Right-Wing Discussion Thread Part Two

[United Marxist Nations]

Clearly someone is forgetting how polite the Soviet Union was towards the LGBT community.

V O I D isn't a commie.

Also, V O I D, if you ever make this regime, I'd like a job

I didn't take you for a supporter of dictatorship.

[The East Marches]

Yes, I wish for such a thing too. Maybe then this country would have less naive fools and dreamers trying impractical ideas. It would a good thing for them witness a bit of horror.

Wouldn't there just be a violent backlash against the people who forced others to witness horrific visions?
Sympathy is not a trait that you can tear out from the hearts of social conservatives.

I wasn't implying it for LGBT stuff. I was implying it for the Chicken hawks and other fools who think war is easy or can have rules. To show other people the barbarity of some other foreign cultures. Things of this nature.

There might be backlash yes. Then again, it is so highly unrealistic that I'm sure how we would even go about such a thing.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

V O I D isn't a commie.

Also, V O I D, if you ever make this regime, I'd like a job

I didn't take you for a supporter of dictatorship.

Well, I mean, if there was one... so many opportunites...

[Aelex]

I'm glad somebody cares for free speech. I have been in a similar boat.

On that note, I do this it's telling that Rambo IV is acceptable but a pair of tits is not. Both sides are largely ok with that as it stands now.

Wow. This is actually way more realistic than I would have expected from a Rambo film.
'cause yeah, bullets, and especially bullets of high caliber, don't just make clean little holes. They can fucking tear your flesh or even limbs apart on impact.

[United Marxist Nations]

I didn't take you for a supporter of dictatorship.

Well, I mean, if there was one... so many opportunites...

Regardless, V O I D's ideology seems to be near-worship of the state. It makes the state infallible.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Well, I mean, if there was one... so many opportunites...

Regardless, V O I D's ideology seems to be near-worship of the state. It makes the state infallible.

All the more reason to be a part of the State

[The East Marches]

I'm glad somebody cares for free speech. I have been in a similar boat.

On that note, I do this it's telling that Rambo IV is acceptable but a pair of tits is not. Both sides are largely ok with that as it stands now.

Wow. This is actually way more realistic than I would have expected from a Rambo film.
'cause yeah, bullets, and especially bullets of high caliber, don't just make clean little holes. They can fucking tear your flesh or even limbs apart on impact.

Rambo is a real American hero. Good for kids and good role model.

[Northern Davincia]

Well, I mean, if there was one... so many opportunites...

Regardless, V O I D's ideology seems to be near-worship of the state. It makes the state infallible.

Do we start goosestepping now or later?

[The V O I D]

Well, I mean, if there was one... so many opportunites...

Regardless, V O I D's ideology seems to be near-worship of the state. It makes the state infallible.

The State can fail to do its job properly, and it can vary in its form; but in the end, all laws must come from the State, not religion; nor anywhere else.

The Nazi and Soviet States failed because they slaughtered pointlessly and thought they could out-compete a state that had, in its past, won two wars with its mother country with barely any military power of its own, and kept its shit together when secessionists tried ripping it apart.

Bailey, as for you, if I were to make such a regime, I'd appoint you onto the council of my various military and political officials who advise me on things and such. Only because I think you're pretty cool.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Regardless, V O I D's ideology seems to be near-worship of the state. It makes the state infallible.

The State can fail to do its job properly, and it can vary in its form; but in the end, all laws must come from the State, not religion; nor anywhere else.

The Nazi and Soviet States failed because they slaughtered pointlessly and thought they could out-compete a state that had, in its past, won two wars with its mother country with barely any military power of its own, and kept its shit together when secessionists tried ripping it apart.

Bailey, as for you, if I were to make such a regime, I'd appoint you onto the council of my various military and political officials who advise me on things and such. Only because I think you're pretty cool.

