NationStates

Duvniask wrote:

Novus America wrote:
And completely unrestricted individualist personal liberty cannot coexist with things like social welfare. You give up some liberties to get benefits from the state. Expecting you can have both unrestricted individualist personal liberties AND collectivist policies at the same time is doublethink.

In order to ave both at the same time you need to have a compromise that sacrifices some personal liberties and is only partially collectivist. Real social democracy realizes this.
Even if many left coms and US “democratic socialists” seem to struggle with the idea that they are pushing two partially conflicting ideas and unwilling to compromise on both.

Holy fucking shit, you're so bad.

Saying something is antithetical to personal liberty does not mean I want unrestricted personal liberty.

And the social cohesion in the Nordic States does not stem ENTIRELY from the draft, the draft absolutely plays a role in it. The problem is you refuse to admit it plays a part on ideological grounds.

Having an obligation to society (which can be fulfilled with alternative non military service for conscientious objectors) in form of a draft is one of those critical obligations, not the only one but an important one.

You have nothing to show for it. Don't extrapolate your obnoxious American military-worship to my country.

Duvniask wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:
Read this post again. Read it very carefully so you can understand why being this passive-aggressive doesn't often win people over to your argument.

I'm not interested in winning him over to my argument. All I'm saying is he doesn't even get my position right. He's a buffoon, consistently, and I have zero appreciation for his input at this point.

One thing is true though. There can be nothing good gleaned from it. This conversation is over.

Fahran wrote:I want to apologize for making this report right after making another one but I felt this was borderline flaming as well. Emphasis mine. In the absence of anything to clarify the meaning and rude language else-where, it comes across as a vague personal attack that doesn't really contribute to the conversation, designed to both demean a fellow poster and elicit a reaction.

Duvniask wrote:Holy fucking shit, you're so bad.

Saying something is antithetical to personal liberty does not mean I want unrestricted personal liberty.



You have nothing to show for it. Don't extrapolate your obnoxious American military-worship to my country.

The Reformed American Republic wrote:

Duvniask wrote:I'm not interested in winning him over to my argument. All I'm saying is he doesn't even get my position right. He's a buffoon, consistently, and I have zero appreciation for his input at this point.

One thing is true though. There can be nothing good gleaned from it. This conversation is over.

Emphasis mine. "Buffoon" seems to also be a low level flame at Novus America.