Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 90

Thread: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

  1. #1
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    22,437

    Default Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    In similar vein to a different thread, I would like to start this thread as a "Catch-all" for rants other posters and I often want to make towards rightwings, far-right, alt-right, conservatives, globalists, what-have-you. The purpose of this thread is in part to have discussions about rightwing-leaning groups and their faults and failures and in part to blow steam when the actions of a rightwing-oriented group is driving you crazy and you want to rant.

    First, some definitions, from Wikipedia:

    Center Right-wing: Parties of the centre-right generally support liberal democracy, capitalism, the market economy (though they may accept government regulation to control monopolies), private property rights and a limited welfare state (for example, government provision of education and medical care). They support conservatism and economic liberalism and oppose socialism and communism.

    Far Right:"far-right" is used to describe those who favor an absolutist government, which uses the power of the state to support the dominant ethnic group or religion and often to criminalize other ethnic groups or religions.

    Alt-right: Again, from wikipedia: The term "alt-right" is sometimes ill-defined. [...] The Southern Poverty Law Center defined the alt-right as "a set of far-right ideologies, groups and individuals whose core belief is that 'white identity' is under attack by multicultural forces using 'political correctness' and 'social justice' to undermine white people and 'their' civilization."

    Conservativism: Conservatism is a political and social philosophy promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. The central tenets of conservatism include tradition, hierarchy, and authority, as established in respective cultures, as well as property rights. Conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as organized religion, parliamentary government, and property rights, with the aim of emphasizing continuity.



    Please keep in mind that I don't wish to start a discussion about what center-right is or what far-right is etc. While some discussion about these terms is of course welcome and frankly, I have no control or authority over what people discuss in this thread... don't expect me to spend a lot of time in theoretical discussions about the terms used here and their meaning. I give them here so that we have some basis for discussion, a common denominator if you want.


    Another thing to consider is that this thread is not just about USA. It's about the whole world. If you want to blow steam over Duterte's ruthless authoritarianism, Bolsolano's dangerous rhetoric or the people supporting Franco's museum, have a go.

    _____________________________________________________________________________

    Rant begins!

    * Far right: Yes, Fascists and Nazis are far rights! I am sick to my stomach of far-rightwings claiming Nazis are leftwing just because they had socialism in the name. No, Fascism and Communism have very few things in common aside of authoritarianism.
    You can't simply label everything you don't agree with as "leftwing" or "Socialism".

    * Anti-vaxxers: Personally, I consider these people among the most dangerous in the modern world after armed terrorists. It is not just that your kids getting sick increase medical costs for everyone. You are endangering everyone. It is not just your choice when it affects me and my loved ones. If you want to not have a vaccine, please go to a far away island where you won't present a danger to the rest of us.

    * Climate change deniers: 95% of scientists agree, every 3-4 years we have another "hottest summer on record!" or "coldest winter on record!" or "most freaky hurricane season on record!". But some people, even some well educated people think this is a hoax.
    It's not a hoax! Get your head out of the sand!

    * Institutional Racism in USA is a myth: No, it's not. It may be a far more complex issue than "white people bad! Oppressive! Eeeeevul!" but it is there. Yes, people in ghettos and rundown places are more likely to be criminals and minorities are more likely to be in ghettos and rundown places. I don't disagree with that.
    But whether there are reasons or not, it is far more likely to be shot and killed in USA if you're a black person running down a street than if you're a white person (Actually this policeman said it better)




    Feel free to challenge or support the above views, or bring your own grievances against certain rightwing politicians or groups from around the world.


