Which political idealogy will cause the end of the world?

[Spider-Bite]

On a global scale which political idealogy is more likely to contribute more to the extinction of the human race if it happens. Also which idealogy is more likely to contribute to kicking off World War 3?

I believe that it's conservatives, although that probably comes as no surprise to anybody here. I really do. who are liberals trying to kill and go to war with? In every country it's pretty much the same thing. Conservatives want war with other o****ries and liberals don't.

[Dan33977]

You come off as rather ignorant in your post. Not all conservatives are bad, just the radical, religious neoconservatives are. Though I'm not particularly fond of either political party, I do agree that Republicans are worse than Democrats are. Personally, I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal (somewhat of a libertarian).

[Abaddon]

Why does WWIII have to be the end?:huh:

[DV8]

the real political ideology which will cause the end of the world is capitalism . . . we can only consume so much **** before we run out of resources altogether . . .

[triplefive]

there are a lot more political ideologies than just conservativism and liberalism, and i don't think one particular ideology will be the downfall of the world.

[hippie_hunter]

I don't think that it will be the conservatives that will be the cause of World War III. I think the more extreme right such as fascists and reactionaries will cause it.

Remember, conservativism is the good side of right winged politics, just like liberalism is the good side of left winged politics.

[dogwonder78]

Anarchy?

[Parker]

I have no idea which idealogy will cause the end of the world, but they're all just as likely to contribute, the thread and poll are kind of posing a different question.

[Human Shield]

Any ideology that doesn't respect human rights. Which is pretty much all of them except libertarians.

the real political ideology which will cause the end of the world is capitalism . . . we can only consume so much **** before we run out of resources altogether . . .

Good thing then that capitalism is the only system that promotes more effective use of resources and new technology, capitalism is the only system that creates long term investment (no maintenance without private property). Resources that are privately owned never run out.

[Dan33977]

Any ideology that doesn't respect human rights. Which is pretty much all of them except libertarians.

Good thing then that capitalism is the only system that promotes more effective use of resources and new technology, capitalism is the only system that creates long term investment (no maintenance without private property). Resources that are privately owned never run out.

Agreed. I love your reply.:yay:

[Spider-Bite]

You come off as rather ignorant in your post. Not all conservatives are bad, just the radical, religious neoconservatives are. Though I'm not particularly fond of either political party, I do agree that Republicans are worse than Democrats are. Personally, I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal (somewhat of a libertarian).

well if liberals oppose going to war, and conservatives support it, I'd say that pretty much simplifies it wouldn't you? if war happens between two countries it's gonna be because conservatives in both countries supported it.

[hippie_hunter]

well if liberals oppose going to war, and conservatives support it, I'd say that pretty much simplifies it wouldn't you? if war happens between two countries it's gonna be because conservatives in both countries supported it.

You really need to get rid of this generalization that all liberals oppose war are automatically good and represent all of left-winged politics and that all conservatives are hate-mongering fascists that are going to destroy the war.

It's insulting and downright ignorant.

[Dan33977]

well if liberals oppose going to war, and conservatives support it, I'd say that pretty much simplifies it wouldn't you? if war happens between two countries it's gonna be because conservatives in both countries supported it.

You couldn't be more wrong. First of all, I think you need to rethink your ideas of what liberalism and conservatism are; second of all, don't try to simplify the situation when it isn't at all simple.

Again, I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal (somewhat libertarian), so where would I fall in your "simplified" world?

You really need to get rid of this generalization that all liberals oppose war are automatically good and represent all of left-winged politics and that all conservatives are hate-mongering fascists that are going to destroy the war.

It's insulting and downright ignorant.

Agreed. Exactly what I said in my previous reply to this thread. It's like a typical angst-ridden teenager's naive view of liberals and conservatives.

[Immortalfire]

Why does WWIII have to be the end?:huh: Evidently some people can see the future :huh:

[C.F. Kane]

Well, assuming that our sun doesn't go supernova when the Milky Way collides with the Andromeda Galaxy, I'm pretty sure that Sol's expansion into a red giant that will consume everything between it and Mars will destroy the world.


I'm not sure if you can blame that on liberals or conservatives, though.

[gap5ewl]

i dont think this is a good poll..since i believe if both are taken to the extreme, we could possible see something horrrific..

[Orko Is King]

JEWS!!!!:cmad: :cmad: :cmad:

[hippie_hunter]

If there is going to be a World War III, it'll be started by a right-wing reactionary government like Iran or a left-wing communist government like China or North Korea.

