Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: POTF 12 - Nominations

  1. #1
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Blog Entries

    Default POTF 12 - Nominations

    POTF is about recognising the very best posts, the best arguments and discourse in the D&D, and appropriately rewarding it.
    You shall progressively earn these medals once you achieve enough wins, but first you must be nominated in threads such as this one. And it works like this.

    Post of the Fortnight - Rules
    -Each user can nominate up to 2 posts per round, and the only valid form of nomination is by quoting with a link as shown below the chosen post in the PotF thread designated for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    Looking forward to getting this kicked off for real!
    -Each 15 days there will be a new Nomination thread put up, and all the posts written during this period are considered eligible, if properly nominated. Exception are posts who are somewhat breaking the ToS; upon being acted by Moderation, they are always considered uneligible.

    - Remember: It is possible to nominate up to 2 posts each round of the competition; it is also possible to change a nomination anytime before the actual round of nominations ends.

    - There will be two competitions held every month, with a period for nominations followed by a period of voting. The submitted posts can be discussed in a dedicated space.

    - Only posts that have not participated in a previous poll and that have been published in the current period of given time in any section of the D&D area may be nominated.

    - The authors of the nominated post will be informed so they can withdraw the candidacy if that is their wish.

    - The maximum number of participating posts in the final vote will be ten. If more than ten nominations are submitted, seconded nominations will take priority. After seconded nominations are considered, earliest nominations will take priority. If the number of posts submitted to the contest is less than ten, the organizing committee may nominate posts if it considers it appropriate.

    -The members of the committee will never nominate a post belonging to one of them, but the rest of the users can nominate their posts (organizers posts), and vice versa.

    -In the event of a tie, both posts will be awarded and both posters will receive rep and 1 competition point.

    - Public or private messages asking for a vote for a candidate post are forbidden. Violators (and their posts) may not participate in the running contest.

    - People are expected to consider the quality and structure of the post itself, more than the content of the same. While it's certainly impossible to completely split the two aspects when making our own opinion on a post, it remains intended, as also explained in the Competition Commentary Thread, that commenting and discussing on the content rather than on the form/structure of the post is considered off-topic for the purpose of this competition. You are free to nominate and vote for whatever reason you want, but what happens in public has to strictly follow up with the competition rules.

    A nominated post should:

    1. Be focused and relevant to the topic(s) being discussed.
    2. Demonstrate a well-developed, insightful and nuanced understanding of the topic(s) it is discussing.
    3. Be logically coherent, well organized and communicate its points effectively.
    4. Support its contentions with verifiable evidence, either in the form of links or references.
    5. Not be deliberately vexatious to other users.

    Good luck everyone!
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Nope. There is nothing to suggest dramatically that his heart is giving out. His heart attack is a testament to how well he can recover from something like that.

  2. #2
    Flinn's Avatar The Alpha Saint!
    Patrician Citizen Content Emeritus Gaming Director Modding Staff

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Blog Entries

    Default Re: POTF 12 - Nominations

    Quote Originally Posted by Dick Cheney. View Post
    Brilliant, cautious, calculating, and pragmatic, these are just some of the words that only begin to describe the political genius of Otto Von Bismarck. If politics were ever a game of chess, then Bismarck was always eight moves ahead of everybody else. He is the main architect of German unification (successfully defeating Austrian influence through Realpolitik), and the mastermind behind three quick and successful wars with Denmark, France, and Austria. In each case, he skillfully used diplomacy and manipulation to ensure that Prussia exited the war with more allies than it had previously. Yet, he was not above compromising and using reconciliation and treaties as a tool for political power, often allowing his defeated opponents to align with him for mutual benefit. In each case, Bismarck’s genius was in isolating his enemies. Knowing when to deal and when to fold.

    The Iron Chancellor

    After uniting the German states under Prussian rule, one major obstacle remained that threaten Prussia’s version of German nationalism, Pope Pius IX and the Catholic Church.