    PS. Before you call me a commie, I am moderate rightwing (fiscally) and socially conservative. I believe patriotism is a good thing and I believe the country should reflect the values of the nation and if immigrants don't like it, they can leave. I generally oppose multiculty and loathe Political Correctness although I have my limits.
    I.e. I am against kids in cages whatever their parents did. Come on, don't go THAT far.
    Last edited by alhoon; October 06, 2020 at 11:15 AM.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  2. #2

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    ! I am sick to my stomach of far-rightwings claiming Nazis are leftwing just because they had socialism in the name. No, Fascism and Communism have very few things in common aside of authoritarianism.
    So Lenin was a fascist then? What about Mao? Pol Pot? What was the functional difference between their regime and that of NSDAP?

  3. #3
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    22,437

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    So Lenin was a fascist then? What about Mao? Pol Pot? What was the functional difference between their regime and that of NSDAP?
    Simple: They were not based on racial superiority, they were aggressively fighting against the power of the elites, the rich and the burgoise that were, in their opinion, oppressing the masses and exploiting workers.
    The Nazis were aggressively fighting FOR the power of the superior race, thinking it would be awesome and proper to exploit the lesser races.

    I.e. the far leftwings fought for greater equality, the demolition of national barriers and the benefit of the low-people with focus on the masses (and screw individuals) while the far rightwings were fighting for greater inequality and the benefit of the master race and the nation, with a bigger focus on the individual and mostly, the nation.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  4. #4

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Simple: They were not based on racial superiority, they were aggressively fighting against the power of the elites, the rich and the burgoise that were, in their opinion, oppressing the masses and exploiting workers.
    The Nazis were aggressively fighting FOR the power of the superior race, thinking it would be awesome and proper to exploit the lesser races.

    I.e. the far leftwings fought for greater equality, the demolition of national barriers and the benefit of the low-people with focus on the masses (and screw individuals) while the far rightwings were fighting for greater inequality and the benefit of the master race and the nation, with a bigger focus on the individual and mostly, the nation.
    But Marx himself was a racist who constantly ranted against Slavs and Russians in particular. So... many, if not most non-Western leftist regimes aren't leftist then? China has de-facto racial policies (they are trying to "breed" provincial minorities with Han Chinese, in eerie similarity to German Lebensraum).
    Then we also have reverse racism of USSR, where ethnic Russians were de-facto oppressed by "internationalist" (as in non-Russian nationalists that hated Russians)Soviet government that barely had any Russians in it and that did de-facto ethnic cleansing and "derussification" of many ethnic Russian regions post-Civil War, not to mention that Russian society has been either murdered or forced out of the country, essentially proving that treatment of Russians by Soviet government was nothing short of conventional genocide. Stalin's USSR also had no problem with "relocating" whole ethnicities like Chechens and Crimean Tatars.
    Then we have marxist movements in non-Western nations, where marxist ideology is often intertwined with local's national and often even racial antagonism with oppressing foreigners, like communists in Rhodesia or FARC in Colombia.
    So racial superiority doesn't really make NSDAP different from any other leftist regimes in the same century.

  5. #5
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    22,437

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Whatever form the implementation of the regimes took, racial equality was in the agenda of the communists and racial inequality was in the agenda of Far rights.

    In USSR everyone was oppressed, not specific races. Ethnic Russians were in fact less oppressed than say Tatars. The Soviet Union saw the national identity as an enemy of the unity-of-the-people so it targeted large ethnic groups that it considered dangerous to the idea of equality. I.e. the targeted ethnic groups were not targeted because they were considered inferior but because they were considered dangerous for the ideals the communists wanted to promote. Tatars for example were kicked out because some of them collaborated with the Nazis not because they were considered "a lesser race".

    The guys sending Tatars to their deaths didn't consider Tatars as lesser people, they considered them enemies that had to die. The guys gassing the Jews considered them a lesser race.
    This is an important difference.
    Both Nazis and Communists used genocide. But they didn't do it for the same reasons nor with the same justification.
    Both the Fascists and the Nazis believed in racial superiority. But the Italian Fascists didn't do industrialized genocide until they were overrun by the Nazis. They Fascists were just buttholes to the "lesser" people - with some killings. I.e. while both Fascists and Nazis believed in racial superiority, but they didn't BOTH use genocide on their own people to achieve racial purity.


