NationStates Jolt Archive

Since AW seems to get his jollies from derailing every thread he enters, trying to make it about the IRA...
Here it is, a thread about the IRA.

Individial Retirement Accounts? How dull. :(

I would like to use this opportunity to restate my post that AW's comment about British people's opinion on Ireland being worthless, whereas his is perfectly valid as he not only has relatives there but actually takes holidays in the country is quite possibly one of my favourite examples of situational irony.

I would also like to add that as he is holding current British residents responsible for things the British Empire did, I now hold AW personally responsible for slavery, segregation, the Vietnam War and Geroge W Bush.

A threadwin! And only 3 posts in!

EDIT: 4 now, stupid jolt ¬.¬

I would like to use this opportunity to restate my post that AW's comment about British people's opinion on Ireland being worthless, whereas his is perfectly valid as he not only has relatives there but actually takes holidays in the country is quite possibly one of my favourite examples of situational irony.

I would also like to add that as he is holding current British residents responsible for things the British Empire did, I now hold AW personally responsible for slavery, segregation, the Vietnam War and George W Bush.

Individial Retirement Accounts? How dull. :(

No, the International Reading Association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Reading_Association)...which isn't much better...

Rolling squid;13479321']couldn't be, he must be a member of the Indian Rights Association.

Though, on an unrelated note, anyone find it fitting that a guy with a screen name "anarchy works" derails threads?

Especially since he's actually quite good at it.

The Intercollegiate Rowing Association is full of fascist scum and should be disbanded.

No, the International Reading Association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Reading_Association)...which isn't much better...

couldn't be, he must be a member of the Indian Rights Association.

Though, on an unrelated note, anyone find it fitting that a guy with a screen name "anarchy works" derails threads?

Rolling squid;13479321']couldn't be, he must be a member of the Indian Rights Association.

Though, on an unrelated note, anyone find it fitting that a guy with a screen name "anarchy works" derails threads?

I think it's amusing.

It's also amusing how someone named "anarchy works" seems to be a total tool who buys in to the "counter-culture" ideas of "OH MY GOD IF IT'S POPULAR IT MUST BE BAD", which usually is packaged and sold at Hot Topic.

I wish people made threads for me :(

maybe I should post Goatse everywhere :)

having never seen any thread derailed by this mysterious aw, i can only surmise he/she limits doing so to threads i would consider uninteresting and thus probably in need of so being. this IS entirely speculation however as i have indeed yet to witness this phenomina.

=^^=
.../\...

having never seen any thread derailed by this mysterious aw, i can only surmise he/she limits doing so to threads i would consider uninteresting and thus probably in need of so being. this IS entirely speculation however as i have indeed yet to witness this phenomina.

=^^=
.../\...

Yep same here, who is the is AW, I have never seen them here?

Wow, all this thread had to do was mention AW and it got derailed.

Well you did post the IRA which many organizations use as an abbreviation.

But really...who is AW?

Well you did post the IRA which many organizations use as an abbreviation.
Aye, if you'd have read the "Gays and Earthquakes and shit" thread, he starts going off on one about the Provos and such.
But really...who is AW?
A fourteen-year-old prick who think's he's staggeringly mature and so on and so forth.

Aye, if you'd have read the "Gays and Earthquakes and shit" thread, he starts going off on one about the Provos and such.

A fourteen-year-old prick who think's he's staggeringly mature and so on and so forth.



And clearly cant do the research to show that Irish Republican Army propaganda is simply that, terrorist propaganda.

And clearly cant do the research to show that Irish Republican Army propaganda is simply that, terrorist propaganda.
Actually, I think he reckons he's being revolutionary by making a stand against the British, showing off his manliness by taking on the greatest imperial power in the universe ever. As well as fighting pop culture.

Actually, I think he reckons he's being revolutionary by making a stand against the British, showing off his manliness by taking on the greatest imperial power in the universe ever. As well as fighting pop culture.

If he wanted to take on the greatest imperial power, how about the US? We can handle it...

He's an obnoxious snot who does exactly what the others say he does: derails threads. There was this one about the Communist Manifesto turning 160 years old, and he started posting about the IRA. Wtf.
I'm annoying too! How come I don't get my own thread aimed at me for making obnoxious rants against Communism?!

Actually, I think he reckons he's being revolutionary by making a stand against the British, showing off his manliness by taking on the greatest imperial power in the universe ever. As well as fighting pop culture.

Indeed, I espeically liked his comment about how he listens to bands many of us have never heard of. So do I. I listen to a lot of black metal. But Im not going to use that to show how Im better than someone.

IMO hes just a kid who got caught up in Irish Nationalism (which is rampent in parts of Boston, at least it was when I lived there) and the counter cultur of punk rock and is taking it...too far.

Irish Nationalism (which is rampent in parts of Boston, at least it was when I lived there)

Sorry if this is a little off topic but:
I thought Ireland was an independent country. Why is there a terrorist group fighting for the independence of a country that already exists?

Sorry if this is a little off topic but:
I thought Ireland was an independent country. Why is there a terrorist group fighting for the independence of a country that already exists?

Fighting for the independence of Northern Ireland which is still part of the UK (willingly).


See, some of them wanted to remain part of the UK. But apperantly, freedom of choice was un-Irish Catholic...

Sorry if this is a little off topic but:
I thought Ireland was an independent country. Why is there a terrorist group fighting for the independence of a country that already exists?

Northern Ireland is still part of the UK, and the Catholics who live in Northern Ireland want to leave the UK and join the Irish Republic. Most of the Protestants of Northern Ireland oppose this, and there have been "Troubles" over this.

It is, they're probably complaining about Northern Ireland, though.

Picking up the baton of the now practically-disbanded IRA because they've nothing better to do than complain about the plight of the Northern Irish (which is about as grave as the plight of the rest of the UK tbqh) at weekends?

You've got the whole Northern Ireland bit with the religion thing and a cycle of violence.

Didn't the people living in Northern Ireland vote to stay part of the UK?

Wait, you mean they're still fighting over the whole Catholic/Protestant thing? I thought everyone was past that by now. Thats like some 1500's type of shit.

Northern Ireland is still part of the UK, and the Catholics who live in Northern Ireland want to leave the UK and join the Irish Republic. Most of the Protestants of Northern Ireland oppose this, and there have been "Troubles" over this.

Can't they just leave Northern Ireland and go into the part they agree with? Is it really that difficult?
It doesn't seem terribly hard to walk from one part of Ireland to another.

Didn't the people living in Northern Ireland vote to stay part of the UK?

Thats how I was told it.

Wait, you mean they're still fighting over the whole Catholic/Protestant thing? I thought everyone was past that by now. Thats like some 1500's type of shit.

Actually, its more just hate and a desire for "unification" religion is just, as always, a useful tool.

I thought Ireland was an independent country though?
It is, they're probably complaining about Northern Ireland, though.
Why is there a terrorist group fighting for the independence of a country that already exists?
Picking up the baton of the now practically-disbanded IRA because they've nothing better to do than complain about the plight of the Northern Irish (which is about as grave as the plight of the rest of the UK tbqh) at weekends?

Sorry if this is a little off topic but:
I thought Ireland was an independent country. Why is there a terrorist group fighting for the independence of a country that already exists?

You've got the whole Northern Ireland bit with the religion thing and a cycle of violence.

So basically the purpose of the IRA is to bomb some innocent people and be assholes. Am I right?
Not unlike ETA.

So basically the purpose of the IRA is to bomb some innocent people and be assholes. Am I right?
Not unlike ETA.



The purpose of the IRA is the exact same purpose of every terrorist organization.


Much like the Mujahadeen (sp?) it may have started with a more nationalistic/patriotic/practical purpose, but it quickly (just like the example above) devolved into a terrorist organization.


For a while Im fairly certian they sold drugs to fund their "war" too.

The purpose of the IRA is the exact same purpose of every terrorist organization.


Much like the Mujahadeen (sp?) it may have started with a more nationalistic/patriotic/practical purpose, but it quickly (just like the example above) devolved into a terrorist organization.


For a while Im fairly certian they sold drugs to fund their "war" too.

*snorts* That's not very Catholic. Last time I checked, there wasn't anything in the Youth Ministry at my church telling us to sell drugs to kill Protestants. :rolleyes:

A bit different, seeing as ETA want a free country in what is currently their own country, whereas the IRA's operations were mainly cross-border efforts.

They're terrorist scumbags all the same. And they're both still wrong.

Dammit. I got timewarped bigtime.

AW still isn't here yet...I know how to call him...

RED SOX SUCK!!!!!

YANKEES RULE!!!!!

:D

*gasps for air in between laughs*

AW still isn't here yet...I know how to call him...

RED SOX SUCK!!!!!

YANKEES RULE!!!!!