[Dan33977]

If there is going to be a World War III, it'll be started by a right-wing reactionary government like Iran or a left-wing communist government like China or North Korea.

Well, I'm glad at least someone has some sense in this forum!

[Human Shield]

Right and Left are arbitrary terms for people that treat social freedom and economic freedom as two separate issues when they work the same way. Socialism, fascists, and communism all work the same way, left and right of coercion is still coercion, its whatever direction the state forces.

Extremes of left and right make no sense. Moderates are supposed to be pro-freedom and extreme is mass murder and slave camps? Left and Right is just disagreement over what to use coercion on, but both face the same direction, like a tree branch with left and right points but both facing up.

In America at least the Left is all pro-privileges and the right at least has a libertarian segment facing the other direction. Other then that it is all pork-barrel spending for special interest groups, keeping their job depends on making false promises and helping their voters at the expense of others, while giving everything nice sounding names and describing how good things will come regardless of if it does the opposite. If every bill did what it said it would do we should be a utopia.

Socialist and communist are the true conservatives because they want to keep trying what humanity has been doing for 5,000 years.

[Spider-Bite]

I don't think that it will be the conservatives that will be the cause of World War III. I think the more extreme right such as fascists and reactionaries will cause it.

Remember, conservativism is the good side of right winged politics, just like liberalism is the good side of left winged politics.

take into consideration the way Bush, Osama Bin laden, Iranian President Armamjad or whatever he's called, all behave and interact with the rest of the world. They are all very conservative.

If the entire world was suddenly liberal and anti-war wouldn't we have world peace?

[hippie_hunter]

take into consideration the way Bush, Osama Bin laden, Iranian President Armamjad or whatever he's called, all behave and interact with the rest of the world. They are all very conservative.
Osama bin Laden and the Iranian leader are not conservatives. They are reactionaries which is even more right-winged than Bush. And Bush is a crappy conservative, he spends like a liberal, a retarded one at that.

If the entire world was suddenly liberal and anti-war wouldn't we have world peace?
The same thing could happen with conservative and anti-war. You need to get this ideal that all conservatives are a bunch of hateful warmongering bastards who want to destroy the world. As I have already said, your views on conservatives are extremely ignorant, naive, ill-informed, and insulting.

Liberals can also support the idea of war. Various liberals in Congress such as John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Tom Daschle, Diane Feinstein, and others voted to SUPPORT Bush in his war against Saddam Hussein.

Also your dream of world peace will never happen. The times will change. Idealologies will change. Demographics will change. But the nature of people will never change. People will always find a reason to hate one another, it's a basic human emotion like love, anger, joy, sadness, etc. People will hate other people on the basis of race, pride, fear, religion, history, territory, and any other reason they can find. War is a part of history and it will continue forever in the future. Thinking that world peace, no matter how desireable and beneficial it is, is a possibility is foolishness. World peace is an impossibility because there will always be a conflict somewhere in the world.

[Dan33977]

take into consideration the way Bush, Osama Bin laden, Iranian President Armamjad or whatever he's called, all behave and interact with the rest of the world. They are all very conservative.

If the entire world was suddenly liberal and anti-war wouldn't we have world peace?

Do you even bother to read the replies to your thread? You seriously need to rethink your views on what liberalism and conservatism are. You're oversimplifying the situation when it isn't at all simple and what you're suggesting is exactly what one would expect a typical, naive angst-ridden teenager to do. For the last time, get a clue!

Again, I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal (libertarian), so where do I fall in your "simplified" world?

[The Amazing Lee]

Obesity

[X-Chick]

This is assuming the world will end because of a war. Why couldn't it be a giant asteroid or something?

[November Rain]

deeply religious backed conservaties

if that makes any sense...

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Why do people make polls without bothering to think them through? :huh:
The answer is "both". :huh:

[Spider-Bite]

You really need to get rid of this generalization that all liberals oppose war are automatically good and represent all of left-winged politics and that all conservatives are hate-mongering fascists that are going to destroy the war.

It's insulting and downright ignorant.

I dont' believe it applies to every single person. It's an observational generalization.

[Spider-Bite]

You couldn't be more wrong. First of all, I think you need to rethink your ideas of what liberalism and conservatism are; second of all, don't try to simplify the situation when it isn't at all simple.

Again, I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal (somewhat libertarian), so where would I fall in your "simplified" world?


Socially liberal would not put you in the category as contribute to world war 3 or the end of the world.



Agreed. Exactly what I said in my previous reply to this thread. It's like a typical angst-ridden teenager's naive view of liberals and conservatives.

