RWDT XII - 12 Step program to get Right.

[The East Marches II]

You know, when looking back on Rome, and then upon Australia, I have to say, Australia truely is the successor of Rome. Gallipoli? The Gallipoli campaign was nothing more than an attempt to reconquest our rightful clay. It should be noted that it is well known that Constantine XI Dragases Palaiologos, after having thrown off his royal ornaments, traveled to what we know as England. He remarried and moved on, eventually his descendants (who surely kept their heritage in mind) became convicts, they were among the first to establish the Australian colonies. They have, in fact, played a part in all major political events in Australian history, behind the scenes of course, carefully planning the rise of the Australian-Roman Empire.

(Image)

(Image)

This is correct according to history, and anyone who disagrees ought to open a history book, tbh.

No one will tell you this, but Aeneas was NOT the Prince of Troy in Anatolia, but the Prince of Canberra, Australia.

My God, if only I knew this sooner

[Republic of the Cristo]

Okay, you might not like them, but millions of Americans do. Compound this then with the fact these men and their compatriots helped to shape American history. America has plenty of positive ( subjective ) authoritarianism to look back upon.

Authoritarianism is never positive.

:^)

Authoritarianism does not mean bad - it means centralized, or forceful. With that in mind, there are thousands of examples were in authoritarianism has been a good thing. Not only for American history, but for the entire world. The Russian experiment into democracy in the 90's was disastrous - with the arrival of Vladimir Putin, the Russian standard of living began steadily rising and to this day still surpasses that of the 90's. The United States couldn't have won WW2 without authoritarian administration. Napoleon's seizing of power meant an end to the bloody and violent revolutionary politics of the 1st republic. Singapore is an economic powerhouse because of an authoritarian political establishment. Park Chung Hee moved South Korea from a war torn 3rd world country to the 1st world industrial powerhouse it is today.

There is nothing intrinsically bad about authoritarianism.

[The Portland Territory]

Authoritarianism is never positive.

:^)

Authoritarianism does not mean bad - it means centralized, or forceful. With that in mind, there are thousands of examples were in authoritarianism has been a good thing. Not only for American history, but for the entire world. The Russian experiment into democracy in the 90's was disastrous - with the arrival of Vladimir Putin, the Russian standard of living began steadily rising and to this day still surpasses that of the 90's. The United States couldn't have won WW2 without authoritarian administration. Napoleon's seizing of power meant an end to the bloody and violent revolutionary politics of the 1st republic. Singapore is an economic powerhouse because of an authoritarian political establishment. Park Chung Hee moved South Korea from a war torn 3rd world country to the 1st world industrial powerhouse it is today.

There is nothing intrinsically bad about authoritarianism.

There's nothing wrong with an "authoritarian" government, however authoritarian rules and regulations set up by such government is

[Republic of the Cristo]

I wouldn't say so.

America's founding principles were liberal, first of all. Now, to begin with, America has authoritarian examples leaders which we view in a positive light. Alexander Hamilton, for one, essentially advocated for our current government - only with a Unitarian system. Reading over his contributions to the Federalist papers reveals that he was quite the authoritarian and anti-populist. FDR, during peace time, created massive social programs which involved the state directly not only into the economy but also the lives of common civilians - and then during war time censored the press through the OWI and controlled large swaths of the US economy.

And illegally imprisoned thousands of US citizens.

Legally imprisoned thousands of US citizens.

No leader is perfect, and that was certainly one of the darker parts of his presidency. Regardless, he was a good leader.

[Herskerstad]

You know, when looking back on Rome, and then upon Australia, I have to say, Australia truely is the successor of Rome. Gallipoli? The Gallipoli campaign was nothing more than an attempt to reconquest our rightful clay. It should be noted that it is well known that Constantine XI Dragases Palaiologos, after having thrown off his royal ornaments, traveled to what we know as England. He remarried and moved on, eventually his descendants (who surely kept their heritage in mind) became convicts, they were among the first to establish the Australian colonies. They have, in fact, played a part in all major political events in Australian history, behind the scenes of course, carefully planning the rise of the Australian-Roman Empire.

(Image)

(Image)

This is correct according to history, and anyone who disagrees ought to open a history book, tbh.

No one will tell you this, but Aeneas was NOT the Prince of Troy in Anatolia, but the Prince of Canberra, Australia.

Now some historical illiterates will surely come around and dispute this most sacred truth, but let's face it. Mixing the vile practices of the greeks with the degeneracy of the Romans could at best only foster a loose tribal confederation.

