How?
Advertisement

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:59 am

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:04 am
Zaras wrote:Baltenstein wrote:
I would very much appreciate if you could refrain from emulating Melas' racist and generalizing mindset, since he is neither representative of the Greek population nor the only Greek user present.
Unfortunately, the other Greek user who could be present here would be CTALNH...


by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:07 am
Inchon wrote:The Nuclear Fist wrote:Civil rights are not up for debate amongst the populace. You don't get to increase your wealth and prestige at the expense of others. That is mob rule and that is wrong.
I'm saying the individual has a fundamental human right to discriminate against or associate with any other individual or group as long as he peacefully respects the right of others to do the same.

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:08 am
Melas wrote:The Nuclear Fist wrote:I'm just making a joke, dear. I'm fully aware that the majority of the Greek populace aren't lazy, racist, or stupid, nor do they support Melas's bigoted, ridiculous views.
In this context, I'm referring to the hypothetical Greeks he keeps bringing up. His 'Greeks support. . .' leads me to a particular conclusion. However, I do not mean to insinuate that I believe all Greeks are lazy or racist.
Just the imaginary Greeks in Melas's mind.
You mean the imaginary half a million greeks that voted for golden dawn??

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:09 am
Melas wrote:Argyres wrote:There are obviously Greeks who share that mindset (or perhaps sympathize with the Golden Dawn's platform in parts) but everyone i've talked to in my family is against them, despite being from the lower/lower-middle class that's been hit especially hard.
That being said, if the more mainstream parties fail to make substantive improvements to governing, the economic infrastructure, etc....well I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them continue to grow.
They are already 3d party in charts...

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:21 am
Inchon wrote:Zaras wrote:
Don't try to end run me, you damn well know the answer is yes. You were advocating the right of voters to submit to their worst mob rule instincts and vote in a referendum to bash immigrants. There is no right to that.
Discrimination is something that can never be allowed at a level beyond the individual. There is no right to it.
No, I'm advocating the right of the individual to decide for themselves what is best for themselves irrespective of what anyone else believes. Your ideas may be different from mine and they may not (you might be supprised) but true tolerance is honoring and respecting the peaceful choices of others.

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:56 am
Scholencia wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
Correct. It's just a flag. Unless you'd like to tell me about how it clearly embodies all Greek people and how burning it is like murdering Greek people, obvs.
Also, what's your thoughts on the fact that Golden Dawn are clearly Nazis and not nationalists, as my lovely linkies prove?
May I ask you from which country do you come from?

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:10 pm

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:18 pm
Scholencia wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
You know the sig underneath all of my posts? First line.
So, do you mind if I can burn the british flag since it represents the most evil, colonialistic creation of the world?
Well, you know it is just a flag and poeple are silliy if they get upset of the gesture.
Melas wrote:http://egklimatikotita-allodapwn.blogspot.gr/

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:38 pm


by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:48 am


by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:05 am

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:09 am
Quintium wrote:Ifreann wrote:Probably the part where people get to live wherever they want, no matter their perspective.
Thereby undermining both our economy and that of their home country. Really, we aren't far away from famine if we carry on like this.
Realistically, allowing them to live wherever they want will mean that they all flock here until we go down like their home countries went down.
You've not solved one situation, you've created two.
http://www.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2012/10 ... 80x735.jpg
Here. Today. These people were asked to leave, though our government can't deport them, and now they've set up a tent camp.
This is their freedom? We have to feed them, meaning they're a burden to us, and they live in conditions even worse than those in their countries of origin.

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:15 am
Quintium wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Maybe if America and other Western nations spent more on aid and ensured the aid was delivered effectively, as opposed to maintaining large quantities of nuclear weapons and other pointless shite, then there wouldn't be such a huge problem.
Actually, foreign aid - especially medical aid and food aid - are causing a large part of this situation. You see, Africa does not actually have the agricultural output to feed its current population. If we were to withdraw food aid by 2025, it's estimated more than half of Africa would be left without food. But now, due to foreign aid, their numbers are inflating artificially, and their enormous population growth is partially brought here.
Were you aware of that?

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:17 am
Melas wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
That's not much. 6.5% of the populace consider a bunch of Neo-Nazis worthwile, while 25% consider a leftist coalition to be good for Greece.
There's hope yet.
If you withdraw food aid, and half of Africa is left without food, then you'd cause one of the largest famines in history. That's not acceptable.
Even less people however believe the Stalinist party worthwhile since they barely made it in

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:32 am
Quintium wrote:Ifreann wrote:You'd let people starve because they should have better a better economy in their country?
No, but you are currently letting people starve. Because every time you send aid, more people won't die, meaning they're able to have children, meaning the next famine will be exactly the same problem only on a larger scale. Edit: as I said, Africa's population based on current output should be less than 500 million, but it's well over 1 billion now.

