NationStates

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:39 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Heloin wrote:The only person who read Les Misérables and spent the booking cheering on Javert.

I also supported Javert because I saw him as a personification of Law and Order

Really? I thought you were better than that.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:40 pm**

Heloin wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
I also supported Javert because I saw him as a personification of Law and Order

Then you didn't read the book very closely then. When he's not blinding trying to arrest a former bread thief he's throwing himself in the river Seine because he realised the law isn't infallible.

He threw himself in the Seine because he understood that he had to pay for his emotional decision to let the main character go

This means that he stayed true to the forces of justice and law and order

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:40 pm**

Geneviev wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
I also supported Javert because I saw him as a personification of Law and Order

Really? I thought you were better than that.

I like police type characters in many works

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:41 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Geneviev wrote:Really? I thought you were better than that.

I like police type characters in many works

That kind of explains some of your hypotheticals. But Javert too?

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:41 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Heloin wrote:Then you didn't read the book very closely then. When he's not blinding trying to arrest a former bread thief he's throwing himself in the river Seine because he realised the law isn't infallible.

He threw himself in the Seine because he understood that he had to pay for his emotional decision to let the main character go

This means that he stayed true to the forces of justice and law and order

Did you... Did you actually read Les Misérables?

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:44 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
LiberNovusAmericae wrote:If he starts to engage in discrimination in the government that is problematic, I'll vote against him next election. But just being discriminatory with his study group is not enough for me to vote against him.

And what if it was racial discrimination with his study group?

Then he wouldn't be close to me politically.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:58 pm**

The Batorys wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
And what if it was racial discrimination with his study group?

Then he wouldn't be close to me politically.

The premise attempts to differentiate between public legislative positions/history and declared positions ((public life/his ‘politics’) and his private self

It asks whether we can trust that it won’t in the future bleed together in some way

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:59 pm**

Heloin wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
He threw himself in the Seine because he understood that he had to pay for his emotional decision to let the main character go

This means that he stayed true to the forces of justice and law and order

Did you... Did you actually read Les Misérables?

I have seen movie adaptations and read some simplified editions

However, I don’t like how it indirectly says being a thief is okay

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:04 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Heloin wrote:Did you... Did you actually read Les Misérables?

I have seen movie adaptations and read some simplified editions

However, I don’t like how it indirectly says being a thief is okay

...

Then you missed Hugo's whole point.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:05 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
The Free Joy State wrote:Then he couldn't possibly line up with my ideals, nullifying the entire question of the thread.

his current stated positions and legislative history are in line with your positions

Racial discrimination is not in line with my political ideology. At all.

I'd be annoyed at him for being an Ivy-league elitist, but that doesn't actually significantly change whether he's politically aligned with me or not.

Racial discrimination is intrinsically against my political beliefs, meaning that we would not be aligned at all, politically.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:06 pm**

Cekoviu wrote:
The World Capitalist Confederation wrote:The fact that a far-left, anarchist candidate is likely to win in this scenario (Tom), I'd vote for him tbh. The very act of him being elected would set forth a change in American politics for the entirety of the 21st century, maybe even longer. If you're an extremist like me, electing Tom is the best option in all scenarios that his political views align with yours. It would change American politics forever, and perhaps even the world. His very election would cause shockwaves throughout the world, as the wheel of ages began to turn against the neoliberal world order. The left would be emboldened and start gaining support across many nations, and might even dominate the world. For a centrist candidate, nothing much would happen if he got elected. But in my case, it would begin a revolution across the world.

Why would an anarchist be running for political office or even voting, lol

To access the levers of power by all means available.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:08 pm**

Geneviev wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
I also supported Javert because I saw him as a personification of Law and Order

Really? I thought you were better than that.

Why would you ever think that God Kefka/Infected Mushroom is better than that? Dude faps to Tywin Lannister.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:09 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
The Batorys wrote:Then he wouldn't be close to me politically.

The premise attempts to differentiate between public legislative positions/history and declared positions ((public life/his ‘politics’) and his private self

It asks whether we can trust that it won’t in the future bleed together in some way

I see no such distinction.

Who you are in private affects your political decisions and your political decisions affect who you are in private.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:40 pm**

The Batorys wrote:
Geneviev wrote:Really? I thought you were better than that.

Why would you ever think that God Kefka/Infected Mushroom is better than that? Dude faps to Tywin Lannister.

What do you mean?

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:41 pm**

Geneviev wrote:
The Batorys wrote:Why would you ever think that God Kefka/Infected Mushroom is better than that? Dude faps to Tywin Lannister.

What do you mean?

If you haven't watched GoT by now, you have too much of a life to be on NSG.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:46 pm**

Cekoviu wrote:
Geneviev wrote:What do you mean?

If you haven't watched GoT by now, you have too much of a life to be on NSG.

That's painfully true.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:55 pm**

Cekoviu wrote:
Geneviev wrote:What do you mean?

If you haven't watched GoT by now, you have too much of a life to be on NSG.

That’s not true at all

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:41 pm**

Geneviev wrote:
Cekoviu wrote:If you haven't watched GoT by now, you have too much of a life to be on NSG.

That's painfully true.

Thermodolia wrote:
Cekoviu wrote:If you haven't watched GoT by now, you have too much of a life to be on NSG.

That’s not true at all

These two posts, one directly after the other, are perfectly reflective of NSG. :lol2:

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:43 pm**

This is one of the least scandalous things I have ever heard a politician do, lmao

Come on IM, go deeper. Call him Richard Nixon 2.0 or some shit.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:02 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
LiberNovusAmericae wrote:If he starts to engage in discrimination in the government that is problematic, I'll vote against him next election. But just being discriminatory with his study group is not enough for me to vote against him.

And what if it was racial discrimination with his study group?

As others have already said, I probably would not agree with Tom politically if he did that.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:11 pm**

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
And what if it was racial discrimination with his study group?

As others have already said, I probably would not agree with Tom politically if he did that.

I would note that people can change from being racist. Robert Byrd, for example.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 10:04 pm**

Hammer Britannia wrote:This is one of the least scandalous things I have ever heard a politician do, lmao

Come on IM, go deeper. Call him Richard Nixon 2.0 or some shit.

I feel like that would be too easy

I wanted to create a borderline case where it’s not clear if a line has been crossed or not for the politician

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 10:09 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Hammer Britannia wrote:This is one of the least scandalous things I have ever heard a politician do, lmao

Come on IM, go deeper. Call him Richard Nixon 2.0 or some shit.

I feel like that would be too easy

I wanted to create a borderline case where it’s not clear if a line has been crossed or not for the politician

Probably should’ve picked a more radical line.

Posted: **Sun Jun 23, 2019 10:50 pm**

The New California Republic wrote:Sure why not. Every single politician out there has at least a little dirt under their nails. In fact, I wouldn't trust one that didn't.

What if this isn't WWII era China and officials/soldiers in the current regime aren't all horrendously corrupt?

I'd reluctantly vote for Tom, barring any other scandals that come up. My RL state consistently votes for presidential candidates of my preferred party, so I doubt my individual vote would have much impact.

Posted: **Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:00 am**

Nouveau Yathrib wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Sure why not. Every single politician out there has at least a little dirt under their nails. In fact, I wouldn't trust one that didn't.

What if this isn't WWII era China and officials/soldiers in the current regime aren't all horrendously corrupt?

Wh...what....?? Where the hell did that come from...? :eyebrow:

NationStates

Would you vote for Tom?