:D

So basically the purpose of the IRA is to bomb some innocent people and be assholes. Am I right?
Was. They're no longer active, nor are the Provos. The only active elements are in the various splinter groups, including the 'Real' IRA, which occassionally blows up a bus-stop, or takes a pot-shot at some policemen or whatever.
Not unlike ETA.
A bit different, seeing as ETA want a free country in what is currently their own country, whereas the IRA's operations were mainly cross-border efforts.

For a while Im fairly certian they sold drugs to fund their "war" too.
Their main source of income was, and continues to be for a select few members, mainly from letting out houses.

Was. They're no longer active, nor are the Provos. The only active elements are in the various splinter groups, including the 'Real' IRA, which occassionally blows up a bus-stop, or takes a pot-shot at some policemen or whatever.

A bit different, seeing as ETA want a free country in what is currently their own country, whereas the IRA's operations were mainly cross-border efforts.

Yeah - the IRA called a reluctant 'ceasefire' in 2001, shortly after 9/11 - mainly because the IRA was getting funded by a few American corporations who believed that the IRA was fighting for independence. After a terrorist attack happened on 9/11, they suddenly snapped to their senses, and stopped.

- Not an attack on US people, or whatever, it's a recognised fact that I thought needed to be raised, and America believed they were fighting for independence, so it's all better :fluffle: -

They're terrorist scumbags all the same. And they're both still wrong.
True, but their MOs are a bit different, as are their goals, although I don't agree with either of them.

Yeah - the IRA called a reluctant 'ceasefire' in 2001, shortly after 9/11 - mainly because the IRA was getting funded by a few American corporations who believed that the IRA was fighting for independence. After a terrorist attack happened on 9/11, they suddenly snapped to their senses, and stopped.
Exactly. Their weapons, as well as those of the UDF et al have mainly been handed in and destroyed during various armistices.

Since AW seems to get his jollies from derailing every thread he enters, trying to make it about the IRA...
Here it is, a thread about the IRA.

It´s disappointing to see that, even when a member of NS deigned making a thread in honor of another member, said member hasn´t even posted once, aknowledging this honor. Shame on you, Anarchy works.;) Now, rant some.
It´s expected.:D

Well you did post the IRA which many organizations use as an abbreviation.

But really...who is AW?

um, no, the provos were quite bad acyually, what with the raping and such. and anarchy works because everyone thinks outside the box and is entitled to there opinion. I support the mike collins IRA from back in the day. not the 80s-now IRA. I also support sinn feinn. so please, respect my political views, or do you want a car antena beay down?
*gets car antena*

AW still isn't here yet...I know how to call him...

RED SOX SUCK!!!!!

YANKEES RULE!!!!!

:D

well, the yankees suck the cock of the world, but you sir, are entitled to your views, as am I so please stop attempting to derail my opinions with petty arguments, or I shall be forced to give out another antena beatdown.
*gets car antena*

um, no, the provos were quite bad acyually, what with the raping and such. and anarchy works because everyone thinks outside the box and is entitled to there opinion. I support the mike collins IRA from back in the day. not the 80s-now IRA. I also support sinn feinn. so please, respect my political views, or do you want a car antena beay down?
*gets car antena*

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e142/leftyflecken/grammartime.gif

so please, respect my political views, or do you want a car antena beay down?
*gets car antena*

No. I only respect the political views of the informed.

Actually, I think he reckons he's being revolutionary by making a stand against the British, showing off his manliness by taking on the greatest imperial power in the universe ever. As well as fighting pop culture.

thank you. :cool:

um, no, the provos were quite bad acyually, what with the raping and such. and anarchy works because everyone thinks outside the box and is entitled to there opinion. I support the mike collins IRA from back in the day. not the 80s-now IRA. I also support sinn feinn. so please, respect my political views, or do you want a car antena beay down?
*gets car antena*

Big whup. They were still terrorists. Support al-Qaeda now, do you? Or ETA? or the Red Brigade (is that its name? tell me if I'm wrong)? or the Democratic Party (sorry, couldn't resist)? or Nazis? Huh? Huh? Do ya?!

BTW, antennae do not hurt me. I want nothing less than a battleaxe.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e142/leftyflecken/grammartime.gif

ROFLMAO!!!!!:D

thank you. :cool:
No, I meant "and you're a twat".

Can't they just leave Northern Ireland and go into the part they agree with? Is it really that difficult?
It doesn't seem terribly hard to walk from one part of Ireland to another.

unless you cant afford it because the protestants wont allow you to get a good job, and the british conveniently look the other way until a protestant gets beaten up. and the IRA started becoming commie in the 80s, so it is relevant to the communist manifesto, or a thread about political views, so that is why I posted on that thread. :)

No, I meant "and you're a twat".

well, go get fucked. :upyours:

Big whup. They were still terrorists. Support al-Qaeda now, do you? Or ETA? or the Red Brigade (is that its name? tell me if I'm wrong)? or the Democratic Party (sorry, couldn't resist)? or Nazis? Huh? Huh? Do ya?!

BTW, antennae do not hurt me. I want nothing less than a battleaxe.

I resoect all political views except those wishing to do me immediate and serious bodily harm, they deserve an open minded consideration, which I give, unlike many of you.

No, I meant "and you're a twat".

Oh dear! ROFLMAO! I´m gonna die laughing!!
http://www.divine-rudraksha.com/fengshui/zoom/laughing_budha1.jpg

I warned you about this, AW. Back your claims by believable sources, because we´ll ask you for them. And again, if I were a member of the IRA, I would smash your teeth in, so that you look like Herbert from ¨Family Guy¨ for this display.:D

But I have to admit your outbursts make me laugh. And they make me laugh so much, people at work have started questioning my sanity. So, arigatou gozaimasu for making my day less tedious.;)

unless you cant afford it because the protestants wont allow you to get a good job, and the british conveniently look the other way until a protestant gets beaten up.
Proof?

unless you cant afford it because the protestants wont allow you to get a good job, and the british conveniently look the other way until a protestant gets beaten up.



Source from somewhere other than the IRA website.

Source from somewhere other than the IRA website.

um, the IRA has a website? :confused:

Source from somewhere other than the IRA website.

Congrats on your 1,000 post!!

Back to the topic in question. AW´s ideas are a bit biased, by his condition as an Irish-American, which surprises me because the IRA and the conflicts in Ireland aren´t his reality, and by whatever he seems to be reading on the IRA web page. In order to have a complete perspective of it all, I think you either need to experience it, live in a country that has similar conditions or be well versed in the matter. None of these seem to apply to our young fellow. Of course, this doesn´t mean I put him below his capabilities, I guess he can hold his own against a few of us, but that anger. *shakes head* That has to go, AW, really, for your own good. When one gets angry, one can´t argue a point nor debate properly. And of course, one of the main areas of a debate, know when the f*ck you´ve been bested by a fellow debater. Of course, that´s just me and my musing. I could be mistaken. Agur!

It was a source for a paper I wrote in one of my undergrad classes, thats how I know.

Im still waiting on that source.

okay. allow me to track down every website I have ever visited, every newspaper I have ever looked at, and everyone I have ever talked to and determine my sources.
:rolleyes:

um, the IRA has a website? :confused:

It was a source for a paper I wrote in one of my undergrad classes, thats how I know.

Im still waiting on that source.

okay. allow me to track down every website I have ever visited, every newspaper I have ever looked at, and everyone I have ever talked to and determine my sources.
:rolleyes:

Just one will suffice.


Welcome to the world of intellectual maturity. Youre going to be asked to source claims often, especially when they are outragious/wrong.

see AW is in this thread now, thus backing up my claim that I called him...I declare myself winner of the thread

Manvir-heil!
Manvir-heil!
Manv..... Awwww, screw this. Manvir won!:mad:

<.< That can only mean one thing...

We ALL lose The Game!!:eek:

AW still isn't here yet...I know how to call him...

RED SOX SUCK!!!!!

YANKEES RULE!!!!!

:D

see AW is in this thread now, thus backing up my claim that I called him...I declare myself winner of the thread

Just one will suffice.


Welcome to the world of intellectual maturity. Youre going to be asked to source claims often, especially when they are outragious/wrong.

um, okay, can you prove this claim is outrageous or wrong? Then please sit down and shut up.

um, okay, can you prove this claim is outrageous or wrong? Then please sit down and shut up.

The fact that you aren't providing credible sources might give some merit to his accusation.

We don't have to prove your statements are wrong/crazy, you have to prove they aren't.

No, I meant "and you're a twat".

You are better at this than I am, I'll fookin' give you that.

Hoch O'Duffy!

see AW is in this thread now, thus backing up my claim that I called him...I declare myself winner of the thread
I win the thread because it was made due to me, and this is indisputable, so it is. :)

Hm, so if something cannot be proven wrong, it should stand completely unchallenged...