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:33 am

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:36 am
Quintium wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:So if we stop sending aid, because it may cause demographic issues, Africa will only be able to support half its populace, meaning a death toll in the hundreds of millions could reasonably be effective.
You're playing poker with those lives here. Their population will keep growing rapidly, and their agricultural output will not increase enough to support even half of that. And there will come a time when, due to environmental or political concerns, the western world and East Asia will need to take care of their own population first. And that's when the bubble will burst. The size of the bubble is the issue here, and it depends completely on how willing the European left is to expand it before it bursts.
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Because shutting off food supplies in order to cause mass death isn't indefensible or anything.
You're just postponing it. We'll be known in the future as the generation that did heinous things with good intentions.

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:43 am
Quintium wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:How about, instead of starving people, we continue experimenting with GM crops, in order to try and create higher-yield ones?
Happening already. Yet Africa's situation is still dire, and getting worse, and apparently 75% of their population now depends on foreign aid for their basic needs.
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:You're advocating bringing forward mass death to prevent it later.
I'd rather have 500 million starve now than 1500 million in a decade or two, yes.
Thing is, this situation will not be solved within the reality of there being foreign aid.
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Last time I checked, deliberately causing mass death by famine could technically be classed as genocide, as well as a more generic crime against humanity.
It's not deliberate. We're not stopping food shipments they can afford. We'd just be stopping food shipments we feel obliged to give them while their population expands in such a way that the next food shipment needs to have three more containers, and the one after that five more, and seven more, until they reach a point at which we cease to be able to afford it and they all die.


by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:54 am
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Depends. I'd support a massive contraception-spreading and education program, personally.
Impossible. You'd have to turn to castration. Reality is, these people do not want contraception. Children are their life insurance and retirement fund all at once.
And Africa's infrastructure is barely enough for 250 million people, yet it has to maintain a billion. That's part of the reason why Africa's population is in trouble. The infrastructure, agricultural, academic and much more, is operating at about four times its capacity.
Most people born in Africa now are born without a chance of success - because there's too many of them to support.
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:It doesn't matter whether they can afford it or not. If you deliberately, and the scenario you've just described involves deliberate stoppage, deprive an ethnic group (in this case, Africans, hideously inaccurate and wide-ranging as that term is) of the food that they need to survive, with mass starvation being both the object and the outcome, then you've committed genocide.
Yes. And we will commit genocide unless we commit 'genocide'. Listen very carefully. The system as it is now will collapse within a few decades. And at current and predicted population growth rates, the damage done will be several times worse if the system collapses in three decades, and even worse in four.

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:03 am
Quintium wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:I'd imagine that that's due largely to child mortality rates, meaning that people need to have more children to have a chance of some reaching adulthood, meaning lots and lots of hungry mouths to feed.
Proper, widespread medical facilities set up by the West, in large numbers, could help with that, could they not?
Unfortunately, that seems rather impossible. Health care costs in the west are quite nearly impossible to afford already, so you'd have to spread it very thinly across Africa. Adding to that issue, it's not just a matter of the ones making it into adulthood. It's also a matter of large families being a symbol of status and necessity in famine-stricken and aid-fed regions like the Horn of Africa.Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Again, no reason why aid, in the form of volunteer teachers on a large scale, supported by Western governments, in accordance with large amounts of aid spent on infrastructure, could not fix the problem.
There's not enough people to teach here, let alone a surplus to send over to Africa. Again, you'd have to spread it so thinly you'd end up with almost no practical gain. Paying for making African infrastructure up to date would immediately bankrupt all western countries. We'd all be bust by tomorrow if we even thought of paying for irrigation in all famine-stricken parts of Africa. The underlying problem with these ideas is that you assume there to be a capacity that does not exist at all. There is simply no way to make life good for the Africans, as long as they depend on aid.
We're not talking about money. We're talking about food. Our agricultural sector is very well near the end of its capacity, and we're still sending enormous shipments of food to Africa each year. I'll tell you this, living in the country with the most efficient agricultural-output-to-land ratio in the world: there's no way we can keep feeding them for any more than two decades, even if we can spend hundreds of billions on it, if there's no food to buy for that money.

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:34 am
also lets say we did came from africa,doesnt that mean we are a superior evolved species?

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:05 pm
Melas wrote:Ceannairceach wrote:Ha! Learn a bit about German history and economics. Hitler's Germany built its economy on war, plunder and forced labor. Were it not for their massive war machine, they would have remained in obscure poverty. And it was proven, too, for when the Germans failed to expand their economy imploded, as the money they pilfered from European banks slowly seeped away and the labor dried up due to their completely lacking economy built as a stage show rather than a sturdy house.
The modern German economy, conversely, is built upon free enterprise and mutually beneficial agreements with the European states and the rest of the world in the interest of self and global promotion.
In short, Hitler's economy = hatred, modern Germany economy = friendship.
Do as you whish while I laugh and piss myshelf![]()
![]()

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:12 pm

by Orcoa » Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:54 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Alvecia, Amenson, American Legionaries, Candedo, Eahland, Elejamie, Eternal Algerstonia, Grand matrix of Dues ex machina, Great Britain eke Northern Ireland, Hispida, Incelastan, Jewish Underground State, Kerwa, Picairn, Shrillland, The Astral Mandate, The Dodo Republic, The marxist plains, The North Polish Union
Advertisement