Why must somebody be a teenager in order to be liberal? you do know that 2 out of 3 college professors are liberal right?

[Spider-Bite]

If there is going to be a World War III, it'll be started by a right-wing reactionary government like Iran or a left-wing communist government like China or North Korea.

One country can't "start" world war 3 for the most part. It takes at least two to tangle. There is a very strong argument to be made that American President Bush deserves an awful lot of the blame for the oncoming world war 3. Not all of the blame, not even half, but a lot of it.

We aren't moving fast enough to get off of oil, and we haven't been reasonable in our trying to govern the middle east.

Nobody can say North Korea is leftist. We know practically nothing about their culture, other than everybody is opressed, and traditions are forced on people.

China has heavy regulation on their economy, but people there make 10 cents a day and millions a day. As far as evening out the wealth China is farther to the right than most of America. On human rights they are farther to the right than the vast majority of liberals on this planet.

[Ahura Mazda]

You do know that the term liberal was originally used for those who wanted change whereas the conservatives were those that wished to keep things the same. They have now been subverted to mean left wing and right wing.

However, the lines between both are blurred in many Countries such as France where the right wing party still upholds a wealth tax that starts at a very low level and in the UK, where the left wing party has kept taxes relatively low, using liberal (and this is right wing) economic policies, contrary to a Keynsian economic model, tend to show that labels seem inaccurate today.

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Socially liberal would not put you in the category as contribute to world war 3 or the end of the world.

LMAO
One of the most Wrong posts I've read this morning...:huh:
Are...:huh:...you aware that Al Qaeda, Iran and China hate the U.S. and major European powers because they are "Socially Liberal"? :huh:
LOL

Do you know why America is called "The Great Satan"?
It isn't solely because of our untamed imperialism and arrogant, violent expansionist bulls***.
It's also because we let women traipse around in man-pants, go to school, screw dudes they've just met, study, profess and preach about any religion that seems correct to them, allow cartoonists to draw whatever they want, let Atheists buy food, sell things for profit.....

I could go on all day. What are you Talking about? :huh:

[Spider-Bite]

Socialist and communist are the true conservatives because they want to keep trying what humanity has been doing for 5,000 years.

That's a complete lie. Economics and social issues are two differest areas for one thing, and hating gays and being racist and solving our differences with war is what weve been doing for way longer than 5000 years. Conservatives always want to do what they think has worked perfectly all these years. Liberals tend to want big change.

[raybia]

It won't be a political system that destroys the world.

Uncivilized, unnatural behavior will be our undoing.

The Earth won't be destroyed but the world that we know will be and a new one will rise in its place.

[Mee]

The Good Book don't say nothin bout political armageddon. :huh:

[Wilhelm-Scream]

The Good Book don't say nothin bout political armageddon. :huh:
If by "Good Book", you mean, "The Bible", it most certainly does. :huh:
The Anti-Christ gains political power over the entire world by taking measures to "ensure" peace and prosperity for all people.
But the "Peace and Prosperity" will be threatened if anyone disobeys by refusing to adhere to his economic mandate...the decree that "no one may buy or sell unless they bear the Mark of the Beast". :huh:

You, really can't GET more "political than that. :huh:

[Mr Sparkle]

But the "Peace and Prosperity" will be threatened if anyone disobeys by refusing to adhere to his economic mandate..

then....it already happened?

[Spider-Bite]

Osama bin Laden and the Iranian leader are not conservatives. They are reactionaries which is even more right-winged than Bush. And Bush is a crappy conservative, he spends like a liberal, a retarded one at that.

Liberals tend to support higher spending, but government spending has no bearing on how liberal or conservative you are. What if a government leader spends 5 trillion dollars on preserving the culture, religion, and traditions of today?

Explain to me why Iran's president expelled all the liberal college professors out of college? Those people are extremely conservative. They appear much like America's past conservatives and even have a lot in common with today's American repbulican party.


The same thing could happen with conservative and anti-war. You need to get this ideal that all conservatives are a bunch of hateful warmongering bastards who want to destroy the world. As I have already said, your views on conservatives are extremely ignorant, naive, ill-informed, and insulting.


I feel that conservatives are extremely religous, prejudice, unaccepting people who want to blow the world up. All they do is prove me right on a daily basis. Just look at O'Reily, who's views are supported by America's conseravtives. "I think our Christain values make us noble. I think our founding father's were noble. I think Americans are very noble, there's room for improvement, but I like it pretty much the way it is, but these liberals say oh no, we need big change"

I say our founding fathers were slave owning, gay hating, women oppressing, indian murderers. I feel that like all cultures some Americans are noble, and others aren't. I believe a person's religion is irrelevant to their nobility, and America is the best place to live, and that's sad, because even America ain't that great.