Your soul is the excrement of a despairing God, and everyone else's isn't.

um, what the fuck? this is seriously getting fucked when someone says that.
:(

Didn't the people living in Northern Ireland vote to stay part of the UK?

Wait, you mean they're still fighting over the whole Catholic/Protestant thing? I thought everyone was past that by now. Thats like some 1500's type of shit.
well, yes it should be. then the north could join the free state. and from the heart of darkness I am convinced colonialism and imperialism suck serious ass.
:p

um, okay, can you prove this claim is outrageous or wrong? Then please sit down and shut up.

Hm, so if something cannot be proven wrong, it should stand completely unchallenged...


Your soul is the excrement of a despairing God, and everyone else's isn't.

um, what the fuck? this is seriously getting fucked when someone says that.
:(

Well, the premise (your premise) was that if they couldn't prove something wrong or outrageous, they should "sit down and shut up".

Practice what you preach.

having never seen any thread derailed by this mysterious aw, i can only surmise he/she limits doing so to threads i would consider uninteresting and thus probably in need of so being. this IS entirely speculation however as i have indeed yet to witness this phenomina.

=^^=
.../\...

I am a dude, I am actually an anarchist, I have never bought anything at hot topic, Have only ever watched two mtv shows, and I listen to bands based on talent, although top 40 is a minus. Hot topic is shit, it vilolates anarchy by using a belief that is against corporatism to benefit a corporation.

Well, the premise (your premise) was that if they couldn't prove something wrong or outrageous, they should "sit down and shut up".

Practice what you preach.

yes, however, that was an uncalled for bit of assholery. to call someone that is screwed to hell.
on a different note,
R.I.P. anarchist catalonia, 1936-1939 :(

um, okay, can you prove this claim is outrageous or wrong? Then please sit down and shut up.

You know, people might take your claim that you are 'mature for a 14 year old' a bit more seriously if you could actually provide a response other than a roundabout way of saying "no u".

I am a dude, I am actually an anarchist, I have never bought anything at hot topic, Have only ever watched two mtv shows, and I listen to bands based on talent, although top 40 is a minus. Hot topic is shit, it vilolates anarchy by using a belief that is against corporatism to benefit a corporation.

Anarchy has tenets to violate?

You might be doing it wrong.

yes, however, that was an uncalled for bit of assholery. to call someone that is screwed to hell.
on a different note,
R.I.P. anarchist catalonia, 1936-1939 :(

Telling someobody else to sit down and shut up is far more egregious on an open debate board than a cogent and illustrative demonstration that happens to also be edged.

If you don't understand why, you have my sympathy.

Anarchy has tenets to violate?

:rolleyes:

Yes. It does.

um, no, the provos were quite bad acyually, what with the raping and such. and anarchy works because everyone thinks outside the box and is entitled to there opinion. I support the mike collins IRA from back in the day. not the 80s-now IRA. I also support sinn feinn. so please, respect my political views, or do you want a car antena beay down?
*gets car antena*

I only respect the political views of people who are worthy of my respect.

Terrorists, while worthy of equal protection under the law, are not worthy of any respect.

:rolleyes:

Yes. It does.

although they are few. And I am still learning, so therefore I am not an all knowing genius, nor will I ever be, same as the rest of you, please tell me everyone agrees on this.

You know, people might take your claim that you are 'mature for a 14 year old' a bit more seriously if you could actually provide a response other than a roundabout way of saying "no u".

He's 14? With how meaningful a statement he thought the Hot-Topic boycott was, I thought 10 or 12.

He's 14? With how meaningful a statement he thought the Hot-Topic boycott was, I thought 10 or 12.

um, the hot topic thing was a statement of fact, not something I said meaningfully, but as a fact of life.

Well, the premise (your premise) was that if they couldn't prove something wrong or outrageous, they should "sit down and shut up".

Practice what you preach.

well, okay, then you should as well and back this claim the fuck up.

I am now going to read the heart of darkness again, enjoy debating my political views, nay, those of the world, and bashing all those that oppose yours, while demanding they provide facts and providing no facts of your own.
:)
anarchy works out.
:cool:

I am now going to read the heart of darkness again, enjoy debating my political views, nay, those of the world, and bashing all those that oppose yours, while demanding they provide facts and providing no facts of your own.
:)
anarchy works out.
:cool:



Why dont you leave the board? This is for grown ups, or at least those who can talk like grown ups.

Why dont you leave the board? This is for grown ups, or at least those who can talk like grown ups.

would you like the long answer or the short answer?

THE BRITISH ARE PERFECTLY DECENT PEOPLE! YOU'RE JUST A STUPID NEW ENGLANDER! I'M STARTING TO BE HAPPY THE GIANTS WON THE SUPERBOWL IF NEW ENGLANDERS ARE ALL LIKE YOU!

Hooray for going all Captain Capslock! Wheeeee!

...but colonialism and imperialism are fun. Teddy Roosevelt is my hero!

BTW, if you bring anything up saying Catholics should support the IRA or something like that, you will feel bad vibes from the south. Those would be me, giving you the finger. 'Cause anyone who says that is smoking something that's probably illegal. Although rubber probably isn't illegal.

I am not saying that. nor am I condoning the tactics. I am condoning the ultimate goal and supporting michael collins's IRA of the war of independence era.

THE BRITISH ARE PERFECTLY DECENT PEOPLE! YOU'RE JUST A STUPID NEW ENGLANDER!
Hooray for going all Captain Capslock! Wheeeee!

...but colonialism and imperialism are fun. Teddy Roosevelt is my hero!'Cause anyone who says that is smoking something that's probably illegal. Although rubber probably isn't illegal.

uh huh, right, can you back this up?
imperialism and colonialism are the root of my thread crashing and the troubles. teddy roosevelt was not an imperialist, was he? if so I now hate him.
um, wtf?

[/U][/I][/B]
well, yes it should be. then the north could join the free state. and from the heart of darkness I am convinced colonialism and imperialism suck serious ass.
:p

THE BRITISH ARE PERFECTLY DECENT PEOPLE! YOU'RE JUST A STUPID NEW ENGLANDER! I'M STARTING TO BE HAPPY THE GIANTS WON THE SUPERBOWL IF NEW ENGLANDERS ARE ALL LIKE YOU!

Hooray for going all Captain Capslock! Wheeeee!

...but colonialism and imperialism are fun. Teddy Roosevelt is my hero!

BTW, if you bring anything up saying Catholics should support the IRA or something like that, you will feel bad vibes from the south. Those would be me, giving you the finger. 'Cause anyone who says that is smoking something that's probably illegal. Although rubber probably isn't illegal.

When you cite a fact in the course of argument, it is hopefully with the intent of some meaning.

Now, if you're finally admitting that the things you say have no meaning, or at least no salient meaning, then we can agree.

I repeat, because it bears repeating, given the degree of acumen you've demonstrated so far:

When you referenced hot topic, you implied it had some meaning as political and social statement. I'm glad you now see it was not something said meaningfully. Should you decide to say something that is meaningful at some point, please use a different font color or something, so we know.

um, dude, I acknowledge it as a fact because of your constant "state facts" and then you beat it down for being used purely to state a fact?
WTF:confused::confused::confused:
This makes no sense to me.

uh huh, right, can you back this up?



Ok.


Which of your previous pro-IRA anti-British posts would you prefer to be used as my evidence?

Ah but you were in the one that insisted that if the premise can't be proven wrong, the RESPONDENT should, as you put it, sit down and shut up.

Can you not follow your own axioms, either in practice or in concept?

true, but you said this was incorrect, and that facts need to be stated. please set an example. I rest my case
*sits down, shuts up*

Ok.


Which of your previous pro-IRA anti-British posts would you prefer to be used as my evidence?

pick one. then we will debate its relevance.

um, the hot topic thing was a statement of fact, not something I said meaningfully, but as a fact of life.

When you cite a fact in the course of argument, it is hopefully with the intent of some meaning.

Now, if you're finally admitting that the things you say have no meaning, or at least no salient meaning, then we can agree.

I repeat, because it bears repeating, given the degree of acumen you've demonstrated so far:

When you referenced hot topic, you implied it had some meaning as political and social statement. I'm glad you now see it was not something said meaningfully. Should you decide to say something that is meaningful at some point, please use a different font color or something, so we know.

Wow, you are so deep and profound to be reading Heart of Darkness...what a truly original and powerful choice of literature to attach yourself to in what is surely much more than a painfully laughable attempt at intellectual credibility.

If you really want regard from peers (and you clearly want it desperately, like a lot of people), get this posturing pseudo-intellectualism out of your system now.

