinion was different when things were rolling

people complain about stuff they haven't tried hard enough making better.

Foxtrot wrote:

you're really on my case, aren't you

abraker wrote:

Foxtrot wrote:

you're really on my case, aren't you

Yes, but I don't want to weigh it much on you, so I'll just make it a— brief case

Foxtrot wrote:

also you must be real proud of that

silmarilen wrote:

I miss the days when i could just post on the forums and like 5 of my friends were active at the same time and we would just mess around for a while. I don't really know many people anymore because most of them joined after i became less active.

Hika wrote:

Collab avatars are fun if you keep them long.

Me and Aurani are actually coming up to our four years.
EDIT: maybe I mean three. I don’t know.

Tanzklaue wrote:

i'm here to mess with you anytime bby.

Tanzklaue wrote:

also non-collab profile pics are always superior to collab ones.

Aomi wrote:

all good things must come to an end (:

Hika wrote:

just 1

aurani

Hika wrote:

just 1

aurani

silmarilen wrote:

Thanks, it's part of the gay OT collab that people are already leaving before it's even a week old.

Endaris wrote:

Hi Milkshake o/

silmarilen wrote:

Thanks, it's part of the gay OT collab that people are already leaving before it's even a week old.

Serraionga wrote:

just 4 people, nothing to worry about i think

silmarilen wrote:

If it involves a fight between a man and a woman, don't take jordan seriously. He has a history of hating women in general regardless of what actually happened.
Unlike what tumblr people call mysoginist (basically anybody that isn't a woman agreeing with their point of view), i think he actually is one.

B1rd wrote:

Nothing is more symptomatic of this sheltered generation than people who block others at the slightest sign of them having a different opinion.

B1rd wrote:

If you want a block from me don't be edgy, just make sure all your posts are both a nuisance and absolutely devoid of any intellectual value over a long and sustained period of time.

B1rd wrote:

Nothing is more symptomatic of this sheltered generation than people who block others at the slightest sign of them having a different opinion.