The World to Come

Absolutely. How can such a simple statement of fact be argued or debated? What is "crude and juvenile" about it and why would it be considered "trolling"?

 

My position has been thoroughly explained. The nuance is obviously lost on you. As is the philosophical method of Heraclitus it would seem. Lack of nuance, and childish point-scoring abuse is the mark of the loser and that's what we have seen from you in this discussion. You are only interested in your straw man arguments and cheap rhetorical devices, trying to put words in other people's mouths. I will leave you to your echo chamber. You can rattle around in it making feeble jabs at the Trumpista trolls. Enjoy. It is a very vacuous pleasure.

 

It seems you cannot distinguish fact from judgment or opinion. This is the essence of puerile argument. I think you have been taken in by the crude devices of the Right and you now mimic them. No surprise to me there to see the "Left" as ignorant of dialectic and reason as the keyboard warriors on the Right.

 

So, you claim you've already "thoroughly explained" to Eleuthera but apparently the message never made it to my desk. Would it be asking too much ...... ?

 

Read the thread. That's the whole idea of these forums.

 

As long as Ayn Rand is published, liberty has nothing to fear; good always triumphs—though not always as expediently I wish.

 

If your main orientation is "the Right" and "the Left then your argument is screwed before you begin. But that is all you've got as far as I can see from your last 4 responses. No logic. No depth. Not so much as a relative focal point on the subject. "Crude - Juvenile - Troll - Right - Left". My oh my. What insight! Do you have any idea what the subject here is?

 

Well, here’s a fact Progressives, Pragmatists, and Conservatives love to ignore: individuals have rights—not society, not race, not gender, not the workers, not the poor, not the sick, not the homeless, not the dying, not the children, not the teachers, not the government, not any group or gang or collective, just individuals, no matter what their identity. And the only rights they have are “...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

As the “world to come” will aptly demonstrate, one way or another. Dialetic or otherwise.

You’re very good with Ancient Greek philosophers. Perhaps it’s time to upgrade to Locke?

 

Are you really so blinkered? Is it really worth continuing with this piffle? Do you enjoy it? Try getting a life mate. My argument with Eleuthera has been developed over many posts. I sought out a serious nuanced discussion and got trolling and fratboy point scoring. True, it is de rigeur on here and I made the mistake of treating him like a serious and sincere correspondent. I should learn my lesson. Occasionally it doesn't happen and I get a sensible conversation, but generally not too many with vulgar Marxists and politically illiterate lefties. It's tiresome. As is this conversation.

 

It is simple, from my point of view: Your response to .....

..... is "Crude - Juvenile - Troll".

Reading the whole thread at this point is unnecessary because there will be no explanation for your response. You might have earlier expressed your general opinion but we are this page now and it at this point I require some sort of justification for your remarks.

 

No.

"vulgar Marxists and politically illiterate lefties"? If that's the depth and boundary of your earnest efforts then I have just uncovered the piffle.

 

Damn capitalist pigs.

 

Well when we are having a racist foreign Government orchestrating a coup and that Government is ruled by Corporate Power and the intent as seen by choice of personnel is to be involved in massacres it is perhaps understandable that you will see it in that light. However in this situation where the major player is not even trying to keep quiet about it you could do a lot better. There again I do note that a lot in the US seem to feel under a great deal of pressure to follow the Governments line at least in some areas. I watched for instance Ilhan Omar questioning Elliot Abrams but noticed that she agreed when he said that the US was trying to get Democracy in Venezuela rather than the complete opposite. I am sure she knows the truth so must imagine the fear has become so great that the US has made it clear it no longer on politics accepts freedom of speech, certainly from those in Government. I accept that that will be frustrating for you and no doubt why you responded as above. However there is so much information available that you can easily learn a bit and so not just have so be so vulgar. Here is a video done I think today. I suggest you watch it, find one or two items in it which interest you and then do some more research on them so that you will be able to tell people just how back to front the information is that people are being provided with. Good luck.

 

Ah, the lovers of democracy. What happens when the majority rules? The individual is trampled by the mob.

BTW: Ever notice how much Maduro looks like Gotti?