That's kind advice, whether you get it or not.

um, dude I read it because everyone says it is good. so i read it to form my own opinions. fuck the aproval of others, they may put it up there ass fo all I care, I dont want it. as for credibility you have not ever attempted to prove yours.

well, okay, then you should as well and back this claim the fuck up.

Ah but you were in the one that insisted that if the premise can't be proven wrong, the RESPONDENT should, as you put it, sit down and shut up.

Can you not follow your own axioms, either in practice or in concept?

Franco did some good work over there, I reckon. They had it coming.
They were only slightly better than the commies and Soviet puppets who ran the rest of the Republic.
RIP Emperor Charles V 1500 - 1558
As a preemptive strike against anyone who is about to call me an asshole for supporting Franco: I don't, necessarily, other than that it is in absence of anything better. The Republic was effectively Soviet run.

anarchist catalonia functioned till it was overrun by military force, and it functioned quite well at that/ franco was a fascist arsehole, yet after the overruning of catalonia, all the options sucked, at least he brought a notion of stability.

I am now going to read the heart of darkness again, enjoy debating my political views, nay, those of the world, and bashing all those that oppose yours, while demanding they provide facts and providing no facts of your own.
:)
anarchy works out.
:cool:

Wow, you are so deep and profound to be reading Heart of Darkness...what a truly original and powerful choice of literature to attach yourself to in what is surely much more than a painfully laughable attempt at intellectual credibility.

If you really want regard from peers (and you clearly want it desperately, like a lot of people), get this posturing pseudo-intellectualism out of your system now.

That's kind advice, whether you get it or not.

yes, however, that was an uncalled for bit of assholery. to call someone that is screwed to hell.
on a different note,
R.I.P. anarchist catalonia, 1936-1939 :(

Franco did some good work over there, I reckon. They had it coming.
They were only slightly better than the commies and Soviet puppets who ran the rest of the Republic.
RIP Emperor Charles V 1500 - 1558
As a preemptive strike against anyone who is about to call me an asshole for supporting Franco: I don't, necessarily, other than that it is in absence of anything better. The Republic was effectively Soviet run.

My example is your own post, quoted here.

I made a statement that you can't prove wrong. By your own position, you should not challenge it but rather sit down and shut up.

You challenged it, proving either hypocrisy or an inability to understand what you yourself said. That fact is right there in your own post.

Lots of statements can be successfully challenged even if they can't be proven wrong in a categorical sense.

Seriously, AW, if you want to be taken seriously (which you clearly need very badly), go back and look at how you replied to that person. You made a statement and assumed it was the opposition's burden to disprove it. It was rather your burden to make cogent support of YOUR position.

.

which I did in fact do. however by your reasoning everything needs to be factually proven, which I challenged you to do, to show that you cannot argue this point succesfully against me. aditionaly, your taking me seriously is unimportant to me.

This is a most unproductive thread - perhaps you should each stop and read back through it to see how pointless it is.

...you may feel a slight sting. That's pride fucking with you. Fuck pride. Pride only hurts, it never helps

I concur. nice pulp fiction qoute.

well, having a life and not caring about the opinions of anyone, I leave the thread. anyone see a reason I should return? send it to my nation, I will consider it. :)

true, but you said this was incorrect, and that facts need to be stated. please set an example. I rest my case
*sits down, shuts up*

My example is your own post, quoted here.

I made a statement that you can't prove wrong. By your own position, you should not challenge it but rather sit down and shut up.

You challenged it, proving either hypocrisy or an inability to understand what you yourself said. That fact is right there in your own post.

Now, if you'd like to reverse your position that a statement that cannot be proven wrong is unchallengable (for example, the premise that your soul is the shit of a failed deity, which you cannot prove wrong), then you are no longer in an untennable position.

Lots of statements can be successfully challenged even if they can't be proven wrong in a categorical sense.

Seriously, AW, if you want to be taken seriously (which you clearly need very badly), go back and look at how you replied to that person. You made a statement and assumed it was the opposition's burden to disprove it. It was rather your burden to make cogent support of YOUR position.

Fourteen would be a great age to start getting this stuff, AW.

This is a most unproductive thread - perhaps you should each stop and read back through it to see how pointless it is.

...you may feel a slight sting. That's pride fucking with you. Fuck pride. Pride only hurts, it never helps

and you clearly want it desperately, like a lot of people

...like virtually everyone....

Some people just hide it better than others.

um, dude I read it because everyone says it is good. so i read it to form my own opinions. fuck the aproval of others, they may put it up there ass fo all I care, I dont want it. as for credibility you have not ever attempted to prove yours.

Ah, yes, fuck the approval of others, which is why you made so sure to mention that you were reading it.

Yes, put it up their ass for all you care, as you repeatedly and urgently engage those you care so little about.

Also, read the underlined part, then the bolded. You either suffer from cognitive dissonance, or you lack rudimentary reasoning skills.

which I did in fact do. however by your reasoning everything needs to be factually proven, which I challenged you to do, to show that you cannot argue this point succesfully against me. aditionaly, your taking me seriously is unimportant to me.

By my reasoning? YOU said this:


um, okay, can you prove this claim is outrageous or wrong? Then please sit down and shut up.

The only "facts" I need here are your own words.

And yes, of course, you care so little, and it shows, because you need to mention so repeatedly and emphatically. A sure sign of truth.

Yes, you don't care about the opinions of anyone, which is why you chose your reading material because "everyone says it is good" (your words).

Do I see any reason you should return?

Whether you can stomach to admit it, you care very much for our opinions, just as many of us care about the opinions of others here because, veil of the digital medium aside, we are people and it is intrinsic in us to be concerned with the social unit, barring some mental pathology.

You are young, and you think its a sign of strength to not care.

Yet you insist so needfully that you don't care, you make it so clear that you do.



But....but...he has a life!

well, having a life and not caring about the opinions of anyone, I leave the thread. anyone see a reason I should return? send it to my nation, I will consider it. :)

Yes, you don't care about the opinions of anyone, which is why you chose your reading material because "everyone says it is good" (your words).

Do I see any reason you should return?

Whether you can stomach to admit it, you care very much for our opinions, just as many of us care about the opinions of others here because, veil of the digital medium aside, we are people and it is intrinsic in us to be concerned with the social unit, barring some mental pathology.

You are young, and you think its a sign of strength to not care.

Yet you insist so needfully that you don't care, you make it so clear that you do.

...like virtually everyone....

Some people just hide it better than others.

But there really isn't anything wrong with caring what others think, as long as you don't make it the majorative element of your decision making.

And on the internet, it likely shouldn't even be a measurable portion, but I think if you bother posting on the forum, its non-zero.

But....but...he has a life!

Yes, he mentioned that. Its important, when you have a life, to tell people that you have one. Otherwise, they might not know.

Same thing with apathy. You have to frequently remind people how little you care, especially how little you care about what they think, otherwise they might think something different, and you wouldn't want that, if you're Anarchy Works.

L
O
L.

That is all.

I win the thread because it was made due to me, and this is indisputable, so it is. :)

Yes but my comment about the Red Sox summoned you here as if I were a Black Mage...My summoning you BREATHED LIFE into this thread...Also that means I win even i you win the thread...

Anarchy Works wins Thread, New Manvir Summons Anarchy Works, therefore New Manvir Wins the Thread

*nods to Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Conan O'Brien*

see simple...ME FTW!!!!

Yes but my comment about the Red Sox summoned you here as if I were a Black Mage...My summoning you BREATHED LIFE into this thread...Also that means I win even i you win the thread...

Anarchy Works wins Thread, New Manvir Summons Anarchy Works, therefore New Manvir Wins the Thread

*nods to Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Conan O'Brien*

see simple...ME FTW!!!!

You kept the Dismiss cantrip written down somewhere, right?

Can't they just leave Northern Ireland and go into the part they agree with? Is it really that difficult?
It doesn't seem terribly hard to walk from one part of Ireland to another.

Well now 'the troubles' are more or less over now. With each generation being born they seem to shrug their shoulder s and say meh over the whole thing . Of course you still get shitheads on both sides that want to stir shit but I recon in saaaay 50 years it will be more or less all done.

As they say about the size of Ireland 'It's a long way to Tipperary'

unless you cant afford it because the protestants wont allow you to get a good job, and the british conveniently look the other way until a protestant gets beaten up. and the IRA started becoming commie in the 80s, so it is relevant to the communist manifesto, or a thread about political views, so that is why I posted on that thread. :)

Sorry how long have you lived in Ireland then?

It violates Anarchy?

I still can't get my head around why an anarchist is so fond of socialist former-terrorists.

I am a dude, I am actually an anarchist, I have never bought anything at hot topic, Have only ever watched two mtv shows, and I listen to bands based on talent, although top 40 is a minus. Hot topic is shit, it vilolates anarchy by using a belief that is against corporatism to benefit a corporation.