    As such, nooope, Racial Superiority is something Far Rightwings did.
    Oppressing ethnic minorities because they are of an ideology that is considered dangerous to the state (Tatars and more in the 40s in USSR, Uyghurs in China today) is something leftwings did.
    Both sides have murderous buttholes with the blood of millions in their hands. But for a different reason and different ideology.
    Last edited by alhoon; October 06, 2020 at 04:34 PM.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  6. #6

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    racial equality was in the agenda of the communists and racial inequality was in the agenda of Far rights.
    No, agenda of communists was class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs. Racial equality may have been an agenda of some communist movements, but then again, Mussolini's Italy also accepted Africans into fascist party and even NSDAP started handing out "honorary Aryan" status to everyone left right and center, from non-German Europeans to Native Americans and population of colonies that viewed Germans as liberators from "democratic" colonials. Then again, we have Marx himself who viewed Slavs as "lesser race". He also had funny ideas about Jewish people too. So no, communism was never about racial equality. At the end of the day, Gotfrid Feder's ideas were pretty much carbon copy of marxist ideas of their time.

    In USSR everyone was oppressed, not specific races. Ethnic Russians were in fact less oppressed than say Tatars. The Soviet Union saw the national identity as an enemy of the unity-of-the-people so it targeted large ethnic groups that it considered dangerous to the idea of equality. I.e. the targeted ethnic groups were not targeted because they were considered inferior but because they were considered dangerous for the ideals the communists wanted to promote. Tatars for example were kicked out because some of them collaborated with the Nazis not because they were considered "a lesser race".
    USSR had "corenization" policies which essentially were mini-Lebensraums for certain ethnic minorities within former Russian Empire, typically corresponding to the nationality of non-Russians that were in charge. In such a way, Gerogian Dzhugashvili added a bunch of non-Gerogian territories like Abkhazia and Osetia, where local non-Georgians were forced to assimilate and were discriminated.
    The guys sending Tatars to their deaths didn't consider Tatars as lesser people, they considered them enemies that had to die. The guys gassing the Jews considered them a lesser race.
    This is an important difference.
    Both Nazis and Communists used genocide. But they didn't do it for the same reasons nor with the same justification.
    Both the Fascists and the Nazis believed in racial superiority. But the Italian Fascists didn't do industrialized genocide until they were overrun by the Nazis. They Fascists were just buttholes to the "lesser" people - with some killings. I.e. while both Fascists and Nazis believed in racial superiority, but they didn't BOTH use genocide on their own people to achieve racial purity.
    Again, plenty of examples where "class warfare " was racialized. Communists in Rhodesia and South Africa, for example, viewed ethnic Europeans as racial enemies, and other leftist regimes, including USSR, supported them, meaning that communists were perfectly fine with racial antagonism when it was politically and culturally expedient.
    As such, nooope, Racial Superiority is something Far Rightwings did.
    Oppressing ethnic minorities because they are of an ideology that is considered dangerous to the state (Tatars and more in the 40s in USSR, Uyghurs in China today) is something leftwings did.
    Both sides have murderous buttholes with the blood of millions in their hands. But for a different reason and different ideology.
    As I said, the nature of the act itself is purely racial in its basis. If Uygurs were punished strictly for not being zealous communists is one thing, China's current attempts at literally erasing them by breeding them with Han Chinese is as racial as Germans intending to do the same thing to "lesser races". Same functionality.

  7. #7
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    22,437

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Well, you got right the part about the class warfare being the focus. Class Warfare was the mantra, and if racial equality served the agenda, so be it. Still in many of the examples, even where communist regimes acted on race lines, the "down with the evil bosses!" was the rhetoric. The Rhodesians and South Africans targeted predominantly whites because the whites were the bosses... at least in theory. That's what they were saying and I bet most of them still rationalize their actions the same way.