    An opponent unlike any other, the Pope’s powers had traditionally been far reaching. Able to claim legitimacy and independence of any state government (the closest thing to a sovereign multi-national body), Bismarck’s primarily concern was that Germany’s Catholic population and clergy would be more loyal to the Church in Rome than to the state. This of course was very problematic when Roman Catholics in Germany numbered 15 million (36.5% of the population) and the fact that they were disproportionately located in Polish communities, areas of the Reich that did not speak German and often clashed violently with Prussian settlers. Those Poles of course, who weren’t Catholic, also tended to be social democrats, whereas working in communal mines and farming villages differed significantly with both Prussian landowners (who valued private estates) and Progressive bureaucrats who valued free-trade. Combine these cultural differences (the Polish Question) with the fact that Prussia’s constitution had traditionally respected and guaranteed special autonomy and freedoms to Roman Catholics (including state funding for catholic schools and a private council of bishops who could meet and petition the government) and you have the makings of ruin for national identity. 60% of Germany’s population was Protestant, its true, and they also had similar constitutional privileges to their Catholic counterparts, yet Protestants and Lutherans were not nearly as global, multinational, or political (with a sovereign figure) as the Catholic Church. Of major concern, and a slap to German nationalists, was the fact that a non-German Pope still appointed non German Bishops, who in turn did not have to be German speakers, who ran the schools, ran the charities, ran the hospitals, handled marriages, lived in separate communities, published newspapers, and ran most parishes, in many cases with constitutional protection and state backing – including legitimacy and authority that came from God. A reckoning and war between Church and State was coming.

    Bismarck vs. Pope Pius IX - Kulturkampf (1871-1879)

    It’s unclear who fired first, historians like to say that the Vatican’s official proclamation of Papal Infallibility in 1870 was a direct attack against Liberalism. The decree proclaimed the Pope’s authority over Christian dogma to be binding and infallible, completely immune to the possibility of error, a ridiculous moral assertion, yet godly if ever put into practice. Bismarck’s obvious fears were the loss of state power to papal decrees and any chance of regulating the Church with any kind of legitimate authority (an infallible Pope would also lead to infallible ministers). Yet, historians should note that Pope Pius IX was playing a weak hand, having lost temporal power the same year to the kingdom of Italy, and not too many Europeans or Catholics were willing to restore the Papal States. Ultramontanism (including Papal Infallibility) was thus the Vatican’s way of adapting the Pope’s authority for the future – it no longer needed a physical kingdom for legitimacy, because the Pope’s authority came from God, and his actual subjects were the spiritual followers of Christ. In this sense, the Church was adapting itself to the times, a strictly religious role and spiritual kingdom without borders. Yet secularism was on the rise, along with scientific literacy and liberalism, and Papal Infallibility (now codified for the first time) was not a popular proposal with philosophical and intellectual thinkers, including many Catholics who believed Papal Infallibility -along with the recent Syllabus of Errors- went too far. It is not inconceivable then, that Bismarck and his coalition saw an opportunity.

    Bismarck’s overall goal again, was to separate church from state and protect German national identity (albeit with Prussian preferences), and his first step was to exercise state authority over education and religious/government appointments. To do this though, he would need to isolate Germany’s new Centre Party – a coalition of German Catholics and German minorities. Though not large enough to take on Liberals, Conservative, or Protestant factions, it was still a force (and legislative annoyance) that needed to be dealt with.

    Under the guise of “equality” and “equal protection of the laws,” Kulturkampf began with the creation of the Ministry of Culture (a fusion of separate Catholic and Protestant education wings) to oversee the future regulation and state inspection of all public and private schools – including Catholic ones. The next law immediately enacted was the Pulpit Law, a controversial new law that could in theory imprison Catholic priests and clergymen who voiced poltical opionions before a crowd or national assembly. Bismarck’s strategy then, and justification, was the classic secularist argument for the separation of Church and State, - the Church (Bismarck argued) had no right to interfere with or dictate state politics. Yet, unlike the American model (and German constitution), the German parliament was also clearly enacting laws that interfered with the free governance of religion. Bismarck countered however, with the claim that the German Centre Party was monopolized by Rome, and its interests were a clear obstacle to individual freedom and a healthy separation of Church and State. Winning arguments it appeared for both liberal secularists, conservatives, and anti-Catholic factions. Bismarck, it seemed, would win by isolating his opponents once again.