It violates Anarchy?

I still can't get my head around why an anarchist is so fond of socialist former-terrorists.

ifreann means hell in gaelic, doesnt it? And I support the goal, not the means.

It violates Anarchy?

yes. It goes against anrchist principles. therefore, it sucks.
:cool:

This thread delivers!

yes. It goes against anrchist principles. therefore, it sucks.
:cool:

The anarchist principles being?

The anarchist principles being?

As an anarchist speaking here, Upper Cardinal Prime Directive Principle #1 is kinda anti-nationalism. So the fact that Anarchy Works says he is anarchist, yet supports Northern Irish nationalism, is contradictory. It's like a member of the US Libertarian Party saying they're against the First Amendment, it makes no sense. And I promised myself I would never use the phrase "you are not an anarchist"...

And I promised myself I would never use the phrase "you are not an anarchist"...

Welcome to NS, you'll find yourself breaking a lot of those promises :P

And I promised myself I would never use the phrase "you are not an anarchist"...
No True Anarchist would ever use such a phrase! :D

No True Anarchist would ever use such a phrase! :D

Ah, I agree completely. I'm generally the guy in any given anarchist debate saying we should all lighten up on the "anarcho-capitalists" and "christian anarchists" (I myself happen to be a christian and an anarchist... at the same time!), but I feel I'm being severely tested by the concept of an "anarcho-Irish-nationalist" :confused:

anarchist catalonia functioned till it was overrun by military force, and it functioned quite well at that/ franco was a fascist arsehole, yet after the overruning of catalonia, all the options sucked, at least he brought a notion of stability.
Err...

Anarchist Catalunya functioned about the same as Not Anarchist Catalunya, and was despised by almost everyone in the entire world outside of anarchists, surprisingly.

Which is why it died a messy death.

And as to Franco bringing stability - not really. What he brought was massive terrorist movements in the north of the country.

unless you cant afford it because the protestants wont allow you to get a good job, and the british conveniently look the other way until a protestant gets beaten up. and the IRA started becoming commie in the 80s, so it is relevant to the communist manifesto, or a thread about political views, so that is why I posted on that thread. :)

No. Just no. To everything. Sorry.

anarchist catalonia functioned till it was overrun by military force, and it functioned quite well at that/ franco was a fascist arsehole, yet after the overruning of catalonia, all the options sucked, at least he brought a notion of stability.

Gah! Dude, once again, post about what you do friggin' know!!:mad:

Dare talk about Anarchist Catalunya (a topic you surely lack in knowledge), and for once, learn to write!!! It's not Catalonia, it's Catalunya!!

And don't even go there with Franco, besides being an ass, he completely twisted the destinies of the Spanish citizens. And did it until 1975!! Stability, shmability! That was the last thing he brought to Spain. Do you have any idea how many families from Catalunya, and mine included, suffered because of him? No, you have no friggin' clue! I have second cousins that died in Barcelona because Franquist idiots killed them. My grandmother suffered immensely for that to the point of leaving Spain and never returning, even to visit us! She lost her brother, and her father was almost killed. I... screw it. Stick with the IRA, reactionist freak!!!:upyours:

As an anarchist speaking here, Upper Cardinal Prime Directive Principle #1 is kinda anti-nationalism. So the fact that Anarchy Works says he is anarchist, yet supports Northern Irish nationalism, is contradictory. It's like a member of the US Libertarian Party saying they're against the First Amendment, it makes no sense. And I promised myself I would never use the phrase "you are not an anarchist"...

anti nationalist or just anti government? besides rule by a country with some semblence of a claim to it is better than rule by a colonialistic former empire.

Ah, I agree completely. I'm generally the guy in any given anarchist debate saying we should all lighten up on the "anarcho-capitalists" and "christian anarchists" (I myself happen to be a christian and an anarchist... at the same time!), but I feel I'm being severely tested by the concept of an "anarcho-Irish-nationalist" :confused:

how bout anarcho-opposed to rule by colonialist nations from hundreds of miles of water away?

Gah! Dude, once again, post about what you do friggin' know!!:mad:

Dare talk about Anarchist Catalunya (a topic you surely lack in knowledge), and for once, learn to write!!! It's not Catalonia, it's Catalunya!!

And don't even go there with Franco, besides being an ass, he completely twisted the destinies of the Spanish citizens. And did it until 1975!! Stability, shmability! That was the last thing he brought to Spain. Do you have any idea how many families from Catalunya, and mine included, suffered because of him? No, you have no friggin' clue! I have second cousins that died in Barcelona because Franquist idiots killed them. My grandmother suffered immensely for that to the point of leaving Spain and never returning, even to visit us! She lost her brother, and her father was almost killed. I... screw it. Stick with the IRA, reactionist freak!!!:upyours:

um, dude lighten up a bit. I am not spanish and therefor lack knowledge about spanish history. I admit. But, I still think anarchist cataluyna was a good model of anarchy working. Long live the durruti column!

Ah, I agree completely. I'm generally the guy in any given anarchist debate saying we should all lighten up on the "anarcho-capitalists" and "christian anarchists" (I myself happen to be a christian and an anarchist... at the same time!), but I feel I'm being severely tested by the concept of an "anarcho-Irish-nationalist" :confused:

how about anarcho socialists that want to liberate the northernmost 6 counties of ireland from british rule?

anarchist catalonia functioned till it was overrun by military force, and it functioned quite well at that/ franco was a fascist arsehole, yet after the overruning of catalonia, all the options sucked, at least he brought a notion of stability.

Of course, and any REAL anarchist knows, stability achieved through authority is better than other options, right?

Just like that you selectively object to rule from an overseas government as being any worse than indiginous rule makes you much more genuine than those anarchists who would just object categorically to any rule.

Yes, you are truly an authentic anarchist, not one of those posers that espouses it loudly because its oh so cool and deep...

well yes I am. I am learning more about anarchy, but I maintain my genuine anarchist status.

Well, then you have no excuse for not knowing anything about Irish History outside of what the IRA tells you.

um, dude lighten up a bit. I am not spanish and therefor lack knowledge about spanish history. I admit. But, I still think anarchist cataluyna was a good model of anarchy working. Long live the durruti column!

You don't have to be Spanish to learn about its history, but if thats the reasoning you want to go by...

Are you Irish?

You don't have to be Spanish to learn about its history, but if thats the reasoning you want to go by...

Are you Irish?

well yes I am. I am learning more about anarchy, but I maintain my genuine anarchist status.

anti nationalist or just anti government?

Anti-nationalist and anti-government*. Nationalism, according to anarchist philosophy, is a false distinction that divides people over artificially-constructed "differences" and makes them susceptible to rule from above. In this specific instance, British-Irish rivalry is a distraction based on abstract nonsense that draws attention away from both people's material problems. According to anarchy, it is one of many obstacles (such as racism, sexism, religious intolerance...) that prevents people from uniting to overcome their shared difficulties: poverty, exploitation, servitude to illegitimate authority, etc.

*Government isn't necessarily opposed by anarchism, if 'government' is understood in the sense of people coming together to solve community-wide issues. Many anarchists are in favour of direct democracy, or "workplace democracy". Government, understood as a class of "governors" ruling over the "governed", is opposed by anarchists.

how about anarcho socialists that want to liberate the northernmost 6 counties of ireland from british rule?

And replace British rule with what? The IRA's aim is to replace it with "Irish" rule, which is the same cake with different icing.

Of course, and any REAL anarchist knows, stability achieved through authority is better than other options, right?

Just like that you selectively object to rule from an overseas government as being any worse than indiginous rule makes you much more genuine than those anarchists who would just object categorically to any rule.

Yes, you are truly an authentic anarchist, not one of those posers that espouses it loudly because its oh so cool and deep...

I am fairly sure you are being sarcastic, BUT, think about it, I object to all rule from overseas in all cases, franco kept spain out of ww2 which would have destroyed spain, I do not like franco, but at least he prevented any foreign power from taking over.
aditionally, I have a loose interpretation of nationalism as "any group of people who come together to protect their collective interest by being independent from all outside forces" this allows me to be something of an "anarcho-nationalist"

**using quiet golf commentator voice**

And, Knights of Liberty with the clean headshot...nicely done...

*Unreal Tournament Voice*


HEADSHOT!

Anti-nationalist and anti-government*. Nationalism, according to anarchist philosophy, is a false distinction that divides people over artificially-constructed "differences" and makes them susceptible to rule from above. In this specific instance, British-Irish rivalry is a distraction based on abstract nonsense that draws attention away from both people's material problems. According to anarchy, it is one of many obstacles (such as racism, sexism, religious intolerance...) that prevents people from uniting to overcome their shared difficulties: poverty, exploitation, servitude to illegitimate authority, etc.