    I don't know what Marx said and what he believed about Slavs. I don't know the guy, I don't read Marxist crap. But I have heard 1000 communists promoting equality in my university, based on Marx's teachings while the "Marx was seeing Slavs as inferior" is something I hear vague things from and not from reliable sources.
    Do not get this as an invitation to link me large articles about Marx, or copy paste quotes from Marx. I simply don't care what Marx says. I won't read them, I won't respond to them and they won't change my mind that most communist regimes were egalitarian in terms of race at least in theory, even if their actions targeted (and target) specific groups. (Although I agree it was often made because it was politically convenient)

    USSR targeting specific groups was not because they believed in ethnic superiority, it was for political reasons, that made a mockery of their mantra that all men are equal. They discriminated against ethnic groups because it was convenient and as collective punishment while preaching they do it for the good of all the people. They targeted the "Rich" nations which happened to be the colonial masters. A poor white guy in Rhodesia? Well, sucks to be you buddy, your side was full of evil bosses that oppressed the people etc etc. But as far as I know, most such groups in Asia and Africa do not say "Blacks are superior species!". They seek revenge on the wrongs done to their ancestors by colonial regimes.

    Anyway, the fuctionality may be similar (not the same, you take the examples too far) but the philosophy behind the acts is different.
    PS. as far as I know the Han Chinese avoid the "unreformed" Uygurs, they don't attempt to marry them. They want to de-muslify them first and de-nomadize them. After they change their cultural identity to the "state appropriate one" then they "seal the deal" by marrying them.



    REGARDLESS: Whenever you see me saying "Nazi" or "Fascist" here, you know where I stand and that I consider them far-rights for the reasons mentioned. Whenever you see me saying "Far-right" you would know that I include "Nazis" and "Fascists" for the reasons mentioned.
    You may disagree all you want but personally I will go by the definition of Far Right as given in the OP, and I will include Nazis and Fascists there.

    You will also keep hearing me ranting about people not accepting that Nazis are far right and fundamentally different than the communists. Genocide was the tool used, but for different goals.
    You are free to disagree, but it is unlikely that I will change my opinion.
    Last edited by alhoon; October 06, 2020 at 06:18 PM.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  8. #8

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Well, you got right the part about the class warfare being the focus. Class Warfare was the mantra, and if racial equality served the agenda, so be it. Still in many of the examples, even where communist regimes acted on race lines, the "down with the evil bosses!" was the rhetoric. The Rhodesians and South Africans targeted predominantly whites because the whites were the bosses... at least in theory. That's what they were saying and I bet most of them still rationalize their actions the same way.
    That's not different from any other racial ideology. For example, NSDAP's anti-semitism also started with "Jews are landlords and bankers" and blablabla
    30s German anti-semitism and 70s African communist hatred of the "white man" are functionally same things.
    I don't know what Marx said and what he believed about Slavs. I don't know the guy, I don't read Marxist crap. But I have heard 1000 communists promoting equality in my university, based on Marx's teachings while the "Marx was seeing Slavs as inferior" is something I hear vague things from and not from reliable sources.
    Do not get this as an invitation to link me large articles about Marx, or copy paste quotes from Marx. I simply don't care what Marx says. I won't read them, I won't respond to them and they won't change my mind that most communist regimes were egalitarian in terms of race at least in theory, even if their actions targeted (and target) specific groups.

    USSR targeting specific groups was not because of ethnic superiority, it was for political reasons, that made a mockery of their mantra that all men are equal.