Liberals can also support the idea of war. Various liberals in Congress such as John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Tom Daschle, Diane Feinstein, and others voted to SUPPORT Bush in his war against Saddam Hussein.


That's politics. People lie and do things to keep their jobs. It's not representative to the views of liberal citizens who in America make up only about 30% of the population. Not to mention they were lied to in order to get those votes. And they actually voted to give Bush authorization to go to war, as a way to put pressure on Saddam to let weapons inspectors in. Then at the time of the invasion some democrats who wanted to appeal to voters other than their liberal base stood up and pretended to support it.

The decision to invade was ultimate decided by Bush, who was given the authority to make that decision by congress.


Also your dream of world peace will never happen. The times will change. Idealologies will change. Demographics will change. But the nature of people will never change. People will always find a reason to hate one another, it's a basic human emotion like love, anger, joy, sadness, etc. People will hate other people on the basis of race, pride, fear, religion, history, territory, and any other reason they can find. War is a part of history and it will continue forever in the future. Thinking that world peace, no matter how desireable and beneficial it is, is a possibility is foolishness. World peace is an impossibility because there will always be a conflict somewhere in the world.
gotta go I'll be back. no time to comment on that paragraph.

[Mee]

If by "Good Book", you mean, "The Bible", it most certainly does.
The Anti-Christ gains political power over the entire world by taking measures to "ensure" peace and prosperity for all people.
But the "Peace and Prosperity" will be threatened if anyone disobeys by refusing to adhere to his economic mandate...the decree that "no one may buy or sell unless they bear the Mark of the Beast".

You, really can't GET more "political than that.

Yeah that slipped my mind. I'm not totally awake yet.


No big deal, I just forgot about the Anti-Christ. :woot:

[hippie_hunter]

One country can't "start" world war 3 for the most part. It takes at least two to tangle. There is a very strong argument to be made that American President Bush deserves an awful lot of the blame for the oncoming world war 3. Not all of the blame, not even half, but a lot of it.
Actually it can. Germany manipulated Austria into a fight in the Seven Weeks War. Germany provoked France into starting the Franco-Prussian War. Germany provoked Austria into starting World War I. Germany basically started World War II in Europe and Japan did the same in Asia.

China can start World War III by invading Taiwan. North Korea can start World War III by nuking South Korea or Japan. Iran can start World War III by attacking Israel.

In instances like these it will be one country that started it and President Bush would deserve no blame at all. As a matter in fact a lot of his policies aren't going to start World War III or even tie-into it. If there is going to be a World War III, it isn't for a long way off. Right now, there just aren't any warning signs of a World War like there were for World War I and World War II. So quit talking out of your ass.

We aren't moving fast enough to get off of oil, and we haven't been reasonable in our trying to govern the middle east.
If you ask me we should just pull out of the Middle East. They don't want us there and we should be focusing on getting off of Middle Eastern oil.

Nobody can say North Korea is leftist. We know practically nothing about their culture, other than everybody is opressed, and traditions are forced on people.
- The communist Workers' Party of Korea is in charge: check
- The economy is heavily centralized in a communist style: check
- The government has declared itself a communist state: check
- The world views North Korea as a repressive communist state: check

Last time I checked, North Korea is a communist state. Communism is on the far left of the political spectrum. So yes, North Korea is an extremist leftist state.

China has heavy regulation on their economy, but people there make 10 cents a day and millions a day. As far as evening out the wealth China is farther to the right than most of America. On human rights they are farther to the right than the vast majority of liberals on this planet.
You need to get this idea that oppresion is a tool of right-winged poltics. Oppression is a tool of both extremes of the political spectrum. China is a communist state. That means that it is a leftist state.

[chamber-music]

any political party that uses religion, as religion an politics don't mix.

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Yeah that slipped my mind. I'm not totally awake yet.


No big deal, I just forgot about the Anti-Christ. :woot:

It happens. Last week we were pumpin' along on our dirt bikes, and there's the "Anti-Christ" ( :whatever: ).
And he goes, "Hey bro.s!........where....'re you goin'? :csad:"
And we go, "Ohhhh,...hey....antichrist *false exclamation point*.....guhhh, pfff, we were...goin' to Shakey's Pizza........do.....you....wanna come? :fake smile:

And he goes, "SWEET!.....Lemmee....let me go home and get some money from my Mom and I'll meet you dudes there!
We should TOtally go to the salad bar and like, fill up! Hahahahaha:up:"

And we went, "Cool. We'll save you some Baco-Bits, man.:up:"
So he tore off back to his ramshackle house like he was being chased by bees and we headed down by Lincoln and hooked up with this totally ****ty Puerto Rican girl whose cousin just got a Wii and then she felt me up and stuff. :):up:

[Mee]

Great story.