    Bismarck on the purpose of the Kulturkampf, Speech in the Prussian House of Lords, March 10th 1873
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    "The question we currently deal with, in my opinion, is falsely described, and the perspective by which we look at it, is a wrong one, if one regards it as a confessional one. It is mainly a political one; it is not about the struggle, as our Catholic fellow citizens are told, of a Protestant dynasty against the Catholic church, it is not a struggle between believers and unbelievers, it is the age-old struggle between kingship and priesthood, a power struggle as old as mankind, older than the appearance on earth of our saviour, the power struggle Agamemnon fought with his seers in Aulis, the power struggle which shaped the German history in the Middle Ages, leading to the desintegration of the German Empire, in the form of the conflict between emperors and popes, and which resulted in the execution of the last descendant of the illustrious Swabian dynasty by the axe of a French conqueror, a French conqueror alied with the pope.

    This power struggle is subject to the same conditions as any other struggle; it is a misinterpretation of the question with the object to impress people without judgment, if it is described as a matter of oppression of the church. It is a matter of defense of the state, of a delimitation, inhowhar priesthood and inhowfar royal rule shall reach, this delimitation has to be found in a way that the state can continue to exist. Because in this world the state claims both authority and priority."

    What Bismarck did not anticipate however, was a wave of cultural resentment that centered in Prussia.

    Though Bismarck’s initial goal was to regulate Church influence -as it pertained to politics-, it was not to defeat or extinguish Catholicism itself. A pragmatic, but impossible goal given the prejudices of his coalition. Prussians despised Catholic Poles and considered them Reichsfeinde (enemies of the Reich). Polish migrations to the Ruhr area were also viewed with deep cultural suspicion, and evidence of a nationalist takeover. Meanwhile, liberal secularists saw state inspections of all Prussian schools as a way to finally outlaw religion in the classroom, the ultimate triumph of progress over tradition. Additionally, conservative leaders, along with Protestant allies, jumped at the chance to declare a culture war on Catholics, pushing for even more measures of Germanization and an end to cultural and racial impurities. Even Bismarck, who so often separated policy from ideology, betrayed his ideological leanings when he suggested European leaders ought to help select the next Pope, and that the Polish question would only be settled through violence or deportation. The end result was an uncontrollable wave of anti-Catholic sentiment, and a series of new laws and policies that were aimed at controlling and dissembling the Catholic Church in Prussia.

    Beginning in 1872, Prussia’s Parliament (separate from the Reichstag) passed the School Supervision Act, which formally removed Catholic curriculums and clergy from Prussian schools. And on the national side, Bismarck expelled the Jesuits from Germany when Pope Pius IX refused to recognize Germany’s ambassador (a Cardinal who had opposed Papal Infallibility) or temper public support for Germany’s Centre Party. Prussia’s constitution was also amended to accommodate the new laws, and many Catholic ministers were removed from office. Finally, amid obvious protesting from German Catholics and Catholic Bishops, formal diplomatic relations between Germany and Rome were suspended. The culture war was on.

    The crisis reached a fever pitch however with the appointment of Adalbert Falk to the Ministry of Education. For his part, Adalbert Falk attempted to place strict government control over religious training and ecclesiastical appointments, eventually leading to the controversial May Laws in 1873. These laws -while intending to disrupt the Pope’s connections to German seminaries- gave the government far reaching powers to regulate and select Priests. Priests who refused to submit themselves to special state exams and disciplinary courts faced fines, imprisonment, and exile. In addition, new legislation was passed that allowed state incentives for German citizens to leave Catholic orders, and in 1874 a new state law was passed that allowed civil marriages for the first time.


    -Otto Von Bismarck, 1872. Inferred from Canossa speech to Reichstag

    Catholic opposition to Kulturkampf and the May Laws of course was immense. Nearly all German bishops, clergy and laymen rejected the legality of the new laws, with the Pope himself publically decrying them. Nearly 1,800 Priests were imprisoned, and a third of all monasteries and churches in Prussia were closed due to vacancies. Though there were instances of violence, many Catholics chose to leave the country, others sought more passive forms of resistance. Those that stayed sought and hosted mass and Sunday schools in their homes, others setup underground charities to support and fund non-government priests. For their part, Catholic Bishops issued formal letters of dissent and the number of Catholic newspapers -both public and underground- grew. The Centre Party also nearly doubled in size – both in the Reichstag and Prussian Parliament, and its leader, Ludwig Windthorst, became a popular hero for German minorities.