    Anyway, the fuctionality may be similar (not the same, you take the examples too far) but the philosophy behind the acts is different.
    PS. as far as I know the Han Chinese avoid the "unreformed" Uygurs, they don't attempt to marry them. They want to de-muslify them first and de-nomadize them. After they change their cultural identity to the "state appropriate one" then they "seal the deal" by marrying them.
    You don't need to read Marx's crap to like him, just to understand what his ideology is all about.
    It is important to look at main sources and pay less attention to ideological acrobatics of modern Western left which is trying to erase aspects of its ideology's history that make them look less presentable.
    If you are going for philosophy of Marxism, then it is just "bosses bad, people with money bad", which are always personified by racial or other identitarian markers. In case of early USSR, they demonized Petrian Russian elites, in case of NSDAP they demonized the Jews, in case of something like ZAMLA they demonized Europeans in general, while in case of Maoist China now they demonize... non-Chinese.
    REGARDLESS: Whenever you see me saying "Nazi" or "Fascist" here, you know where I stand and that I consider them far-rights for the reasons mentioned. Whenever you see me saying "Far-right" you would know that I include "Nazis" and "Fascists" for the reasons mentioned.
    You may disagree all you want but personally I will go by the definition of Far Right as given in the OP, and I will include Nazis and Fascists there.

    You will also keep hearing me ranting about people not accepting that Nazis are far right and fundamentally different than the communists. Genocide was the tool used, but for different goals.
    As I said, it is simply not factually correct, since National-Socialists lacked the most fundamental aspect of right-wing politics - emphasis on individualism and personal liberty. On the other hand, National-Socialism is bound with other types of left-wing ideologies by the virtue of its inherent collectivism.
    The goal of any genocide is pretty straight-forward - to remove undesirable population in specific area. Like I said, there is little functional difference between what Hitler did in Jewish ghetto in Poland or what Lenin did to Russian villages in Semirechje. Nature of both genocides was racial in both cases.

  9. #9
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    22,437

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    And as the definition of Far-right goes, FAR-right wing policies do not put emphasis on personal liberty but on national or ethnic superiority. Far-right is not rightwing. And of course, right-wing does not put that much emphasis on individualism and personal liberty. It puts some weight on it, but not as much as you suggest. Rightwings are by definition conservative (see the definition in the OP), they are not socially liberal and they are not necessarily tolerant. For example, traditional rightwings do not support LGBT marriage. Traditional rightwings do not support separation of church and state. On the other hand, rightwings are capitalists. And capitalists generally support Globalism.

    In short, HH, what you describe is not "rightwing" it is closer to "Liberal" (the classic term, socially liberal, economically liberal). Rightwings may support the free market, capitalism etc but they also support globalism and multinationals getting powers over the individual etc.

    The "black supremacists" in South Africa (which are a small fraction) are delving Far-Right since they promote racial superiority and they use absolutism to promote their desired collectivism. Being authoritarian doesn't make a state communist or far-rightwing. There are Authoritarians in all colors.

    Like I said, there is little functional difference between what Hitler did in Jewish ghetto in Poland or what Lenin did to Russian villages in Semirechje. Nature of both genocides was racial in both cases.
    Yes, there's little functional difference in butchering undesirables. The reasons for wanting to remove them at any cost were different though.

    You may notice that both sides are horrible. That's because both sides are horrible.


    To surmise: Nope, individualism is certainly not the main aspect of rightwing ideologies, just part of it, and far-right ideologies veer even further away from individualism in support of the all-glorious nation or superior race.
    Last edited by alhoon; October 06, 2020 at 07:25 PM.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  10. #10

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    And as the definition of Far-right goes, FAR-right wing policies do not put emphasis on personal liberty but on national or ethnic superiority. Far-right is not rightwing. And of course, right-wing does not put that much emphasis on individualism and personal liberty. It puts some weight on it, but not as much as you suggest. Rightwings are by definition conservative (see the definition in the OP), they are not socially liberal and they are not necessarily tolerant. For example, traditional rightwings do not support LGBT marriage. Traditional rightwings do not support separation of church and state. On the other hand, rightwings are capitalists. And capitalists generally support Globalism.