Tuck me in now, Papa?

[Kritish]

Religion will surely cause the third world war.

[hippie_hunter]

Liberals tend to support higher spending, but government spending has no bearing on how liberal or conservative you are. What if a government leader spends 5 trillion dollars on preserving the culture, religion, and traditions of today?
They are still fiscally liberal, a retarded fiscal liberal at that.

Explain to me why Iran's president expelled all the liberal college professors out of college? Those people are extremely conservative. They appear much like America's past conservatives and even have a lot in common with today's American repbulican party.
You are a jackass for comparing the leaders of Iran to the Republicans of America. The leadership in Iran is so far towards the right that they aren't even conservatives. They are reactionaries. Stop thinking that all right-winged politics are conservatives.

I feel that conservatives are extremely religous, prejudice, unaccepting people who want to blow the world up. All they do is prove me right on a daily basis. Just look at O'Reily, who's views are supported by America's conseravtives. "I think our Christain values make us noble. I think our founding father's were noble. I think Americans are very noble, there's room for improvement, but I like it pretty much the way it is, but these liberals say oh no, we need big change"
Again, you are a jackass for thinking that all conservatives are like that. It's downright insulting. My parents are conservatives and they are not extremely religous, prejudiced, and unaccepting of other people. Many of the people I work with are conservative yet think the same way. You need to get ignorant jackasses like Bill O'Reily, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh out of your head and realise that they don't represent all conservatives, they represent the neo-conservatives.

I say our founding fathers were slave owning, gay hating, women oppressing, indian murderers. I feel that like all cultures some Americans are noble, and others aren't. I believe a person's religion is irrelevant to their nobility, and America is the best place to live, and that's sad, because even America ain't that great.
Again, you're being an ignorant jackass.

That's politics. People lie and do things to keep their jobs. It's not representative to the views of liberal citizens who in America make up only about 30% of the population. Not to mention they were lied to in order to get those votes. And they actually voted to give Bush authorization to go to war, as a way to put pressure on Saddam to let weapons inspectors in. Then at the time of the invasion some democrats who wanted to appeal to voters other than their liberal base stood up and pretended to support it.
Again, you are missing the point. The point was that LIBERALS voted to go to war. It's not just a conservative thing.

The decision to invade was ultimate decided by Bush, who was given the authority to make that decision by congress.
That is true.

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Religion will surely cause the third world war.
Nope. It'll be a justification for WW3.
The causes are way more complex and varied.

[Kritish]

Nope. It'll be a justification for WW3.
The causes are way more complex and varied.

The Nazi's believed they were descendants of Atlantis.

[hippie_hunter]

The Nazi's believed they were descendants of Atlantis.

No they didn't, they beleived that the German people were descendants of the Aryan race, the perfect race.

[Kritish]

No they didn't, they beleived that the German people were descendants of the Aryan race, the perfect race.

The concept of Atlantis also attracted National Socialist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism) (Nazi) theorists. In 1938 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938), Heinrich Himmler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Himmler) organized a search in Tibet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet) to find a remnant of the white Atlanteans. According to Julius Evola (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola) (Revolt Against the Modern World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolt_Against_the_Modern_World), 1934 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1934)), the Atlanteans were Hyperboreans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperboreans) -- Nordic supermen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbermensch) who originated on the North pole (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_pole) (see Thule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thule)). Similarly, Alfred Rosenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Rosenberg) (The Myth of the Twentieth Century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_the_Twentieth_Century), 1930 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1930)) spoke of a "Nordic-Atlantean" or "Aryan-Nordic" master race (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_race).

[Mr Sparkle]

Nope. It'll be a justification for WW3.
The causes are way more complex and varied.

reptilians.

[DV8]

Good thing then that capitalism is the only system that promotes more effective use of resources and new technology, capitalism is the only system that creates long term investment (no maintenance without private property). Resources that are privately owned never run out.

you're just a stoopid n00b anyway . . . your smart talk don't matta to me until yous got mo' posts than I do. . . . :hyper:

[Kritish]

you're just a stoopid n00b anyway . . . your smart talk don't matta to me until yous got mo' posts than I do. . . . :hyper:

Perhaps if you want to sound smarter than everyone you should use correct grammer and cease your use of leet.