Awesome! Can I be in charge of the 'Security Forces' too? Wouldn't mind enforcing compliance

[United Marxist Nations]

Regardless, V O I D's ideology seems to be near-worship of the state. It makes the state infallible.

The State can fail to do its job properly, and it can vary in its form; but in the end, all laws must come from the State, not religion; nor anywhere else.

The Nazi and Soviet States failed because they slaughtered pointlessly and thought they could out-compete a state that had, in its past, won two wars with its mother country with barely any military power of its own, and kept its shit together when secessionists tried ripping it apart.

Bailey, as for you, if I were to make such a regime, I'd appoint you onto the council of my various military and political officials who advise me on things and such. Only because I think you're pretty cool.

Who decides what the state's job is if the state is the ultimate authority?

[The V O I D]

The State can fail to do its job properly, and it can vary in its form; but in the end, all laws must come from the State, not religion; nor anywhere else.

The Nazi and Soviet States failed because they slaughtered pointlessly and thought they could out-compete a state that had, in its past, won two wars with its mother country with barely any military power of its own, and kept its shit together when secessionists tried ripping it apart.

Bailey, as for you, if I were to make such a regime, I'd appoint you onto the council of my various military and political officials who advise me on things and such. Only because I think you're pretty cool.

Awesome! Can I be in charge of the 'Security Forces' too? Wouldn't mind enforcing compliance

Sure. You'd also be tasked with overseeing reeducation of political dissidents / anti-Statists / overall traitors.

[The East Marches]

If I want to fuck, and the other guy/girl wants to fuck, why the hell shouldn't we?

1. There's some stuff to indicate it could be involved in pair bonding, which could be undermined by promiscuity wearing out the mechanism.

2. For the fertile, there is risk of baby. Baby is best raised in stable 2-parent home.

3. It's quite possible that lack of desire for promiscuous women among some men is natural, much like how some women naturally prefer tall men.

4. Disease risk.

This was an interesting post. Do you have more observations on that topic?

[The V O I D]

The State can fail to do its job properly, and it can vary in its form; but in the end, all laws must come from the State, not religion; nor anywhere else.

The Nazi and Soviet States failed because they slaughtered pointlessly and thought they could out-compete a state that had, in its past, won two wars with its mother country with barely any military power of its own, and kept its shit together when secessionists tried ripping it apart.

Bailey, as for you, if I were to make such a regime, I'd appoint you onto the council of my various military and political officials who advise me on things and such. Only because I think you're pretty cool.

Who decides what the state's job is if the state is the ultimate authority?

At worst, the people do - via democracy and constitutionality. At best, the State should know what its job is, and should know how to do it properly without public interference - via political-military dictatorship.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Awesome! Can I be in charge of the 'Security Forces' too? Wouldn't mind enforcing compliance

Sure. You'd also be tasked with overseeing reeducation of political dissidents / anti-Statists / overall traitors.

Re-education sounds lovely. HehehehehehehehahahahahahahAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... tee-hee.

[United Marxist Nations]

Who decides what the state's job is if the state is the ultimate authority?

At worst, the people do - via democracy and constitutionality. At best, the State should know what its job is, and should know how to do it properly without public interference - via political-military dictatorship.

When "at best" is "they just do", I don't have much faith in this ideology.

[The V O I D]

Sure. You'd also be tasked with overseeing reeducation of political dissidents / anti-Statists / overall traitors.

Re-education sounds lovely. HehehehehehehehahahahahahahAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... tee-hee.

See? You'll be perfect for the role. No one would dare politically dissent after a session with you or anyone you're in charge of.

[The V O I D]

At worst, the people do - via democracy and constitutionality. At best, the State should know what its job is, and should know how to do it properly without public interference - via political-military dictatorship.

When "at best" is "they just do", I don't have much faith in this ideology.

It isn't, 'they just do'. It's, "they should." If they don't know how to do their jobs properly, that is the only time their authority and jobs should be defined by the people in a democratic manner - to explain their jobs to them. Of course, not in a direct democratic fashion. Trusting the entire populace with any amount of power is risky at best, and anarchic at worst.