[Republic of the Cristo]

:^)

Authoritarianism does not mean bad - it means centralized, or forceful. With that in mind, there are thousands of examples were in authoritarianism has been a good thing. Not only for American history, but for the entire world. The Russian experiment into democracy in the 90's was disastrous - with the arrival of Vladimir Putin, the Russian standard of living began steadily rising and to this day still surpasses that of the 90's. The United States couldn't have won WW2 without authoritarian administration. Napoleon's seizing of power meant an end to the bloody and violent revolutionary politics of the 1st republic. Singapore is an economic powerhouse because of an authoritarian political establishment. Park Chung Hee moved South Korea from a war torn 3rd world country to the 1st world industrial powerhouse it is today.

There is nothing intrinsically bad about authoritarianism.

There's nothing wrong with an "authoritarian" government, however authoritarian rules and regulations set up by such government is

What?

[The East Marches II]

And illegally imprisoned thousands of US citizens.

Legally imprisoned thousands of US citizens.

No leader is perfect, and that was certainly one of the darker parts of his presidency. Regardless, he was a good leader.

He was a traitor. Not just for that but also for helping rebuild the Soviet Union during the war. We should have left them in a pile of rubble and only given war material.

[Washington Resistance Army]

And illegally imprisoned thousands of US citizens.

Legally imprisoned thousands of US citizens.

No leader is perfect, and that was certainly one of the darker parts of his presidency. Regardless, he was a good leader.

No, it was illegal and I'm pretty certain SCOTUS later said so after he died. He was a traitor to the United States and you sound like one yourself my good man.

[Canadensia]

I think the point is that at its core, American identity is largely individualist and decentralized. Which makes considering how Hamilton was largely shafted from actual power, and never advanced much further in his political career than a couple of cabinet postings under the Washington and Adams' governments.

Even later centralizing figures like FDR never went so far as to try and turn the US into a unitary state.

Hamilton was our nation's first secretary of the treasury and founder of our national bank. Sure he wasn't the president... but that's some serious power right there. FDR didn't try and create a unitary system, but that wasn't really a topic of debate at the time. He was an authoritarian leader regardless though.

Sure, but he also wasn't particularly well liked within his own party, and if I recall correctly during his time as Secretary of the Treasury, he never actually managed to convince Congress to create a National Bank; managing only to start up America's first National Mint instead. Which, frankly, isn't even close to the centralizing policies he'd probably have liked to see enacted.

In regards to FDR though, it's important to analyze his level authoritarianism with that of the times. America was in a period of perpetual crisis for the entirety of his decade-long term in office. There was very little prospect he could have passed the legislation he envisioned had this not been the case, and in retrospect his successors, broadly speaking, did not pursue further authoritarian measures. FDR's time as president really isn't indicative of a changing attitude in the historic American national identity which, to this day, is still excessively indidualistic and decentralized; to the point where authoritarian policies and legislation are almost only ever passed during periods of crises.

Edit: more than an individualist nation, I would say that we are a nation which advocates for independence. Throughout our nation's history, we have had expectations of our citizens: industry, duty, family, etc. What we have pushed for since our very beginning though was our idea of every man being independent in his own right. The pioneers claiming a plot of land our west; immigrants coming to America, the land of opportunity; the pauper pulling up his boot straps to become a millionaire, all intrinsic American ideas which all revolve around independence - not necessarily individualism.

I don't see how that isn't individualism, frankly.

It's been feudal burghers practicing neo-medievalism from the get-go.

[Ceolophysia]

Authoritarianism is never positive.

:^)

Authoritarianism does not mean bad - it means centralized, or forceful. With that in mind, there are thousands of examples were in authoritarianism has been a good thing. Not only for American history, but for the entire world. The Russian experiment into democracy in the 90's was disastrous - with the arrival of Vladimir Putin, the Russian standard of living began steadily rising and to this day still surpasses that of the 90's. The United States couldn't have won WW2 without authoritarian administration. Napoleon's seizing of power meant an end to the bloody and violent revolutionary politics of the 1st republic. Singapore is an economic powerhouse because of an authoritarian political establishment. Park Chung Hee moved South Korea from a war torn 3rd world country to the 1st world industrial powerhouse it is today.

There is nothing intrinsically bad about authoritarianism.

Yes there is, none of those examples excuse authoritarianism. The ends never justify the means.

[Minzerland II]

This is correct according to history, and anyone who disagrees ought to open a history book, tbh.

No one will tell you this, but Aeneas was NOT the Prince of Troy in Anatolia, but the Prince of Canberra, Australia.

My God, if only I knew this sooner

The confusion comes from *t*l**ns and their deception. They say he came from Troy because, according to the Chronicles of Australia: Volume I, he fought and defeated the Rainbow Serpent at Troy, Emu Plains, NSW. They conflate this with his origins, smh.