    The one exception to an otherwise peaceful opposition was the attempted assassination on Otto Von Bismarck. While the perpetrator -acting in the name of religious freedom- clearly acted alone, this gave security officials political cover to confiscate church property in the event Catholics did not comply with state mandates, though other draconinan measures included the confiscation of Catholic newspapers and the extradition of Catholic bishops.

    In all, Kulturkampf had the opposite effect of what Bismarck had intended. Rather then push Catholics towards the state, many felt unjustly persecuted, which made their participation in the Centre Party essential. Living under a police state -including threats of extradition and constant supervision- also forced Prussian Catholics to rely more on each other and their communities, both for spiritual care and protection. Of particular embarrassment to non-Catholic Liberals -who otherwise supported Kulturkampf- was the house arrest of several elderly bishops and archbishops, many in their 70s and 80s. Many ties between Rome and German Catholics were also strengthened.

    By 1878, Bismarck’s coalition was finally showing its weakness. Liberals could no longer support Kulturkampf if it did not advance individual freedom. An all-powerful authoritarian government -which could fine, imprison, and extricate citizens who voiced political dissent- also ran contrary to liberal ideas. Protestants themselves were also growing wary of state intervention in public schools; the loss of religious teaching, and religious ministers, made them feel as if Germany and Prussia were becoming a heathen state. Even Junkers and Conservatives -members of Bismarck’s own political class- retested the loss of Christian traditions, including Christian marriages. Most alarming to Bismarck however, was the rise of a Socialist Movement, which took Kulturkampf as an opportunity to attack all religions. Seeing the writing the on the wall -including the Centre Party which was growing stronger- Bismarck took it upon himself to personally resolve the culture war.

    Bismarck’s opportunity came with the death of Pope Pius IX and coronation of Pope Leo III in 1879. In this event, Bismarck acted brilliantly. He entered direct negotiations with Pope Leo III, sidestepping the Reichstag, but also the Centre Party. During negotiations he was able to receive concessions, which included papal support for a civil registry of German clerics, in return for a slow process of repealing the Kulturkampf laws. Bismarck also restored diplomatic relations and supported the Pope in international affairs, including a Spanish territorial dispute, which allowed the Pope to abstain on Bismarck’s domestic agenda, such as public education and military spending. But by pardoning bishops, restoring diplomatic relations, and supporting the Pope on international affairs, Bismarck was awarded the Supreme Order of Christ, becoming the only Protestant to ever receive an award for Catholic chivalry. For his part, and arguably weak hand, Pope Leo III gained a powerful ally in Germany on a continent that was becoming ever more hostile to theology and Catholic tradition. Yet, by waiting for the death of Pope Pius IX, Bismarck was able to substitute his feud with Catholic ideology with Pope Pius’s personality, a brilliant safe facing measure that helped make political reconciliation possible – including an alliance with the Centre Party against the socialists. Germany’s relations with Austria were also secured through the Dual Alliance, an unlikely event if Prussian Protestants had been allowed to dominate German politics. In short however, by securing political interests, not yielding to the Centre Party, and showcasing remarkable restraint, Bismarck also showed that Germany would bow to no power but its own.
    Under the patronage of Finlander, patron of Lugotorix & Lifthrasir & joerock22& Socrates1984; of the Imperial House of Hader

  3. #3
    Abdülmecid I's Avatar ¡Ay Carmela!
    Moderation Overseer Civitate Moderation Mentor

    Join Date
    Jul 2014

    Default Re: POTF 12 - Nominations

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Is their a less pronounced carbohydrate digestion enzyme/gut flora/tolerance issue with the Mesopotamian/Anatolian farmer wave? I imagine the "barrier" to eating a cereal diet for HGs is lower as it were, but still something. The experience for naive Austra;lian Aboriginal populations is poor dental and digestive health, not just from sugar and alcohol but even from flour.