[Aterria]

I hear dictator aspirations!

The horror!

[United Marxist Nations]

When "at best" is "they just do", I don't have much faith in this ideology.

It isn't, 'they just do'. It's, "they should." If they don't know how to do their jobs properly, that is the only time their authority and jobs should be defined by the people in a democratic manner - to explain their jobs to them. Of course, not in a direct democratic fashion. Trusting the entire populace with any amount of power is risky at best, and anarchic at worst.

And if the people don't know what the job is? What if no one knows what their job is?

[Aelex]

It isn't your duty to question the State. Matters of religion do not govern what the State does. The State should always do things in the interests of their people; not their religious beliefs, nor for religions. The State governs us. Not anything else. If something goes against the interests of their people (i.e. psychological or physical harm, etc.), it should be solved somehow or some way. Marriage is a State matter, as it is an agreement of union between two people that the State presides over and legally acknowledges. Religious 'marriage' in a church or whatever is a formality, if that, and just two people expressing their beliefs in the process of marrying someone they love. I don't think we should force religious institutions to marry people, unless the church formed a legally binding contract beforehand with the people - whether they knew the couple was homosexual or not is irrelevant. Once a legally-binding contract is made, the State can and will enforce this contract on behalf of the people in question if the church fails to do so. Churches, so long as there is no binding contract, can feel free to refuse people; the people will likely go elsewhere or simply marry in a courtroom if they so wish.

What's with this total and utter non sequitur?
I simply can't respond to this post since it has litteraly nothing to do with what I said so, please, just re-read what I said and actually respond to the points I made rather than the ones you wish I had.

Bringing that back since it might have been ate by the endpage.
V O I D, do you care about responding to my actual post?

[The East Marches]

When "at best" is "they just do", I don't have much faith in this ideology.

It isn't, 'they just do'. It's, "they should." If they don't know how to do their jobs properly, that is the only time their authority and jobs should be defined by the people in a democratic manner - to explain their jobs to them. Of course, not in a direct democratic fashion. Trusting the entire populace with any amount of power is risky at best, and anarchic at worst.

Do you know anything about leadership in a practical manner or sense? What is your experience with the topic?

[Northern Davincia]

I hear dictator aspirations!

The horror!

They'll never gulag my soul!

[Threeman]

Great post mate. You're so edgy.

He's not the one that identifies with a homicidal maniac. Now, seriously, stop.

Homicidal maniac? Name a single person he actually killed. Exactly.

Why should I stop? You lefties are constantly spreading your lies and propaganda under the guise of, "free speech", so I have every right to speak the truth to prevent you from ressurecting your beloved Soviet Union

[The V O I D]

It isn't, 'they just do'. It's, "they should." If they don't know how to do their jobs properly, that is the only time their authority and jobs should be defined by the people in a democratic manner - to explain their jobs to them. Of course, not in a direct democratic fashion. Trusting the entire populace with any amount of power is risky at best, and anarchic at worst.

And if the people don't know what the job is? What if no one knows what their job is?

If no one knows what the job of the State is, including the State, then I can imagine only two scenarios: a. the State is so far down shit's creek without a paddle because it screwed up so badly at its job that it forgot its job, and so did its people, so they are just there, idle. OR b. there is no state to begin with because no one knows what the job of a state / the state is, and thus there is anarchy... which is essentially every person for themselves.

It isn't, 'they just do'. It's, "they should." If they don't know how to do their jobs properly, that is the only time their authority and jobs should be defined by the people in a democratic manner - to explain their jobs to them. Of course, not in a direct democratic fashion. Trusting the entire populace with any amount of power is risky at best, and anarchic at worst.

Do you know anything about leadership in a practical manner or sense? What is your experience with the topic?

I know enough to say for certain that the State is the State, the Church is the Church, and the State is superior to the Church, not the other way around.