[Republic of the Cristo]

Legally imprisoned thousands of US citizens.

No leader is perfect, and that was certainly one of the darker parts of his presidency. Regardless, he was a good leader.

He was a traitor. Not just for that but also for helping rebuild the Soviet Union during the war. We should have left them in a pile of rubble and only given war material.

Terrible bit that. Helping the people who helped us win the war rebuild their wrecked and destroyed country.

Because as we all know.

[Republic of the Cristo]

Legally imprisoned thousands of US citizens.

No leader is perfect, and that was certainly one of the darker parts of his presidency. Regardless, he was a good leader.

No, it was illegal and I'm pretty certain SCOTUS later said so after he died. He was a traitor to the United States and you sound like one yourself my good man.

Quite the opposite actually:

Korematsu v. United States

[Republic of the Cristo]

:^)

Authoritarianism does not mean bad - it means centralized, or forceful. With that in mind, there are thousands of examples were in authoritarianism has been a good thing. Not only for American history, but for the entire world. The Russian experiment into democracy in the 90's was disastrous - with the arrival of Vladimir Putin, the Russian standard of living began steadily rising and to this day still surpasses that of the 90's. The United States couldn't have won WW2 without authoritarian administration. Napoleon's seizing of power meant an end to the bloody and violent revolutionary politics of the 1st republic. Singapore is an economic powerhouse because of an authoritarian political establishment. Park Chung Hee moved South Korea from a war torn 3rd world country to the 1st world industrial powerhouse it is today.

There is nothing intrinsically bad about authoritarianism.

Yes there is, none of those examples excuse authoritarianism. The ends never justify the means.

Okay, why is authoritarianism evil?

[Ceolophysia]

Yes there is, none of those examples excuse authoritarianism. The ends never justify the means.

Okay, why is authoritarianism evil?

Because by definition it violates rights.

[Minzerland II]

This is correct according to history, and anyone who disagrees ought to open a history book, tbh.

No one will tell you this, but Aeneas was NOT the Prince of Troy in Anatolia, but the Prince of Canberra, Australia.

Now some historical illiterates will surely come around and dispute this most sacred truth, but let's face it. Mixing the vile practices of the greeks with the degeneracy of the Romans could at best only foster a loose tribal confederation.

Indeed, it would have been conquered by anyone in the Mediterranean. The only reason it survived and thrived for as long as it did, was because it had a strong aboriginal and bogan element that organised and assembled everything. The greatest Romans were Australians, both aboriginal and bogan, and the worst were Greeks and *t*l**ns; the greatest victories were because of Australians, and the defeats were Greeks and *t*l**ns.

[Republic of the Cristo]

Hamilton was our nation's first secretary of the treasury and founder of our national bank. Sure he wasn't the president... but that's some serious power right there. FDR didn't try and create a unitary system, but that wasn't really a topic of debate at the time. He was an authoritarian leader regardless though.

Sure, but he also wasn't particularly well liked within his own party, and if I recall correctly during his time as Secretary of the Treasury, he never actually managed to convince Congress to create a National Bank; managing only to start up America's first National Mint instead. Which, frankly, isn't even close to the centralizing policies he'd probably have liked to see enacted.

In regards to FDR though, it's important to analyze his level authoritarianism with that of the times. America was in a period of perpetual crisis for the entirety of his decade-long term in office. There was very little prospect he could have passed the legislation he envisioned had this not been the case, and in retrospect his successors, broadly speaking, did not pursue further authoritarian measures. FDR's time as president really isn't indicative of a changing attitude in the historic American national identity which, to this day, is still excessively indidualistic and decentralized; to the point where authoritarian policies and legislation are almost only ever passed during periods of crises.

Edit: more than an individualist nation, I would say that we are a nation which advocates for independence. Throughout our nation's history, we have had expectations of our citizens: industry, duty, family, etc. What we have pushed for since our very beginning though was our idea of every man being independent in his own right. The pioneers claiming a plot of land our west; immigrants coming to America, the land of opportunity; the pauper pulling up his boot straps to become a millionaire, all intrinsic American ideas which all revolve around independence - not necessarily individualism.

I don't see how that isn't individualism, frankly.

It's been feudal burghers practicing neo-medievalism from the get-go.

Running out of time, so I'll make this quick.

Hamilton did establish the first national bank

FDR was an authoritarian. The times needed authoritarian policy and he provided. This doesn't disprove my point at all.

