NationStates Jolt Archive

Obviously.

Liberalism promotes the individual over the state, while fascism promotes the state over the individual. The two are polar opposites.

You didn't need the distinction made, clearly. It was for the OP, who was having a hard time figuring that out. Speaking of which...

It took you guys 15 pages to figure that out?

Well, I tend to give the benefit of the doubt anymore, and every so often someone who is genuinely that stubbornly ignorant through little or no fault of his own will post something like this. Edwinasia, Red Baptism, New Mitanni, and the like. I'd rather foster a decent troll than fry him outright if I can. To the OP's credit, he did post a few more times.

You didn’t need the distinction made, clearly. It was for the OP, who was having a hard time figuring that out.
Sorry if it came off in that way. I was merely backing you up. :)

Sorry if it came off in that way. I was merely backing you up. :)

And you have my thanks -- I appreciate backup.

Of course, to liberals, any person with a strong sense of duty and loyalty is a 'blind follower' just because they dont bend to ideals outside their beliefs

Ah, and here the true comment comes out. It's an anti-liberal angle. I think someone who "stays true" to their "beliefs" is someone who is stagnant and self centered. Believing that they are right above all, when in reality there are no certainties in life, is simply ignoring anything that is contrary to their own will. As a libertarian, I believe that you freedom is yours and yours alone. As long as your freedom doesn't infringe upon mine then you are fine by me. For instance, I am not gay, but believe all gay people should be treated fairly and equally. I am bi-racial and do not hate my predominantly white heritage, nor do I hate my black heritage. I do not use drugs but I don't care if others do. Hell, I'd even encourage it, providing you do not then get in a car and kill a family. I have done drugs in the past, and no one was hurt by it except the for the shape of some couch cushions and some funny looking club clothes. My religion tells me to live and let live. It also tells me to hate the sin and love the sinner. If I want to walk into the street, cover myself in liter fluid, and make a bonfire of me, so be it. You want to go out into the street and cover yourself in pig urine, fly that kite. It is not my right to tell anyone how to live their life.

Theres a difference between being noble and selfless of your own choices based on real information, and having the liberals telling you PC lies and half-truths, and telling you its better to be noble and selfless to their ideas

Does anyone force you to live your life differently? Or are they just asking that you allow others to live out their own existence in peace? If they are forcing you against your will then I do not support that. If they are saying you have to accept that others are different and your ideas are not superior, then so be it.

I meant the pro-drug users like in that marijuana thread
retards who are pro-drug, not because THEY use, but that because someone else uses, its okay to them

Why is it your, or the government's role to mandate what they can and cannot do? Whatever you want to do to your own body without harming others is just fine for me. It's when you infringe upon my rights that there is a problem.

So, if everyone conformed to this ideology, would they then be sheep? Or is that a bit over your head? And for doing the job 110%, you sure do seem to have trouble following the rules of capitalization and punctuation well. Lazy commie.:D

We might also point out that it's impossible to give more than %100. Who the hell said that people who are accepting of others are automatically going to do a shitty job? This whole argument sounds more like, "my way or the highway! grumblemfjfjweIf I don't believe in it neither should you, bleh bleh." No, if you confirm to this ideology you are pure, morally virtuous, and in God's inner circle. ;)

Simply because an idea is popular, doesn't mean that those who subscribe to those beliefs are "sheep."
The reason for the prevalence of those ideas is that people are starting to wake up to the idea that it's not good to oppress others.

Welcome to NS. It's quite possible that you'll have to explain this point a few more times if you stick around long enough.
:)

i'm a furry green alien cat.

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

I meant the pro-drug users like in that marijuana thread
retards who are pro-drug, not because THEY use, but that because someone else uses, its okay to them

I don't drive. According to your logic, I should run around trying to force legislation that outlaws cars?

I agree with you on many of your points, but this statement is not entairly correct. Much of the rest of the world is pretty damn racist. Per examples: Japanese hate Russians, Russians hate Muslims/ Arabs, Indains hate homosexuals, Chinese hate Japanese, and then there is the whole Darfur tragedy. The list goes on and on. Yes, Europeans did many terrible things to the rest ofthe world, but the concept of racism is not an invention of Western culture. The West just gets better coverage because of its high standards.


more on topics:
Hey I'm an Aries, just what are you implying?

Oh, I entirely agree with you on this. I don't think the hideous treatment of Africans at the hands of Arab slavers (quite probably the root of the modern conflict in Sudan) gets enough publicity in the modern day, for example. The difference is, as you say, that the Western liberal tradition is supposed to aspire to higher things. While American GIs were fighting to bring down Hitler, America itself continued to oppress its black population.

So while I agree that racism, imperialism and colonialism are far from unique to the West, it is the West's history of such in the face of its supposed liberal values that most concerns me.

I don't drive. According to your logic, I should run around trying to force legislation that outlaws cars?

Now you've got it, 'cause if you don't or a sheep...
:rolleyes: