Sexuality, Human Expression, and Personhood

[Seperates]

Totalitarianism is the best climate for oppression. Oppression is inherent in Totalitarianism.

Actually, the authoritarian regimes are more oppressive than the totalitarian states because authoritarian regimes allow the leader to be an individual. Totalitarianism is form of government that permits no individual freedom to subordinate all aspects of the individual’s life to the authority of the government, including the 'leaders of government.

Who/What is 'the government'?

[Pandeeria]

Totalitarianism is the best climate for oppression. Oppression is inherent in Totalitarianism.

Actually, the authoritarian regimes are more oppressive than the totalitarian states because authoritarian regimes allow the leader to be an individual. Totalitarianism is form of government that permits no individual freedom to subordinate all aspects of the individual’s life to the authority of the government, including the 'leaders of government.

See, that's what I'm saying. Literally everyone is oppressed. They're not oppressed by a person but by a concept, an idea: The State.

Oppression is oppression. It is bad in excessive and unnecessary amounts.

[Shie]

When Mussolini rose to power his critical mistake was not dismantling the monarchy and foolishly allowed private enterprise in Italy. Stalin removed religion, rather than replaced it. I'm different Stalin and Mussolini and would've made different decisions in their places.

Mmmhmm... But this statement doesn't address any of his concerns with your argument. Why are you insisting on criticizing the validity of a simile rather than addressing the actual substance of his writing?

I haven't read the writings of Mussolini.

[Pandeeria]

Mmmhmm... But this statement doesn't address any of his concerns with your argument. Why are you insisting on criticizing the validity of a simile rather than addressing the actual substance of his writing?

I haven't read the writings of Mussolini.

My writings and concerns.

[Ayreonia]

Because I want to understand the reasoning behind the other side's point of view.
In my eyes, sex and sexuality are inherently positive things. Sex is pleasant, it's healthy, it's completely natural, along with the urges. Having it with others apart from your Theoretical God-given Future Wife Person is not going to lessen its value in any way. In fact, you'll get better at it, so that it's going to be more enjoyable with the TGFWP.
In fact, I can't think of a single negative thing about sex, save for STDs and unwanted pregnancy, but hey, condoms.

Why?
Okay, that's enough of that, I was just making a point about how you can't just say 'why?' to everything the guy said.

Anyway, condoms fail roughly 1% of the time, that means 1 in every 100 people. And when you think about it like that, are you really that unlikely to be that one in a hundred?

I also happen to believe that sex without love is very emotionally damaging. I view it as inherently abusive and selfish. It's not something I could ever do, or something I could ever live with myself if I did do it.

Yes, condoms fail. There's no contraceptive that's guaranteed to work every single time. 99 to 1 are odds that I'm ready to take.

I expect you have some way of backing your argument up, aside from personal feelings?

[Seperates]

Mmmhmm... But this statement doesn't address any of his concerns with your argument. Why are you insisting on criticizing the validity of a simile rather than addressing the actual substance of his writing?

I haven't read the writings of Mussolini.

*sighs* Not Mussolini. Pandeeri. The one with whom you were supposedly have a discussion with.

Rather than addressing the arguments presented, you argued that his simile between you, Stalin, and Mussolini is erroneous. Now, that is a valid thing to argue after you have addressed his previous concerns, but as a solitary counter-argument is weaker than Keystone Light, because it doesn't actually address anything and is merely the sign of a poor rhetorician, or a stalling tactic, which is practically admitting that you have no counter-claim.

[Shie]

Actually, the authoritarian regimes are more oppressive than the totalitarian states because authoritarian regimes allow the leader to be an individual. Totalitarianism is form of government that permits no individual freedom to subordinate all aspects of the individual’s life to the authority of the government, including the 'leaders of government.

Who/What is 'the government'?

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, are carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

[Vicious Debaters]

Who/What is 'the government'?

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, is carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

You have a seriously fucking weird way of phrasing things. I actually rather like it.

What is the purpose of the government, if not to sustain the people and ensure their freedoms?

[Kyuji]

Who/What is 'the government'?

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, is carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

Anarchist?

[Seperates]

Who/What is 'the government'?

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, is carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

Pray tell what is this gestalt? This noble tale which 'everyone' believes? What is the nature of this super-organic on my Kroeber-ian salad, if you will?

[Pandeeria]

Who/What is 'the government'?

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, are carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

This really reminds me of 1984. No one really is the State, everyone is just a supportive pawn to it. Well in 1984 you would substitute State for Party.

Also, as someone else has put it, you have a really politically-poetic way of phrasing stuff. It's impressive.

However, it's just a poor sauger coated stalling tactic. You know politicians and leaders are the state. And you know your ideals don't hold up under scrutiny.

[Shnercropolis]

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, is carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

You have a seriously fucking weird way of phrasing things. I actually rather like it.

What is the purpose of the government, if not to sustain the people and ensure their freedoms?

To defeat world communism.

[Seperates]

Who/What is 'the government'?