*Government isn't necessarily opposed by anarchism, if 'government' is understood in the sense of people coming together to solve community-wide issues. Many anarchists are in favour of direct democracy, or "workplace democracy". Government, understood as a class of "governors" ruling over the "governed", is opposed by anarchists.



And replace British rule with what? The IRA's aim is to replace it with "Irish" rule, which is the same cake with different icing.

thank you for sharing this knowledge, I already knew many of these points, but still, thank you.
This is not true. it would at least be run by the people who live there, to a degree greater than rule from and by england.

Well, then you have no excuse for not knowing anything about Irish History outside of what the IRA tells you.

**using quiet golf commentator voice**

And, Knights of Liberty with the clean headshot...nicely done...

I am fairly sure you are being sarcastic, BUT, think about it, I object to all rule from overseas in all cases, franco kept spain out of ww2 which would have destroyed spain, I do not like franco, but at least he prevented any foreign power from taking over.
aditionally, I have a loose interpretation of nationalism as "any group of people who come together to protect their collective interest by being independent from all outside forces" this allows me to be something of an "anarcho-nationalist"

Which is like being a feminist rapist.

You prefer one kind of rule over another. You are as much an anarchist as any other nationalist, and the idea that you can find any rational to support a fascist suggests you don't really get anarchy.

What you want is to co-opt the fashionable political identity of anarchy in hopes it will impress people.

thank you for sharing this knowledge, I already knew many of these points, but still, thank you.
This is not true. it would at least be run by the people who live there, to a degree greater than rule from and by england.

Being in favor of trading one house of rulers for another based on their geography and ethnicity makes you as effective an anarchist as a man shooting pool with a rope.

Impotent.

Which is like being a feminist rapist.

You prefer one kind of rule over another. You are as much an anarchist as any other nationalist, and the idea that you can find any rational to support a fascist suggests you don't really get anarchy.

What you want is to co-opt the fashionable political identity of anarchy in hopes it will impress people.

no, what I want to do is be reasonable about it. the system exists, we must work within it to a degree. and I have never actually bragged about being an anarchist. EVER

well yes I am. I am learning more about anarchy, but I maintain my genuine anarchist status.

Bingo, you reveal yourself.

That's what this is about for you, not the idealogy itself (which you clearly don't fathom or apply well), but rather the status you think will come with making the claim.

no, what I want to do is be reasonable about it. the system exists, we must work within it to a degree. and I have never actually bragged about being an anarchist. EVER

I didn't say you bragged about it, I said you mention it constantly hoping it will impress people.

And yes, you DO constantly maintain (or rather claim) status as an anarchist.

Dare talk about Anarchist Catalunya (a topic you surely lack in knowledge), and for once, learn to write!!! It's not Catalonia, it's Catalunya!!

In English, it is Catalonia. In English, it is not Catalunya. Given that we are speaking English, the correct means to address Catalonia is with that spelling. Catalunya would be the correct method if we were speaking Spanish, but we are not.

In any case, I personally find it amazing that Franco was allowed to rule over Spain for such a long period of time. Granted, I was born long after that ended, but I still find it somewhat distressing.

Then again, just look at southeastern Europe for the same old shit happening again.

Bingo, you reveal yourself.

That's what this is about for you, not the idealogy itself (which you clearly don't fathom or apply well), but rather the status you think will come with making the claim.

um, no, actually. it simply seemed an apt way to word it, much like your online or offline status next to the post. it simply describes somethings state of being, in this case online or offline, in my case being an anarchist. it was meant in that way only, dont go over interpeting everything I say and finding a non existent, nonintentional meaning. you might hurt yourself.

I didn't say you bragged about it, I said you mention it constantly hoping it will impress people.

And yes, you DO constantly maintain (or rather claim) status as an anarchist.

well, if someone questions it I will maintain it. would you prefer I not stand up for my beliefs? I HAVE NEVER USED IT TO IMPRESS PEOPLE

In English, it is Catalonia. In English, it is not Catalunya. Given that we are speaking English, the correct means to address Catalonia is with that spelling. Catalunya would be the correct method if we were speaking Spanish, but we are not.

In any case, I personally find it amazing that Franco was allowed to rule over Spain for such a long period of time. Granted, I was born long after that ended, but I still find it somewhat distressing.

Then again, just look at southeastern Europe for the same old shit happening again.

well, yes indeed. I did believe I could spell catalonia, I know plenty about it. Then this other arse showed up and doubted it. thank you

I am fairly sure you are being sarcastic, BUT, think about it, I object to all rule from overseas in all cases, franco kept spain out of ww2 which would have destroyed spain, I do not like franco, but at least he prevented any foreign power from taking over.

There you go again with the indigenous vs foreign. That's nationalist tripe. It doesn't matter if Spain was ruled by foreigners or by a local, either should be wrong under someone who rejects a ruler altogether.

aditionally, I have a loose interpretation of nationalism as "any group of people who come together to protect their collective interest by being independent from all outside forces" this allows me to be something of an "anarcho-nationalist"

Eh, that's an interesting definition of nationalism to say the least.

I'd suggest reading up on how Napoleon used nationalism. Also how nationalism was used to forge and maintain the very empires that you fight against. And how nationalism is partially at the heart of WWI, WWII and a number of genocides in recent times.

well, if someone questions it I will maintain it. would you prefer I not stand up for my beliefs? I HAVE NEVER USED IT TO IMPRESS PEOPLE

Is that not what you are trying to do here?

The more you say you don't care about our approval, the more it seems like you do. If you truly were apathetic, you'd be just that - apathetic.

um, no, actually. it simply seemed an apt way to word it, much like your online or offline status next to the post. it simply describes somethings state of being, in this case online or offline, in my case being an anarchist. it was meant in that way only, dont go over interpeting everything I say and finding a non existent, nonintentional meaning. you might hurt yourself.

I understood the context, AW, it was a play on words.

The fact is, you mention constantly that you are an anarchist, often coupled with an opinion that involves favoring one kind of rule over another.

You can excuse it by claiming you are being pragmatic, working within the system, but putting your energy into that system makes you a very compromised "anarchist".

I see I have to be very plain in communicating with you, since basic ideas like sarcasm (you seem to be only "fairly sure", even when its made obvious) and plays on words seem to escape you, even when made saliently evident.

well, no one should be told what to do. but, would you prefer your countrymen tell you what to do or a foreigner tell you what to do?
and maybe my theory is more "groupism" or "communityism"

I am a dude, I am actually an anarchist, I have never bought anything at hot topic, Have only ever watched two mtv shows, and I listen to bands based on talent, although top 40 is a minus. Hot topic is shit, it vilolates anarchy by using a belief that is against corporatism to benefit a corporation.

Dude, with all due respect, there's possibly a mistake somewhere if you're claiming to be an anarchist based on not shopping somewhere and listening to the right bands. It's a state of mind man, not a shopping choice.

I also label myself an anarchist. I don't do so on some basis of where I shop, or what music I listen to. I do so because I reject the legitimacy of the government, because I feel no-one has the right to rule me. Otherwise is like claiming you're a communist because you wear a Che Guavera t-shirt and once read something by Marx. It's not how you act, it's what you believe that matters. Changes in action may come as a result of that, but they are by no means required.

Make sense, man?

although no one should be forced or told to do anything, I agree.

Strange then that you seem to be Hell bent on forcing 900 thousand Northern Irish people into a union with a country they don't want to be part of.

I understood the context, AW, it was a play on words.

The fact is, you mention constantly that you are an anarchist, often coupled with an opinion that involves favoring one kind of rule over another.

You can excuse it by claiming you are being pragmatic, working within the system, but putting your energy into that system makes you a very compromised "anarchist".

I see I have to be very plain in communicating with you, since basic ideas like sarcasm (you seem to be only "fairly sure", even when its made obvious) and plays on words seem to escape you, even when made saliently evident.

well, I dont spend much time on the system, but I would rather be ruled by a fellow boston irish dude then some french guy from canada, and that is just practical in any application. although no one should be forced or told to do anything, I agree. and yes, I could learn more about anarchy. See, I admited I was wrong. Do I get a cookie?
*waits for cookie*

well, if someone questions it I will maintain it. would you prefer I not stand up for my beliefs? I HAVE NEVER USED IT TO IMPRESS PEOPLE

Are you trying to convince us or yourself?

The funny part is, there really isn't anything wrong with wanting a certain regard from people we interact with, its a natural human impetus.

So emphatically denying it when it permeates almost everything you say here, well...that's understandable, too, especially since you're young.

However, an anarchist who supports Irish Nationalism is just schismatic.

Dude, with all due respect, there's possibly a mistake somewhere if you're claiming to be an anarchist based on not shopping somewhere and listening to the right bands. It's a state of mind man, not a shopping choice.