 

We'll start from the beginning. Firstly, do you understand that the USSR was defeated? Secondly, how and why did that happen? We can take other steps later.

 

Do you think that the people of Vietnam and Cuba were better off under Communism, the Iraqis under Saddam Hussein, Afghanistan under the Taliban, the Syrians under whatever they're suffering through, or the Venezuelan people under a military dictatorship? You're convinced that Fidel Castro was elected by the people, huh?, and was a benevolent dictator.

As well, do you think we should continue to send financial aid to these various dictatorships where the money seldom gets to the people?

Would the English have preferred the Americans stay out of their affairs (twice) or the French? In fact, Western Europe encouraged an American invasion and, ironically, later complained that they didn't arrive soon enough. Today they love the Germans who bombed the Hell out of them, and the Swiss who were "Neutral" about Nazism and got rich on the war.

So what's the lesson here? The answer seems to be that Helping Europeans is Good - Helping non-Europeans is Bad. Very Bad.

And, as ever, no good deed goes unpunished

 

It was not defeated.

The reason why it was "dismantled" is because the citizens of the Eastern Block had seen what happened to Communist reformists Imre Nagy in Hungary (1956) and Alexander Dubček in Czechoslavkia (1968. To reform individual states within the Warsaw Pact had been a dangerous enterprise that demonstrated the precariousness of their position. So when Mikael Gorbatjov began his reforms too quickly (by opening the borders), the population feared another clamp down imminent and fled rather than remain calm and follow Gorbatjov's reforms. But you seem to think the U.S. "defeated" the USSR!

If you like.

 

Your understanding of international events/history is extremely poor and is clearly fully reliant upon American propaganda.

* Vietnam was Communist for a very good reason. You insinuating that the Vietnamese were better off with the illegal American occupation, the concocted split of the country and so much death and destruction ..... is disgusting. You have absolutely no knowledge of that war, how it began, or how it ended.

* Cuba was a Batista, puppet regime run by the American mafia with War-Shington's blessing. Castro threw them out with the naïve belief that the U.S. would appreciate his achievements and willing to continue Cuban-American friendship under a new and corrupt-free government. Castro wasn't even Communist until the U.S. backed him against the wall, leaving him no other choice than to accept assistance from the USSR. Your notion of being "better off" is if Cuba remained under the yoke of American mafia's stranglehold. Disgusting.

* There are adequate numbers of Iraki's who themselves say that Irak was better off under Saddam Hussein than what it has become since the American illegal invasion, rape, torture, murder, and the introduction of CIA death squads.

* Whatever you (or I) think of the Taliban in Afghanistan it is their own country to chose how they want to live under what they think of as "God's will". It is the U.S. that created Al Qaida there and between it and the Taliban, I am sure the later is preferable to the population.

* What the Syrians are "suffering through" is American treachery. Assad is a man of the people and his efforts have been to better the lives of his countrymen against American intervention.

* And now we have Venezuela. You haven't the slightest clue.

I advise that you rely less on the CIA's version of the world and improve your literacy instead.

 

Which countries are members of the USSR now?

'Dismantled' is now a euphemism for defeated. Any idea why Gorbachev 'opened the borders' or why other Communists sealed them?

 

Great cartoon, Thanks.

 

I have explained the opening of Soviet borders and Gorbatjov's motivation in doing so.

Dismantled vs. Defeated: Euphemisms and Synonyms appear to confuse you and you are susceptible to stretching incorrect interpretations, making absurd conclusions as a consequence. Perhaps you are a knowledgeable fellow whose only failure is English comprehension?

 

Yeah, Thingamabob, that's probably it.

 

With respect, Fred, we don't know how foreigners think, nor what they'd prefer or not prefer? They don't think like us, and it's insufferably arrogant of us to believe that we know what's best for every other country on the effing planet, because it's quite clear from recent history that we effing well don't. You are wrong to be the self-appointed 'world's policeman'. I mean let's face it - wherever the West goes, the only thing that happens is we make it even worse. And it happens every time?

 

What's done is done. It's what you do now that matters, Fred.

 

It's not an easy lesson for anyone to learn.