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, are carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

And you do realize, that with the vacuity that you phrased that, we could already be on that wheel. If it is above human control and corruption, who is to say that we are not already cruising the streets on one last-ditch power-drive of fate?

[Shie]

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, is carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

Pray tell what is this gestalt? This noble tale which 'everyone' believes? What is the nature of this super-organic on my Kroeber-ian salad, if you will?

It's likely going to be a myth that every institution, including the scientific ones acknowledge as fact. It's got to be a myth/story that isn't up for debate. More believable than the bible, more convincing than the theory of evolution.

[Pandeeria]

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, are carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

And you do realize, that with the vacuity that you phrased that, we could already be on that wheel.

I don't like the way he phrases things. It's really vague and a slow, sugar coated concession.

[CTALNH]

Because I want to understand the reasoning behind the other side's point of view.
In my eyes, sex and sexuality are inherently positive things. Sex is pleasant, it's healthy, it's completely natural, along with the urges. Having it with others apart from your Theoretical God-given Future Wife Person is not going to lessen its value in any way. In fact, you'll get better at it, so that it's going to be more enjoyable with the TGFWP.
In fact, I can't think of a single negative thing about sex, save for STDs and unwanted pregnancy, but hey, condoms.

Why?
Okay, that's enough of that, I was just making a point about how you can't just say 'why?' to everything the guy said.

Anyway, condoms fail roughly 1% of the time, that means 1 in every 100 people. And when you think about it like that, are you really that unlikely to be that one in a hundred?

I also happen to believe that sex without love is very emotionally damaging. I view it as inherently abusive and selfish. It's not something I could ever do, or something I could ever live with myself if I did do it.

Yes I will now commit ritual suicide because of the horrors I had to go through having sex with escorts and in brothels.What an abusive and selfish prick I am!I even guilt tripped myself in tipping the girls that I emotionally damaged the horror!

[Shie]

However, it's just a poor sauger coated stalling tactic. You know politicians and leaders are the state. And you know your ideals don't hold up under scrutiny.

The idea that people need to be led by any institution is how the state came to be, without that belief(regarded as fact) there would be no state.

[Seperates]

Pray tell what is this gestalt? This noble tale which 'everyone' believes? What is the nature of this super-organic on my Kroeber-ian salad, if you will?

It's likely going to be a myth that every institution, including the scientific ones acknowledge as fact. It's got to be a myth/story that isn't up for debate. More believable than the bible, more convincing than the theory of evolution.

You mean like ones we already tell ourselves, and is already taught?

This misses one crucial aspect of humanity. With humanity, everything is up for debate. Even the things that 'shouldn't' be. This aspect is not a curse. It is one of the wonderful things about humanity and human diversity. I mean, I assume you are familiar with Hegel?

[Pandeeria]

However, it's just a poor sauger coated stalling tactic. You know politicians and leaders are the state. And you know your ideals don't hold up under scrutiny.

The idea that people need to be led by any institution is how the state came to be, without that belief(regarded as fact) there would be no state.

So you're conceding? You just said without the belief that people need to be led by an institution is how the state came to be.

Ignoring the vagueness, you're saying without people ruling others there would not be a state.

[The Federal Republic of Simonia]

Well someone believes in traditional gender roles....


But seriously, why return to 50s style family models?

[Pandeeria]

Well someone believes in traditional gender roles....


But seriously, why return to 50s style family models?

Hey Simonia.

[Shie]

The government is the agenda, the Dharmacakra, it continues to turn as the objectives consistent with the noble tale which everyone believes, are carried out. All people are merely riders on the wheel.

And you do realize, that with the vacuity that you phrased that, we could already be on that wheel. If it is above human control and corruption, who is to say that we are not already cruising the streets on one last-ditch power-drive of fate?

I can't see how totalitarianism is being set in motion, if it is then it's being done very strategically and subtly or unintentionally.

[Seperates]

However, it's just a poor sauger coated stalling tactic. You know politicians and leaders are the state. And you know your ideals don't hold up under scrutiny.

The idea that people need to be led by any institution is how the state came to be, without that belief(regarded as fact) there would be no state.

Even if it is not 'fact', that belief will always exist in some form or another. Therefore there will likely always be some form of state. Some of humanity may escape it, but many will fall within the Leviathan.

[Seperates]

And you do realize, that with the vacuity that you phrased that, we could already be on that wheel. If it is above human control and corruption, who is to say that we are not already cruising the streets on one last-ditch power-drive of fate?

I can't see how totalitarianism is being set in motion, if it is then it's being done very strategically and subtly or unintentionally.

Perhaps the wheel simply isn't turning in the direction that you predicted.

Nevertheless, it moves.

[Pandeeria]

And you do realize, that with the vacuity that you phrased that, we could already be on that wheel. If it is above human control and corruption, who is to say that we are not already cruising the streets on one last-ditch power-drive of fate?

I can't see how totalitarianism is being set in motion, if it is then it's being done very strategically and subtly or unintentionally.

No, it not. Separates was saying that due to the extremely vague way you phrased it, essentially most countries already are totalitarian.