    In short, HH, what you describe is not "rightwing" it is closer to "Liberal" (the classic term, socially liberal, economically liberal). Rightwings may support the free market, capitalism etc but they also support globalism and multinationals getting powers over the individual etc.

    The "black supremacists" in South Africa (which are a small fraction) are delving Far-Right since they promote racial superiority and they use absolutism to promote their desired collectivism. Being authoritarian doesn't make a state communist or far-rightwing. There are Authoritarians in all colors.
    By that logic, most if not all leftist regimes are right-wing. Again, the flaw in your thinking is that we look too much into modern Western left's interpretation, where it engages in white-washing or erasing historical aspects of its ideology that don't fit the current "progressive" narrative. We just went through almost every leftist regime in history promoting ethnic or cultural superiority in some shape or form, from discrimination of ethnic Russians in USSR to Naziesque policies of Communist China against non-Han minorities.
    Most leftist regimes definitely did not support LGBT rights, and were often against religion only because they view it as competition, due to somewhat religious nature of their ideology. In the same way, we have Western leftists, who completely ditched "working class" and are now in bed with globalist corporate elites ("democratic socialists" in USA and Labor in UK being perfect examples). On the other see far-right nationalist movements that are pro-free speech and against corporate hegemony.
    Hence why definition of the dichotomy should be based on the lines of relation between individualism and collectivism, since class aspect is simply no longer a defining factor.

  11. #11
    Himster's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Dublin, The Peoples Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    9,797

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    No, Fascism and Communism have very few things in common aside of authoritarianism.
    For many people (practically everyone I know) that is the most significant feature one could possibly imagine. I would go one step further and say that they should, rightly, be lumped together, not as leftwing obviously. But there should be no excuses or exceptions made for any authoritarian ideology. Evil is evil, no exceptions and no asterixis.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.
    -Betrand Russell

  12. #12

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    For many people (practically everyone I know) that is the most significant feature one could possibly imagine. I would go one step further and say that they should, rightly, be lumped together, not as leftwing obviously. But there should be no excuses or exceptions made for any authoritarian ideology. Evil is evil, no exceptions and no asterixis.
    Exactly. What made both evil was the fact that they banned natural human rights - right for free speech, right for property ownership and right for weapon ownership. Any government that does so is objectively evil.

  13. #13
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    22,437

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Exactly. What made both evil was the fact that they banned natural human rights - right for free speech, right for property ownership and right for weapon ownership. Any government that does so is objectively evil.
    Ahh... this thread keeps giving and giving.
    I now want to rant about something else some liberals support: "Gun ownership is a natural right!"

    No, it is not.
    Here's a possible list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundam...portant_rights
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  14. #14

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Ahh... this thread keeps giving and giving.
    I now want to rant about something else some liberals support: "Gun ownership is a natural right!"

    No, it is not.
    Here's a possible list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundam...portant_rights
    Gun ownership is a fundamental right because without it, you can't defend your other rights.

  15. #15
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    22,437

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Gun ownership is a fundamental right because without it, you can't defend your other rights.
    Without water you can also not defend your other rights, because you would die from dehydration. And yet, access to water for free is not a fundamental right.
    Fundamental rights or the less defined "natural rights" are not the rights you need in order to defend other rights. They are the rights the UN or similar supernational organization recognize as very important and protected.

    Furthermore, the "other side", the ones that want to rebel, always want the guns. In the Western world, that side is the communists. Our rightwing government demanded the communist militias to be disarmed in 1946 and that triggered the start of the Greek civil war as they refused to give up their "fundamental right" to guns.
    The civil war ended with the communist militias agreeing to disarm after 3 years of war and several defeats, bowing down to the rightwing government that banned guns and stripped people of their right to own guns.
    If they didn't have guns, we wouldn't have a civil war. Guns = bad.

    Militant communists are more often than not pro-guns in the west nowdays because they are not in power and want to rebel and take it. Thankfully, militant communists are not many.