[DV8]

^c'mon Kritish . . . I was being sarcasmatic :o you disappoint me . . . :(

[Kritish]

^c'mon Kritish . . . I was being sarcasmatic :o you disappoint me . . . :(

I was just trying to be an arse, nothing personal. :yay:

[DV8]

^forgiven ;)

[Human Shield]

That's a complete lie. Economics and social issues are two differest areas for one thing, and hating gays and being racist and solving our differences with war is what weve been doing for way longer than 5000 years. Conservatives always want to do what they think has worked perfectly all these years. Liberals tend to want big change.

How are they different? Both work on the principle of noninterference.

So the cultures after the Greeks that hated gays were liberal because it was a change? Were the first people to go to Africa liberal to start fighting them instead of between their own countries because it was a change?

The terms are worthless. Keeping things the same and liberty aren't on the same axis, sometimes liberty is keeping things the same sometimes it is changing things, the American revolution kept English common law and parliament framework and took out the king and added constitution. The French Revolution wanted to change everything and had no place for natural rights, slaughtering tons of people. So are natural rights a conservative or liberal idea?

Economic controls have been used since the start of civilization and always lead to the fall of the classical civilizations. Hilary Clinton's health care plan uses the same mechanism as the Code of Hammurabi that failed in his time in Babylon.

[Superman Prime]

Most libertarians are cynical *******s. That is what the libertarian party is offspringed from:

Freakish cynicism.

Most democrat liberals have no religious morals. Therefore, they are not grounded in any specific culture... which, therefore, is the destruction of culture itself. That is unacceptable.


Strangely enough, I'm the only one that voted for Liberals being the ones who we someday retrospectively see as being the cause of WWIII.

[Mr Sparkle]

Most democrat liberals have no religious morals. Therefore, they are not grounded in any specific culture... which, therefore, is the destruction of culture itself. That is unacceptable.



WOW, what a dumb thing to say :confused:

[Spider-Bite]

LMAO
One of the most Wrong posts I've read this morning...:huh:
Are...:huh:...you aware that Al Qaeda, Iran and China hate the U.S. and major European powers because they are "Socially Liberal"? :huh:
LOL

Do you know why America is called "The Great Satan"?
It isn't solely because of our untamed imperialism and arrogant, violent expansionist bulls***.
It's also because we let women traipse around in man-pants, go to school, screw dudes they've just met, study, profess and preach about any religion that seems correct to them, allow cartoonists to draw whatever they want, let Atheists buy food, sell things for profit.....

I could go on all day. What are you Talking about? :huh:

Alquead and Iran are liberal? what planet have you been living on? They are conservative extremists. Somthing like 30% of Iran is liberal, and something like 60% is conservative. Alqueda? Dude they are ultra conservative. How on earth could you figure they are liberal?

The mian reason we are hated by the middle east is because we protect Israel.

[Corinthian™]

NEITHER

Our downfall will be cause by those ****ing Buddhist Pacifists:cmad:

[Spider-Bite]

Hippie Hunter Also your dream of world peace will never happen. The times will change. Idealologies will change. Demographics will change. But the nature of people will never change. People will always find a reason to hate one another, it's a basic human emotion like love, anger, joy, sadness, etc. People will hate other people on the basis of race, pride, fear, religion, history, territory, and any other reason they can find. War is a part of history and it will continue forever in the future. Thinking that world peace, no matter how desireable and beneficial it is, is a possibility is foolishness. World peace is an impossibility because there will always be a conflict somewhere in the world.

World peace is not impossible. yeah it's in our nature to go to war and hate each other, but a person is not ruled by his or her instincts, any more than my dog is obligated to piss on the carpet because he smells another dog who visited rescently. You can train a dog not to do things that are instinctual to him, and you can train a human even easier, becuase we have the ability to reason.

There was a time when the United States weren't so united. many probably thought we never would be. I'm sure blacks thought "anybody who thinks we wont always be slaves is naive and putting too much faith in whitey" I'm sure women thought that men would never ever let them live as equals. Many people thought we would never make it to the moon. Who'd have thought gays would actually be getting married in America? People probably even doubted color tvs.

We are the same species, and nobody can say that 300 years from now we wont be united as a one world government. Why are we any more likely to go to war with another country than Iowa is to go to war with Florida? Location? These petty oceans are nothing in the scheme of the universe. If we survive the next couple centuries we will discover means of interstellar travel, and what happens when we discover an alien culture? Will earthlings be seperated by borders, ancestry, oceans, or religion here on earth? That's like saying me and my next door neighboors can't live in peace because we live in different households.