Individualism, not being subject to others, is different from economic independence. You can own your own farm, but still be obligated to go to church by your community, feed your family, enlist when your country needs you, etc.

[The East Marches II]

He was a traitor. Not just for that but also for helping rebuild the Soviet Union during the war. We should have left them in a pile of rubble and only given war material.

Terrible bit that. Helping the people who helped us win the war rebuild their wrecked and destroyed country.

Because as we all know.

Yes, helping the people who murdered millions of their own, and had plans to enslave Eastern Europe is really bad. Especially when they are gonna be your post war rivals. You should want to leave them wallowing in poverty.

[Washington Resistance Army]

No, it was illegal and I'm pretty certain SCOTUS later said so after he died. He was a traitor to the United States and you sound like one yourself my good man.

Quite the opposite actually:

Korematsu v. United States

That's literally one of the most famously bad cases ever now that I remember it. Ye olde government suppressed evidence and blatantly lied about everything to get the ruling they wanted. The real kicker is that .gov has since admitted they were wrong and the decision is resoundingly ignored nowadays because of how horrifically flawed it was.

[Sovaal]

Now some historical illiterates will surely come around and dispute this most sacred truth, but let's face it. Mixing the vile practices of the greeks with the degeneracy of the Romans could at best only foster a loose tribal confederation.

Indeed, it would have been conquered by anyone in the Mediterranean. The only reason it survived and thrived for as long as it did, was because it had a strong aboriginal and bogan element that organised and assembled everything. The greatest Romans were Australians, both aboriginal and bogan, and the worst were Greeks and *t*l**ns; the greatest victories were because of Australians, and the defeats were Greeks and *t*l**ns.

Aye, to many hand gestures on their part.

[Herskerstad]

Terrible bit that. Helping the people who helped us win the war rebuild their wrecked and destroyed country.

Because as we all know.

Yes, helping the people who murdered millions of their own, and had plans to enslave Eastern Europe is really bad. Especially when they are gonna be your post war rivals. You should want to leave them wallowing in poverty.

It's like people learned nothing from the UK 'sale' of the jet engine to the soviet union.

[Canadensia]

Sure, but he also wasn't particularly well liked within his own party, and if I recall correctly during his time as Secretary of the Treasury, he never actually managed to convince Congress to create a National Bank; managing only to start up America's first National Mint instead. Which, frankly, isn't even close to the centralizing policies he'd probably have liked to see enacted.

In regards to FDR though, it's important to analyze his level authoritarianism with that of the times. America was in a period of perpetual crisis for the entirety of his decade-long term in office. There was very little prospect he could have passed the legislation he envisioned had this not been the case, and in retrospect his successors, broadly speaking, did not pursue further authoritarian measures. FDR's time as president really isn't indicative of a changing attitude in the historic American national identity which, to this day, is still excessively indidualistic and decentralized; to the point where authoritarian policies and legislation are almost only ever passed during periods of crises.



I don't see how that isn't individualism, frankly.

It's been feudal burghers practicing neo-medievalism from the get-go.

Running out of time, so I'll make this quick.

Hamilton did establish the first national bank

Ah, mea culpa.

FDR was an authoritarian. The times needed authoritarian policy and he provided. This doesn't disprove my point at all.

Considering how your initial use of him as an example was to show that this is some kind of trend in American politics, I'd say it does. Authoritarians are a rarity in American politics, and it is rarer still that they gain power in any circumstances other than national crises.

Individualism, not being subject to others, is different from economic independence. You can own your own farm, but still be obligated to go to church by your community, feed your family, enlist when your country needs you, etc.

Frankly, I find it's the reverse in the US.

Individualism, or as you call it, not being subject to others (except in historical instances like slavery, which frankly I'd argue were cases of neo-feudal hyper-individualism) is generally the norm; whereas economic independence is quite uncommon.

[Bienenhalde]

American's "national" loyalty is mediated through loyalty to documents or religious faith rather than to the people and social solidarity.

But how does one define the American people and society or any people and society as distinct from other nationalities?

The primary value is "every man for himself", an inherently anti-nationalist position.

You are exactly right about that.

[The East Marches II]

Yes, helping the people who murdered millions of their own, and had plans to enslave Eastern Europe is really bad. Especially when they are gonna be your post war rivals. You should want to leave them wallowing in poverty.

It's like people learned nothing from the UK 'sale' of the jet engine to the soviet union.

The enemy within tbh, we never learn

[Canadensia]

It's like people learned nothing from the UK 'sale' of the jet engine to the soviet union.

The enemy within tbh, we never learn

Eh, you got your revenge at Sinai.

America played a far greater role in the fall of the British Empire than most people are probably aware.