I also label myself an anarchist. I don't do so on some basis of where I shop, or what music I listen to. I do so because I reject the legitimacy of the government, because I feel no-one has the right to rule me. Otherwise is like claiming you're a communist because you wear a Che Guavera t-shirt and once read something by Marx. It's not how you act, it's what you believe that matters. Changes in action may come as a result of that, but they are by no means required.

Make sense, man?

yes, it make sense. All I was saying is that I reject corporatism. you seem well learned in anarchy, would you like to share some more information?

well, no one should be told what to do. but, would you prefer your countrymen tell you what to do or a foreigner tell you what to do?
and maybe my theory is more "groupism" or "communityism"

Neither, I reject both of them if they try to do so. Incidentally, I also reject the idea of a foreigner and a countryman. How does one effectively define that, without reference to the artificial construction of a nation?

well, I dont spend much time on the system, but I would rather be ruled by a fellow boston irish dude then some french guy from canada, and that is just practical in any application. although no one should be forced or told to do anything, I agree. and yes, I could learn more about anarchy. See, I admited I was wrong. Do I get a cookie?
*waits for cookie*

You get a cookie.

*gives cookie without borders*

Seems if you really want to anarchist, though, you can't plausibly give your rathers to any rule, even if you think or hope it will bring you closer to anarchy.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself?

The funny part is, there really isn't anything wrong with wanting a certain regard from people we interact with, its a natural human impetus.

So emphatically denying it when it permeates almost everything you say here, well...that's understandable, too, especially since you're young.

However, an anarchist who supports Irish Nationalism is just schismatic.

it is more "irish freedom from outside control and influence" a step towards absolute freedom AKA anarchy

Neither, I reject both of them if they try to do so. Incidentally, I also reject the idea of a foreigner and a countryman. How does one effectively define that, without reference to the artificial construction of a nation?

good point. maybe I should put it as local or somone from a far off region, rather than "countrymen or foreigners". would this be a better way to put it?

well, no one should be told what to do. but, would you prefer your countrymen tell you what to do or a foreigner tell you what to do?
and maybe my theory is more "groupism" or "communityism"

I respect that at least you are willing to examine and refine your ideas at this point.

I know you ostensibly don't care about anybody's respect, but you're getting at least some on this point.

You get a cookie.

*gives cookie without borders*

Seems if you really want to anarchist, though, you can't plausibly give your rathers to any rule, even if you think or hope it will bring you closer to anarchy.

thank you for the tasty cookie. now I must go get a tasty beverage to wash down your tasty cookie.

it is more "irish freedom from outside control and influence" a step towards absolute freedom AKA anarchy

That's a trap, in a sense.

Having your rulers be "local", where they can consolidate power, keep an eye on you...

What makes you think that will be any easier to overthrow, having the castle right on top of you?

That's a trap, in a sense.

Having your rulers be "local", where they can consolidate power, keep an eye on you...

What makes you think that will be any easier to overthrow, having the castle right on top of you?

I wont have to walk as far to blow it up, other than that nothing. congratulations on sometimes deadly staus.

Strange then that you seem to be Hell bent on forcing 900 thousand Northern Irish people into a union with a country they don't want to be part of.

*quiet golf commentator voice*

We have a sniper in the bush, another clean hit...

*gets machine gun*
say hello to my little friend!!!!
*shoots sniper*

This would hold more weight if you actually provided a response to what I said. I won't hold my breath for one either.

*quiet golf commentator voice*

We have a sniper in the bush, another clean hit...

*gets machine gun*
say hello to my little friend!!!!
*shoots sniper*

I wont have to walk as far to blow it up, other than that nothing. congratulations on sometimes deadly staus.

They might not make it that easy for you.

In a few years you'll be able to drive, though.

I'd like to stress at this time that this is not a car bomb joke, which would be in very poor taste.

Have fun guys, I'll be back around another night.

They might not make it that easy for you.

In a few years you'll be able to drive, though.

I'd like to stress at this time that this is not a car bomb joke, which would be in very poor taste.
Have fun guys, I'll be back around another night.

um, how so?
and I still wouldnt be able to cross a goddamn ocean to do it, therefore
I maintain local rule is in most cases significantly better.

You get a cookie.

*gives cookie without borders*

Seems if you really want to anarchist, though, you can't plausibly give your rathers to any rule, even if you think or hope it will bring you closer to anarchy.

Well, you can, there's a reasonable historical tradition of preferring less invasive and more local governments, even if you would ideally have none.

yes, it make sense. All I was saying is that I reject corporatism. you seem well learned in anarchy, would you like to share some more information?

Well, I'm a 17 year old student, I'm not quite sure what you'd expect me to have learned. However, some ideas that may prove a source of enlightenment. Read some books. I'm currently working on "Defending the Impossible, a History of Anarchism". Fantastic overview of the subject. Kropotkin is one of the better authors and advocates, and Crimethinc are an interesting modern group.

Get involved in debates, and take to writing. One of the very best ways of developing your ideas is to write them down and argue them with someone else. A corollary of this is to work on your spelling and grammar. It is hopeless to attempt to debate if your English is horrendous---you simply will not be taken seriously.

And finally, listen to no authority, but read all. Educate yourself, write your own manifesto and position papers. Forge your own way, don't slavishly follow another. Listen to all advice, then discard it immediately. Except for the bit about grammar.

Just as a comment on local rule. It's generally easier to deal with rule by a far off power. Movement of troops to oppose is trickier, etc. I don't think there's much of a coincidence in the fact that one of the most successful revolutions was by colonies separated from the parent state by the Atlantic Ocean.

You kept the Dismiss cantrip written down somewhere, right?

Dismiss cantrip?

um, how so?
and I still wouldnt be able to cross a goddamn ocean to do it, therefore
I maintain local rule is in most cases significantly better.
If you put enough pressure on the LOCAL government, then the larger government will eventually abandon the smaller government/province/whatever. The American Revoloution didn't take England, now did it? After all, if your part of a smaller government, it will be more desperate to keep what land it has, and also will be easier to keep a closer eye on the population. I would like to add that I am in no way suggesting this and I am not an anarchist.

were may I obtain a copy?

Mine's from the school library. ISBN number, if that will prove useful, is 0 00 646245 4. Author is Peter Marshall.

Well, you can, there's a reasonable historical tradition of preferring less invasive and more local governments, even if you would ideally have none.



Well, I'm a 17 year old student, I'm not quite sure what you'd expect me to have learned. However, some ideas that may prove a source of enlightenment. Read some books. I'm currently working on "Defending the Impossible, a History of Anarchism". Fantastic overview of the subject. Kropotkin is one of the better authors and advocates, and Crimethinc are an interesting modern group.

Get involved in debates, and take to writing. One of the very best ways of developing your ideas is to write them down and argue them with someone else. A corollary of this is to work on your spelling and grammar. It is hopeless to attempt to debate if your English is horrendous---you simply will not be taken seriously.

And finally, listen to no authority, but read all. Educate yourself, write your own manifesto and position papers. Forge your own way, don't slavishly follow another. Listen to all advice, then discard it immediately. Except for the bit about grammar.

Just as a comment on local rule. It's generally easier to deal with rule by a far off power. Movement of troops to oppose is trickier, etc. I don't think there's much of a coincidence in the fact that one of the most successful revolutions was by colonies separated from the parent state by the Atlantic Ocean.

were may I obtain a copy?

thank you, oh wise anarchist comrade (we can call each other that, right?)

Well, you can cut the reverence if you want. I'd have been happy with "Thanks man" or the like myself. Comrade at the most, if you don't mind.

However, if I have one request that you'll listen too, please use capital letters and correct spelling. No insult intended, but it does make you seem immature. The best way of being considered intelligent and well learned is to speak like it.

Mine's from the school library. ISBN number, if that will prove useful, is 0 00 646245 4. Author is Peter Marshall.

thank you, oh wise anarchist comrade (we can call each other that, right?)

Mine's from the school library. ISBN number, if that will prove useful, is 0 00 646245 4. Author is Peter Marshall.

I doubt I will be able to get mine from there, my school is harsh on political views, especially anarchism (most of the idiot, spoiled rich kids at my school think it is killing, raping, bombing etc.) and commies.
they think "anarchists are fascist nazi scum" (my teacher called a close anarchist friend this, I stood up for him, we both had to serve a week of detention on account of me calling the teacher an asshole. (he indeed is) teachers should not be immune to critiscm, they are just people. nothing more, nothing less. they are the fascists, not us.

Well, you can cut the reverence if you want. I'd have been happy with "Thanks man" or the like myself. Comrade at the most, if you don't mind.

However, if I have one request that you'll listen too, please use capital letters and correct spelling. No insult intended, but it does make you seem immature. The best way of being considered intelligent and well learned is to speak like it.

okay, and indeed wise anarchist comrade was sarcasticly intended.