[Spider-Bite]

How are they different? Both work on the principle of noninterference.


how is a constitutional ammendmant to ban gay marriage noninterferrence? How is oppression noninterferrence? How is bringing a kid to church noninterferrence with that kid's future religous belief or lack thereof? How is Osama Bin laden killing women for reading noninterferrence?




So the cultures after the Greeks that hated gays were liberal because it was a change? Were the first people to go to Africa liberal to start fighting them instead of between their own countries because it was a change?


The terms are worthless. Keeping things the same and liberty aren't on the same axis, sometimes liberty is keeping things the same sometimes it is changing things, the American revolution kept English common law and parliament framework and took out the king and added constitution. The French Revolution wanted to change everything and had no place for natural rights, slaughtering tons of people. So are natural rights a conservative or liberal idea?


Not to be rude, but it sounds like in these paragraphs your intentionally pretending to be dumb. You and I both know the whole world does not progress at an equal pace. It's like the stock market. Ups and downs.


Economic controls have been used since the start of civilization and always lead to the fall of the classical civilizations. Hilary Clinton's health care plan uses the same mechanism as the Code of Hammurabi that failed in his time in Babylon.

this is 2006 you know.

[Spider-Bite]

Most libertarians are cynical *******s. That is what the libertarian party is offspringed from:

Freakish cynicism.

Most democrat liberals have no religious morals. Therefore, they are not grounded in any specific culture... which, therefore, is the destruction of culture itself. That is unacceptable.


Strangely enough, I'm the only one that voted for Liberals being the ones who we someday retrospectively see as being the cause of WWIII.

Religion is one of the most dangerous things ever invented by mankind. It's nothing but another division with ideals that people blindly follow and causes them not to use reasoning.

[The Overlord]

You need to get this idea that oppresion is a tool of right-winged poltics. Oppression is a tool of both extremes of the political spectrum. China is a communist state. That means that it is a leftist state.

China is CINO (Communist in name only). Marx's writing state that is against the rules that he sets out forbidding sweat shops, child labour and private enterprise in the dictatorship of the proles. Say what you will about Communism, but it does have an ethos (an economic one) and if you don't follow it, you aren't really a communist. Its like saying your Christian, but not believing in the divinity of Christ, if you don't follow the ethos of Christainity, you are not a Christian.

[The Man Of 16]

Why does WWIII have to be the end?:huh:

Because this is what our generation consists of.
http://www.etniesmotox.com/site-images/news/article/emo-hairfull.jpghttp://img214.imageshack.us/img214/6883/emo26bd.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v253/urbansuicidejunkie/me/2006/01-03-06_newcam.jpg

Emo kids... I can't imagine these losers winning a war.

...Also, because things usually end in trilogies. Example: The Matrix, The good Rocky movies, the good Saw movies, and lets not forget SPIDERMAN.

[Human Shield]

how is a constitutional ammendmant to ban gay marriage noninterferrence? How is oppression noninterferrence? How is bringing a kid to church noninterferrence with that kid's future religous belief or lack thereof? How is Osama Bin laden killing women for reading noninterferrence?

Exactly, a lack on noninterference. Economic freedom works the same.

A kid is treated like a kid until they are 18.

Economic controls have been used since the start of civilization and always lead to the fall of the classical civilizations. Hilary Clinton's health care plan uses the same mechanism as the Code of Hammurabi that failed in his time in Babylon.

this is 2006 you know.

Hasn't stopped politicians from still using price controls (a large part of the people fed to lions by the Romans and beheaded during the French revolution).

[Spider-Bite]

If the government doesn't interfere economically the rich will use their power to walk all over people. The market wont be free or fair for the little man. Of course this aspect of politics has nothing to do with foriegn policy. A person can side with the left on the economy and still side with the right on foreign policy, and contribute to the end of our species.

[ShadowBoxing]

No one ideology will be the downfall of humanity. If anything our inability to conserve resources will be our downfall, not who we elect or who takes offices.

[Dan33977]

Socially liberal would not put you in the category as contribute to world war 3 or the end of the world.

*sighs*

Yes, I understand this, but you keep saying that conservatives are evil, conservatives do this, conservatives hate everyone, etc. so despite everything I (and others who've also replied to your thread) have been trying to get through your thick skull, you still fail to realize the fact that someone can be both liberal and conservative (like myself); you use these two terms too much and too loosely, and they aren't as black and white as you make them out to be.