    Also, while you may want guns to defend your rights, most of the militias of far-right or far-left that form, want to use those guns to take away your rights and enforce their beliefs through force of arms.
    Guns=bad.

    Last but not least: Some people, especially conservatives, tend to think that the "right to arms" will protect them from the eeeeevuuul government. Guess what: for the west, the eeeeevuuul government doesn't want to take your rights. And if the situation becomes so bad that it wants? Your guns won't be able to stop the military. See what happened to the militias in Syria and Libya: without support from real military groups, they were done for. What makes you think that comfortable-westerner-people's militias would fare better against a more modern Western army, that unless you are in Central Europe is arguably better than Assad's and Gaddafi's?

    I.e. your rights are defended from your country's army. Not from the right to bear arms.
    For remote areas in USA, Canada and Australia, I understand and agree with the right to bear arms. But for the rest? Nope.

    I can understand the "guns help me dissuade criminals" as that has merit, although I disagree with it for reasons.
    But to say "Bob the twitter warrior, Suzie the couch potato and Smith the MOBA veteran will be able to stop a night raid by the SAS or Delta Force because they have guns they barely know how to use" is wrong.
    For starters, the English SAS or the USA delta force have no interest to attack Bob the Twitter warrior and his other two angry friends. Second, if they did, Bob's militia would disappear before they could fart.
    Last edited by alhoon; October 07, 2020 at 06:32 PM.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  16. #16
    Himster's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Dublin, The Peoples Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    9,797

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Exactly. What made both evil was the fact that they banned natural human rights - right for free speech, right for property ownership and right for weapon ownership. Any government that does so is objectively evil.
    Goddammit Americans. Why do you have to ruin everything?

    Gun ownership is a fundamental right because without it, you can't defend your other rights.
    Guns can't, don't and will never again help with that. Governments have drones, air forces satellites with lasers attached and all sorts of stuff. They can take away your rights at any moment on any day and there's nothing a gun can do to stop them.
    There is one legitimate reason to own a gun: They're fun, end of list.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.
    -Betrand Russell

  17. #17

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Without water you can also not defend your other rights, because you would die from dehydration. And yet, access to water for free is not a fundamental right.
    Fundamental rights or the less defined "natural rights" are not the rights you need in order to defend other rights. They are the rights the UN or similar supernational organization recognize as very important and protected.

    Furthermore, the "other side", the ones that want to rebel, always want the guns. In the Western world, that side is the communists. Our rightwing government demanded the communist militias to be disarmed in 1946 and that triggered the start of the Greek civil war as they refused to give up their "fundamental right" to guns.
    The civil war ended with the communist militias agreeing to disarm after 3 years of war and several defeats, bowing down to the rightwing government that banned guns and stripped people of their right to own guns.
    If they didn't have guns, we wouldn't have a civil war. Guns = bad.

    Militant communists are more often than not pro-guns in the west nowdays because they are not in power and want to rebel and take it. Thankfully, militant communists are not many.

    Also, while you may want guns to defend your rights, most of the militias of far-right or far-left that form, want to use those guns to take away your rights and enforce their beliefs through force of arms.
    Guns=bad.

    Last but not least: Some people, especially conservatives, tend to think that the "right to arms" will protect them from the eeeeevuuul government. Guess what: for the west, the eeeeevuuul government doesn't want to take your rights. And if the situation becomes so bad that it wants? Your guns won't be able to stop the military. See what happened to the militias in Syria and Libya: without support from real military groups, they were done for. What makes you think that comfortable-westerner-people's militias would fare better against a more modern Western army, that unless you are in Central Europe is arguably better than Assad's and Gaddafi's?

    I.e. your rights are defended from your country's army. Not from the right to bear arms.
    For remote areas in USA, Canada and Australia, I understand and agree with the right to bear arms. But for the rest? Nope.