I doubt I will be able to get mine from there, my school is harsh on political views, especially anarchism (most of the idiot, spoiled rich kids at my school think it is killing, raping, bombing etc.) and commies.
they think "anarchists are fascist nazi scum" (my teacher called a close anarchist friend this, I stood up for him, we both had to serve a week of detention on account of me calling the teacher an asshole. (he indeed is) teachers should not be immune to critiscm, they are just people. nothing more, nothing less. they are the fascists, not us.

There is a difference between criticism and calling someone an asshole. Even if he was being one, there is no point in sinking to his level.

Click Stand;13484113']There is a difference between criticism and calling someone an asshole. Even if he was being one, there is no point in sinking to his level.

even if he called me a nazi? seriously, this guy had had it coming for years, but everyone feared the Iron Fist.

even if he called me a nazi? seriously, this guy had had it coming for years, but everyone feared the Iron Fist.

Did he call you specifically a Nazi? The way you worded it before, he said anarchists were Nazis. While still an unfair generalization, it wasn't a personal attack and you shouldn't have responded with one.

I really don't get why you're hell-bent on proving yourself if you really don't care. You're not really an anarchist if you believe in nationalism, you seem to be so determined to be "against the man" that you are really just buying in to another fad, and you can't back up the statements you make. (Unless we're in a military court, burden of proof is on the person making the accusations... not those trying to refute them.) Age is probably a factor (and I'm not saying I was any better at your age- dude, being different is always trendy), but you've been proven again and again to have less information than you think you do. Take this as a learning experience and go get more informed.

thank you for sharing this knowledge, I already knew many of these points, but still, thank you.
This is not true. it would at least be run by the people who live there, to a degree greater than rule from and by england.

Do me a favor would you... look up the Northern Ireland Assembly. You know it does actually have a local devolved government, which has considerable powers. In other words, it IS run by the people who live there. This is voted in, by (I think) proportional representation and has a mix of nationalist and unionist members, roughly equal to the proportion of nationlist v unionist population of Northern Ireland (ie more Unionists).

Did he call you specifically a Nazi? The way you worded it before, he said anarchists were Nazis. While still an unfair generalization, it wasn't a personal attack and you shouldn't have responded with one.

I really don't get why you're hell-bent on proving yourself if you really don't care. You're not really an anarchist if you believe in nationalism, you seem to be so determined to be "against the man" that you are really just buying in to another fad, and you can't back up the statements you make. (Unless we're in a military court, burden of proof is on the person making the accusations... not those trying to refute them.) Age is probably a factor (and I'm not saying I was any better at your age- dude, being different is always trendy), but you've been proven again and again to have less information than you think you do. Take this as a learning experience and go get more informed.

okay, I am not a genius. I dont have a 4.0 gpa. I admit.
If he calls my friend, and I qoute "a jew hating cross burning nazi, who thinks it is cool to show up late" and when I said, wow dude, that was harsh he proceeds to say "you are just as bad" and I reply with "you are such a narrow minded asshole", is that out of line? is it? If I Had said it to a student it would not have been a big deal. but, The asshat in question being a teacher, it is now a big deal. That shouldnt be.

Do me a favor would you... look up the Northern Ireland Assembly. You know it does actually have a local devolved government, which has considerable powers. In other words, it IS run by the people who live there. This is voted in, by (I think) proportional representation and has a mix of nationalist and unionist members, roughly equal to the proportion of nationlist v unionist population of Northern Ireland (ie more Unionists).

yes, I am aware of said organization. BUT, the region of northern Ireland IS I believe the British Province Of Ulster, and therefore considered british. at various times I believe it has also been ruled by parliament.

Which is like being a feminist rapist.


Hmmm? maybe a feminist rapist is a woman who rapes men.

Relevent?
Ironic?

Hmmm? maybe a feminist rapist is a woman who rapes men.

Relevent?

how about anarcho socialists that want to liberate the northernmost 6 counties of ireland from british rule?
1) They weren't anarcho socialists, they were just mobsters

2) They're GONE.

3) You've hardly a drop of Irish blood in you, why is this your issue?

I am completely Irish. I was merely born outside Ireland, therefore this is totally my issue. :D
What generation 'Irish'?

1) They weren't anarcho socialists, they were just mobsters

2) They're GONE.

3) You've hardly a drop of Irish blood in you, why is this your issue?

um, I wasnt referencing any specific organisation that I knew of
AND
I am completely Irish. I was merely born outside Ireland, therefore this is totally my issue. :D

on my dads 3rd, on my moms, 2nd. And I have relatives living there. I also can trace all my ancestors to Ireland. Try and dispute these facts. I have been many times as well. :D :D :D :D :D
Yeah, fine. I'm 3rd generation Irish myself. And it's entirely not a big deal.

What generation 'Irish'?

on my dads 3rd, on my moms, 2nd. And I have relatives living there. I also can trace all my ancestors to Ireland. Try and dispute these facts. I have been many times as well. :D :D :D :D :D

Yeah, fine. I'm 3rd generation Irish myself. And it's entirely not a big deal.

yes, I get that. I was just messing because everyone is so upset about facts all the time. yea, I got 'em, and yea, I'll drop 'em
:)

Seems if you really want to anarchist, though, you can't plausibly give your rathers to any rule, even if you think or hope it will bring you closer to anarchy.

Nonsense. "Anarchy" means "no rulers." That's a rule right there.

Hmmm? maybe a feminist rapist is a woman who rapes men.

Send those women this way;)

Nonsense. "Anarchy" means "no rulers." That's a rule right there.

Isn't it more of a definition?

Isn't it more of a definition?

What is a definition but a rule of application?

To be an anarchist, by definition a person must advocate "no rulers": that is to say, he or she must oppose rulers.

Isn’t it more of a definition?
A maxim.

Which is to say, a (moral) rule to live by.

yes, I am aware of said organization. BUT, the region of northern Ireland IS I believe the British Province Of Ulster, and therefore considered british. at various times I believe it has also been ruled by parliament.

You know that Northern Ireland sends MPs to Westminster right? It's not like they have no representation (there are currently 5 Sinn Fein MPs in parliament). Northern Ireland is considered one of the Home Nations, a distinct constituent country in the UK, it's not an occupied territory with no self-government or representation like you seem to be suggesting.

Nonsense. "Anarchy" means "no rulers." That's a rule right there.

My bad, I should have clarified.

I meant "any rule" as in "to be ruled by anyone".

Reading over it, though, I can see how it came off the wrong way.

Syntax is a rule...that's how it starts, you know.

um, dude lighten up a bit. I am not spanish and therefor lack knowledge about spanish history. I admit. But, I still think anarchist cataluyna was a good model of anarchy working. Long live the durruti column!

Then, if you lack knowledge of Spanish history don't even try to debate about it on a forum. Because I know jack s*it about the IRA, I refrain from debating about it. I leave that to the experts. I recognize it. The same principle applies to you.

Ask a Spaniard if the model of Anarchist Catalunya worked, for what's worth, ask a Catalá about it, I invite you to. Then, and only then can you begin to amass knowledge about it. But before that, do remain silent about the topic.

on my dads 3rd, on my moms, 2nd. And I have relatives living there. I also can trace all my ancestors to Ireland. Try and dispute these facts. I have been many times as well. :D :D :D :D :D

Are you familiar with the term 'Plastic Paddy'?

The IRA. Proof the Irish really should be stuck in the middle of an ocean surrounded by sharks. Miles from the rest of the Civilised World.

The IRA. Proof the Irish really should be stuck in the middle of an ocean surrounded by sharks. Miles from the rest of the Civilised World.

The BNP. Proof the English should be stuck in the middle of an ocean surrounded by sharks. Miles from the rest of the Civilised World.

......or perhaps a whole people should not be judged by a minority

What is a definition but a rule of application?

To be an anarchist, by definition a person must advocate "no rulers": that is to say, he or she must oppose rulers.

and I always thought it was about self rule!

Are you familiar with the term 'Plastic Paddy'?

Yep that's what every Brit becomes on a certian day!:D

Are you familiar with the term 'Plastic Paddy'?

Is a term often used to describe non-Irish people that have an almost nostalgic claim of Irishness or due to having some degree of Irish heritage. Plastic Paddy or Plastic Patrick (Padráig). The term usually concerns perceived cultural appropriation of Irish customs and identity by members of the Irish diaspora or even those with no ancestral connection to Ireland. A 'Plastic Paddy' allegedly knows little of actual Irish culture, but asserts their identity, claiming it to be Irish.

Dude, LOL! This describes AW so well!

Public announcement:
For more information on the phenomenae of Plastic Paddy, consult the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_Paddy