Agreed. Exactly what I said in my previous reply to this thread. It's like a typical angst-ridden teenager's naive view of liberals and conservatives.

Why must somebody be a teenager in order to be liberal? you do know that 2 out of 3 college professors are liberal right?

Wow!

Are you mentally retarded?

No, I'm not joking. Are you? If not, then you seriously need to go back and reread what I said: you views on what the terms liberalism and conservatism mean are like those of a typical, naïve angst-ridden teenager, not your actual political standing.

This is the 3rd time now...

[hippie_hunter]

Alquead and Iran are liberal? what planet have you been living on? They are conservative extremists. Somthing like 30% of Iran is liberal, and something like 60% is conservative. Alqueda? Dude they are ultra conservative. How on earth could you figure they are liberal?

The mian reason we are hated by the middle east is because we protect Israel.

What part of what I said about Iran and al-Qaeda being so extremely to the right that they are not conservatives do you not get!

Right Winged Politics
Conservative (jonty, the United States, Mexico, etc.) ---> fascist (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Nationalist Spain, Imperial Japan) ---> reactionary (Taliban Afghanistan, al-Qaeda, Iran)

[hippie_hunter]

China is CINO (Communist in name only). Marx's writing state that is against the rules that he sets out forbidding sweat shops, child labour and private enterprise in the dictatorship of the proles. Say what you will about Communism, but it does have an ethos (an economic one) and if you don't follow it, you aren't really a communist. Its like saying your Christian, but not believing in the divinity of Christ, if you don't follow the ethos of Christainity, you are not a Christian.

Marx developed communism as an economic system, not a political system. He envisioned that government would eventually dissipate as it would be no longer needed in a utopia where everyone works together peacefully and everything such as land, the means of production, etc. is owned by the people.

Good on paper, bad in practice because of what happened, it developed into a political system.

Communism as a political system was developed by Lenin and Stalin and basically cemented what communism became.

Also, China is technically a socialist state economically. Socialism allows some forms of private ownership but the government has tight power over it. The reason why there are sweat shops and child labor and other poor labor conditions in China is because China allows it to happen and isn't doing anything about it. China tells you if you can or cannot do business in their country. And they tell you what you can and cannot do with your business.

Politically however, China is still communist. The Communist Party is still in power. It is the only power allowed and politically acts communist.

[Corinthian™]

What part of what I said about Iran and al-Qaeda being so extremely to the right that they are not conservatives do you not get!

Right Winged Politics
Conservative (jonty, the United States, Mexico, etc.) ---> fascist (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Nationalist Spain, Imperial Japan) ---> reactionary (Taliban Afghanistan, al-Qaeda, Iran)
LOL Mexico is so not Conservative... right now we live in a Central Leftist era

[hippie_hunter]

LOL Mexico is so not Conservative... right now we live in a Central Leftist era

Hmm...I never really saw Mexico as a leftist nation. Wasn't the guy who recently won the Presidential election a member of a right-winged party or something :huh:

[The Riddler]

this thread needs a different question: which religious idealogy will contribute to a world wide conflict?

[Corinthian™]

Hmm...I never really saw Mexico as a leftist nation. Wasn't the guy who recently won the Presidential election a member of a right-winged party or something :huh:
but consider Mexican's right wing party as moderate Democrat/Republican..

and a lot of the things he's doing are really leftist and populists to some extent.. last election really divided Mexico so he's doing a good job so far into uniting him by proposing leftist ideas around

[Spider-Bite]

For those who felt furious I want to say this. This thread is meant to deal with foreign policy attitudes. I belive the end is near, and I believe that conservative foreign policy is extremely dangerous, and will be the cause of it.

[Mr Sparkle]

man, I was going to say "JEWS :cmad: " but someone beat me to it.
I guess Mel Gibson posts here. :confused:

[Wilhelm-Scream]

man, I was going to say "JEWS :cmad: " but someone beat me to it.
I guess Mel Gibson posts here. :confused:

Jews!
I can almost remember their funny faces
That time you told me that
You were going to be marrying soon.
And Jew, i thought the only
Lonely place was on the moon.
Jew!


Ah, matter, want Jews to always love me?
Ah, matter, want Jews to always love me?
Ah, matter, much later.

Jew!
with the wind in your hair of a thousand laces.
Climb on the back and we'll
Go for a ride in the sky.
And Jew, i thought the major
Was a lady suffragette.
Jew! *ew-ew-ew-EW-ooh ooh EW- ooh ooh
JEW!

:csad:







muuUUUuch lay-tuh.

[Mee]

I thought the major was an old lady?