    I can understand the "guns help me dissuade criminals" as that has merit, although I disagree with it for reasons.
    But to say "Bob the twitter warrior, Suzie the couch potato and Smith the MOBA veteran will be able to stop a night raid by the SAS or Delta Force because they have guns they barely know how to use" is wrong.
    For starters, the English SAS or the USA delta force have no interest to attack Bob the Twitter warrior and his other two angry friends. Second, if they did, Bob's militia would disappear before they could fart.

    That's a very one-sided analysis, to say the least. Radicals and criminals can always get guns anyways. They can steal them from the government, import them from abroad or simply manufacture them - we live in age of 3D printing after all, and this technology is growing to be more convenient and affordable. So gun control is useless and only serves those that want their victims to be unarmed. Usually its pushed by rich entitled liberals who live in guarded gated communities and scoff at the notion of average people having a need to defend themselves. Its almost like these kind of people deserve to be overthrown by citizens with guns.
    As for the tired overused "civilians can't fight professional army" argument, let's not forget about how cool professional American soldiers got their asses kicked in Vietnam in 1970s, and how same thing happened to Ukrainian military and ISIS, when armed civilians fought back in Donbass and Iraq/Syria correspondingly.

  18. #18
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    22,437

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    As for the tired overused "civilians can't fight professional army" argument, let's not forget about how cool professional American soldiers got their asses kicked in Vietnam in 1970s, and how same thing happened to Ukrainian military and ISIS, when armed civilians fought back in Donbass and Iraq/Syria correspondingly.
    - This is not the 70s
    - The Professional American Soldiers killed like 20-30 enemies for each one they lost in a far, far away country in the 70s.
    - Those armed civilians in Donbass included tanks and artillery, trained soldiers from the area or other areas of Ukraine, Russian soldiers, Mercs paid by Russia. Without Russian support even the Ukranian army of 2014 which was nowhere close to what it is today, would have kicked their butt.
    - The "Armed civilians" of Syria were ISIS. They were defeated by Syrian forces, Kurdish forces, American and French bombs, Persian soldiers, Turkish forces and mercs. ISIS put up a fight because it was supported by factions inside many muslim states (and by defectors from USA backed groups) but it was a loooooong string of defeats. In short, the backed-by-states fanatics of ISIS had their big party for a few months in June 2013 and then they got their butt kicked repeatedly until they were no more.

    BOTH the modern examples you mentioned were civilians that even though backed by some serious factions, were no match for real armies.
    Even ISIS that was full of fanatics and zealots and had access to serious American weapons stolen from Iraq or taken when Western-backed local factions joined ISIS was crushed on the field time after time.
    Guns and bravery do not win wars. Organized military does.
    Last edited by alhoon; October 08, 2020 at 04:58 PM.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  19. #19
    Ludicus's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    11,574

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    The right, the center and the left, they all are sorely needed.We need to listen to those we don't agree with and vice-versa.Political diversity enriches us.
    He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. — John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

    In a civilized society, bearing arms is a privilege, not a human right. Simply put, human rights are standards that allow all people to live with dignity, freedom, equality, justice, and peace. Standards, not arms.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Usually its pushed by rich entitled liberals who live in guarded gated communities and scoff at the notion of average people having a need to defend themselves. Its almost like these kind of people deserve to be overthrown by citizens with guns.
    I see. In the name of the "people", are you ready to liberate Michigan?
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  20. #20
    Sir Adrian's Avatar the Imperishable
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nehekhara
    Posts
    14,878

    Default Re: Want to rant about rightwings and conservatives? This is your thread.

    @Alhoon, actually fascism and communism have a lot of things in common. In fact the only thing they do not have in common is the ideological object. In communism the worker is the end all be all. In fascism the state is the end all be all. Both nazism and fascism emerged from communist movements, the Italian Socialist Party and the German Workers Party respectively.

    Of course this is all broad strokes, as there as many forms of communism and fascism as there are leadears for each ideology, however at a purely academic level they are almost identical ideologies.
    Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!


Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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