    Makes me think when I share my porridge with Cyclops Jnr every morning what I'm really doing is celebrating twin genocide-by-replacement events. "The oats represent the Borging of Mesolithic Europeans, the milk is for the Yamnaya rapist-warriors, and the salt is the tears of their victims. We add honey at the end because screw the bees, right?"
    Quote Originally Posted by Muizer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Basil II the B.S View Post
    ''the most politically intolerant Americans, according to the analysis, tend to be whiter, more highly educated, older, more urban, and more partisan themselves.''
    That's the profile of the White Liberal .White Conservatives tend to be lesser educated and/or non-urban.
    Your inference, not the article's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Basil II the B.S View Post
    The most intolerant areas in the map of the article also overlap with deep blue areas. My source backs my statement. Seattle, Boston and NYC aren't exactly consevative bastions. Aren't they?
    Selective reading. The article concludes no such thing. Nor should it, considering there are plenty examples that show the opposite.

    Inasfar as the article 'judges' liberals vs conservatives (which is not actually the point of the article) it conlcudes:

    In general, Republicans seem to dislike Democrats more than Democrats dislike Republicans, PredictWise found. We don’t know why this is, but this is not the only study to have detected an imbalance. For example, in a 2014 survey by the Pew Research Center, half of consistently conservative respondents said it was important for them to live in a place where most people share their political views—compared with just 35 percent of consistent liberals. But a more recent survey, conducted in December by The Atlantic and the Public Religion Research Institute, found that Democrats were the ones showing more ill will—with 45 percent saying they’d be unhappy if their child married a Republican (versus 35 percent of Republicans saying they’d be unhappy if their child married a Democrat). So it’s hard to know exactly what’s going on, but what’s clear is that both sides are becoming more hostile toward one another.
    The standout feature is quite evidently that the democrat's prejudice against republicans and the republican prejudice against democrats are highly correlated with eachother.

    There's a word for that: polarization. What else is new.

    Do you actually believe you're correct, I wonder. Are you aware that you're reading these sources selectively? Have you just stopped seeing when data could be open to alternative interpretations?
    Last edited by Abdülmecid I; June 23, 2019 at 01:18 PM. Reason: Aexodus bullies me to add the appropriate quotes. pls help :(

  4. #4
    Katsumoto's Avatar Quae est infernum es
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2009

    Default Re: POTF 12 - Nominations

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdülmecid I View Post
    Don't you know, calling a spade a spade is now a taboo, according to reactionary political correctness. This is why the the term "alt-right" was invented as a convenient euphemism, before being also tainted by the violent acts of its fandom. In any case, saying that racist activists are misrepresenting the situation in South Africa in order to promote their bigotry is a mere statement of fact, while Basil's ignoring evidence under the pretext of lack of impartiality is the easiest and most common logical fallacy.

    To be precise, it's not on stage five, but simply fulfills three criteria, classification (no. 1), symbolisation (no. 2) and polarisation (no. 5). In comparison, Basil's narrative about the threat of liberal vermins match not only the aforementioned categories, but also dehumanisation (no. 3), so, in a rather ironic twist, Basil's view on "liberals" is slightly more genocidal than the situation white farmers face in South Africa. Moreover, that's the second time Basil's own source directly contradicts his claims, which is why I expect both Daily Fail and Genocide Watch soon being labelled as the puppets of cosmopolital Bolshevism.

    Presenting evidence can hardly be described as getting defensive. If someone argued that Casa Pound's membership is literally composed of tortoises, I would still dismiss this accusation, without of course defending them or endorsing their ideas. Arguing to discover the truth is the oldest form of debating, before right-wing post-modernism wrecked our moral standards about bad-faith partisanship. Meanwhile, instead of actually challenging the data I cited, you chose to quickly reject them by questioning their credibility. So, how about leaving the "ad hominem" attacks aside for a bit and concentrate on disproving all these facts about white genocide being nonexistent in South Africa, white farmers actually being underrepresented in murders and crime actually being higher than in the Apartheid.
    "I pray Heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this house and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof."
    - John Adams, on the White House, in a letter to Abigail Adams (2 November 1800)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts