NationStates

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
But what will I do when I cause offense, or do something morally wrong? Should I pay penance via mortification of the flesh?

Pro tip: don't give a shit if you offend anybody, it's what I do[/quote]

Nope. Better to be courteous and considerate towards other people. Of course it should not be necessary to apologize for opposing evil or speaking up for what is right.

This actually brings up an interesting point of discussion, namely at what point is an evil act able to “slide” so to speak. Where is the ethical line drawn between “insignificant” acts of malice and harm and “significant” acts of malice and harm that warrant apology and/or atonement? As you may have guessed, I take a hardline approach in my dealings with others.

Totally Not OEP wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Pro tip: don't give a shit if you offend anybody, it's what I do

Exactly this.

It's the only way one survives on NSG.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:
Exactly this.

It's the only way one survives on NSG.

I am pretty sure you are wrong. People who are gratuitously offensive get DEAT'ed or DOS'ed. That does not happen to those who are polite and civil.

Bienenhalde wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:It's the only way one survives on NSG.

I am pretty sure you are wrong. People who are gratuitously offensive get DEAT'ed or DOS'ed. That does not happen to those who are polite and civil.

But apparently, given the reactions to some of my posts here, there’s a thing as “too much” civility; personally, I find this to be somewhat confusing of a concept, I must admit.

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:
I am pretty sure you are wrong. People who are gratuitously offensive get DEAT'ed or DOS'ed. That does not happen to those who are polite and civil.

But apparently, given the reactions to some of my posts here, there’s a thing as “too much” civility; personally, I find this to be somewhat confusing of a concept, I must admit.

Being too eager to please makes you seem a bit.... submissive.

Cappuccina wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:
But apparently, given the reactions to some of my posts here, there’s a thing as “too much” civility; personally, I find this to be somewhat confusing of a concept, I must admit.

Being too eager to please makes you seem a bit.... submissive.

I might be a bit of a “doormat” so to speak...

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:

Cappuccina wrote:Being too eager to please makes you seem a bit.... submissive.

I might be a bit of a “doormat” so to speak...

Although obedience to authority is important for social stability, that kind of extreme submissiveness is inappropriate from a man, at least towards social equals. A certain level of deference towards elders, officers of the law, and other such things is all right and good, but doormat-like submissiveness isn't.

Diopolis wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:
I might be a bit of a “doormat” so to speak...

Although obedience to authority is important for social stability, that kind of extreme submissiveness is inappropriate from a man, at least towards social equals. A certain level of deference towards elders, officers of the law, and other such things is all right and good, but doormat-like submissiveness isn't.

But you are all my superiors, right? My duty is to be of use for my fellow persons so as to ensure that the great clockwork of civilization runs harmoniously. Does that make sense?

Diopolis wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:
I might be a bit of a “doormat” so to speak...

Although obedience to authority is important for social stability, that kind of extreme submissiveness is inappropriate from a man, at least towards social equals. A certain level of deference towards elders, officers of the law, and other such things is all right and good, but doormat-like submissiveness isn't.

It's inappropriate for anyone, tbh. Only God (swt) deserves that level of submission.

Being overly polite is obnoxious. Politeness involves respectful behavior, nobody feels respected if someone apologies for every damn thing.

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:Being overly polite is obnoxious. Politeness involves respectful behavior, nobody feels respected if someone apologies for every damn thing.

But why? Is it not right to show deference to those who one views as better than oneself? Again, I’m still confused. You are all better than me.

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:Being overly polite is obnoxious. Politeness involves respectful behavior, nobody feels respected if someone apologies for every damn thing.

But why? Is it not right to show deference to those who one views as better than oneself? Again, I’m still confused. You are all better than me.

There is deference, and then there is whatever you’re doing.

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:Being overly polite is obnoxious. Politeness involves respectful behavior, nobody feels respected if someone apologies for every damn thing.

But why? Is it not right to show deference to those who one views as better than oneself? Again, I’m still confused. You are all better than me.

This is not deference. This is submission. Have some respect for yourself.

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:Being overly polite is obnoxious. Politeness involves respectful behavior, nobody feels respected if someone apologies for every damn thing.

So this is how Canadians truly feel

Bienenhalde wrote:Nope. Better to be courteous and considerate towards other people. Of course it should not be necessary to apologize for opposing evil or speaking up for what is right.

Banning sex isn't opposing evil or advocating what's right. Your own religion sees sex as a good thing within marriage.

Banning sex makes absolutely no sense at all. Extreme Gnosticism please exit out the backdoor, thank you.

I honestly don’t understand; I show deference (or is it submission?) in an attempt to be as righteous as I can be, I strive to forsake the wickedness of egoism, but apparently showing deference is evil? So no matter what I do, it’s as if I’m damned.

I just... I don’t know what to do, really.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:
But why? Is it not right to show deference to those who one views as better than oneself? Again, I’m still confused. You are all better than me.

This is not deference. This is submission. Have some respect for yourself.

But I just... can’t, I guess.

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:I honestly don’t understand; I show deference (or is it submission?) in an attempt to be as righteous as I can be, I strive to forsake the wickedness of egoism, but apparently showing deference is evil? So no matter what I do, it’s as if I’m damned.

I just... I don’t know what to do, really.

Nova Cyberia wrote:This is not deference. This is submission. Have some respect for yourself.

But I just... can’t, I guess.

Practice not acting stuck up (no offense intended). Try not to take the extreme high ground on such insignificant issues. Use casual words and speak like anyone with knowledge of slang does. Say words including fuck and shit and don't act like those ultra-clean fundemantalists who dare not say a simple word but support harm of innocents.

Soviet Tankistan wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:I honestly don’t understand; I show deference (or is it submission?) in an attempt to be as righteous as I can be, I strive to forsake the wickedness of egoism, but apparently showing deference is evil? So no matter what I do, it’s as if I’m damned.

I just... I don’t know what to do, really.



But I just... can’t, I guess.

Practice not acting stuck up (no offense intended). Try not to take the extreme high ground on such insignificant issues. Use casual words and speak like anyone with knowledge of slang does. Say words including fuck and shit and don't act like those ultra-clean fundemantalists who dare not say a simple word but support harm of innocents.

I... I need to rethink my life. I’ll see you all later, maybe.

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:But why? Is it not right to show deference to those who one views as better than oneself? Again, I’m still confused. You are all better than me.

That's the problem. I do not consider myself better than you. I'm averse to false Pride, which is one of the Seven Sins. So when you act as if I'm better than you, it is for the want of a better term, disrespectful.

Christ said that one must love oneself as one loves others. Consider that.

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:But why? Is it not right to show deference to those who one views as better than oneself? Again, I’m still confused. You are all better than me.

That's the problem. I do not consider myself better than you. I'm averse to false Pride, which is one of the Seven Sins. So when you act as if I'm better than you, it is for the want of a better term, disrespectful.

Christ said that one must love oneself as one loves others. Consider that.

Well then the problem, then, is that I love others and seek the common good, while simultaneously intensely loathing myself to the point of self-destruction. (I’ve even termed my personal philosophy “obliteration of the self”) Hence why I have doormat levels of submissiveness. Does that make sense? Perhaps I should bring this up to my therapist?

Anyway, I’ve detailed the thread too much; perhaps a question will help us get back to discussing the political right, but sadly, I’ve got nothing at the moment. Any suggestions for a new (and more cheerful) topic?

Soviet Tankistan wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:I honestly don’t understand; I show deference (or is it submission?) in an attempt to be as righteous as I can be, I strive to forsake the wickedness of egoism, but apparently showing deference is evil? So no matter what I do, it’s as if I’m damned.

I just... I don’t know what to do, really.



But I just... can’t, I guess.

Practice not acting stuck up (no offense intended). Try not to take the extreme high ground on such insignificant issues. Use casual words and speak like anyone with knowledge of slang does. Say words including f*ck and *hit and don't act like those ultra-clean fundemantalists who dare not say a simple word but support harm of innocents.

Cussing has nothing to do with this. Swaglord, don't cuss. It's better for you.

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:That's the problem. I do not consider myself better than you. I'm averse to false Pride, which is one of the Seven Sins. So when you act as if I'm better than you, it is for the want of a better term, disrespectful.

Christ said that one must love oneself as one loves others. Consider that.

Well then the problem, then, is that I love others and seek the common good, while simultaneously intensely loathing myself to the point of self-destruction. (I’ve even termed my personal philosophy “obliteration of the self”) Hence why I have doormat levels of submissiveness. Does that make sense? Perhaps I should bring this up to my therapist?

Um.....yes, you should

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:Anyway, I’ve detailed the thread too much; perhaps a question will help us get back to discussing the political right, but sadly, I’ve got nothing at the moment. Any suggestions for a new (and more cheerful) topic?

I never know the answer to this. What's a good right-wing topic to re-visit or something we haven't discussed before?

Would any of you guys want to impose any or all of the hallmarks of the present Chinese state into any of your ideal societies?

There. Cheerio.