|
Arafat's dead (pg. 11)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Kytracid |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilDust
oh man, not another Ayn Rand follower. |
Howard Roarke and John Galt are my hero's. |
|
|
| tamk |
arafat was a thug and an embezzler, furthermore he sold out the palestinian cause by signing the oslo accord in return for american approval
the only thing is he was the symbol of the palestinian freedom struggle, that is why i guess his death is such a big deal |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
You are so wrong. A party in Sweden that is right, would be left in the US, even the liberals here in canada would be somewhat right in Sweden and the conservative here in canada would probably be considered liberal in the US. |
You're twisting words to make your argument seem valid. You use the word "is" in the objective sense but you are talking about a subjective definition. The correct version of what you are saying would be that a party that is considered right-wing in Sweden would be considered left-wing in the USA, and so on. Where that party ACTUALLY IS on the political is wholly independent of the opinions of the citizens of the party's country, and only depends on the party's platform with repect to the scale itself.
If you stick a sack of flour on a digital scale and it reads 1 kg - that's "a lot" to someone who never bakes, but it's very little to someone who makes pancakes every morning. Regardless of what either of them say, it's still 1 kg.
Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Half empty, half full. It doesn't matter which camp you're in, it doesn't matter what word you use to describe it, you're still talking about the same thing.
| quote: | | Besides, the left - righ scale is a bad one imo :thepirate |
Which is why they came up with the 4-point (economic/social) political scale - I happen to be dead center on both of the axes on that scale as well.
Perhaps what you really mean is that you dislike all political scales, which doesn't surprise me since you seem to have a fear of absolutes in general.
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilDust
oh man, not another Ayn Rand follower. |
Ayn Rand simply codified the philosophy driving almost 300 years of the most successful civilizations in Earth's history. Moral relativism is a dogma, not a philosophy - the differences between it and religion's old "love thy neighbour, even if he is an axe-wielding maniac who just hacked your children to bits" are purely superficial.
I don't "follow" Ayn Rand, I started thinking for myself long before I had even heard of Ayn Rand, but I do think that many Canadians would be wise to START "following" her. Hell, at the very least it should be taught in schools as an alternative to this multiculturalist/pluralist/relativist/feminist/3rd-worldist crappola. |
|
|
| TheDemon |
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
womp, womp, womp. |
look at you, your so stupid that you cant even type out full scentences. womp,womp,womp, thats how your mouth sounds when you're eating you pig. off. |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
You're twisting words to make your argument seem valid. You use the word "is" in the objective sense but you are talking about a subjective definition. The correct version of what you are saying would be that a party that is considered right-wing in Sweden would be considered left-wing in the USA, and so on. Where that party ACTUALLY IS on the political is wholly independent of the opinions of the citizens of the party's country, and only depends on the party's platform with repect to the scale itself. |
I might agree that the very right and the very left is easy to point out. But everything in there between is very relative. For example, a left party in Sweden is more for capitalism than for communism. So that would mean they are a right party then if you would strictly follow the right-left wing not-relative scale. But that doesnt make sense to call them right, because compared to most of the western world they are left.
| quote: | | If you stick a sack of flour on a digital scale and it reads 1 kg - that's "a lot" to someone who never bakes, but it's very little to someone who makes pancakes every morning. Regardless of what either of them say, it's still 1 kg. |
well, it would indeed still be 1kg, but would it be a lot or a litle?
| quote: | | Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Half empty, half full. It doesn't matter which camp you're in, it doesn't matter what word you use to describe it, you're still talking about the same thing. |
So you are not a centerist then? Or please define "the midle" for me =)
| quote: | | Which is why they came up with the 4-point (economic/social) political scale - I happen to be dead center on both of the axes on that scale as well. |
yes i like the 4 point scale much better. Makes much more sense.
| quote: | | Perhaps what you really mean is that you dislike all political scales, which doesn't surprise me since you seem to have a fear of absolutes in general. |
Everything is relative, didnt you learn anything in physics ;) |
|
|
| malek |
| quoting honestreporting is like quoting the israeli army...gimme a break:rolleyes: |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by drewfactor
Some food for thought:
Israel is the only country in the middle east (or the whole arab world if I'm not mistaken), in which the Arabs are allowed to vote. That's right, if you're a an Arab Israeli citizen, you're allowed to vote and even run for political office. If you're a Westerner in any other part of the region, your life is at risk simply for not being a muslim, or being a woman not accompanied by a man or covering your face.
|
you are a ing moron sir, I will take pictures in the streets of Syria and Lebanon and show you how the girls wear mini skirts.
I will bring back this thread and post those pics so idiots like you can shut the up!
and westerners being threatned... too much tv idiot, bull is happening in Iraq because of the occupation, you know that.
Are the westerners harrassed when they go work in the ARABIC gulf states and make fortunes?? I don't think so... :rolleyes: |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by tatgirl
that comment is unfounded. get your facts straight. When has the US invaded Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan etc...?
A nice reminder as to who this man was-
Arafat's legacy:
http://www.honestreporting.com/arafat |
ha!
the US deployed 1200 troops in Lebanon, only to get the kicked out of them by one attack, killing 241!
1983: To venge that, the US sent fighter jets to bombard Syria, two jets were shot down and a pilot captured.
1985: Pres. Reagan ordered the CIA to launch a strick against the hizbolla sheikh Fadlallah in Lebanon. A car bomb planted by Lebanese trained and supported by the CIA, exploded close to a mosque during friday night prayers in a densly populated shia muslim suburb. It flattened two seven-storey blocks of flats, a mosque, a cinema, killing 80 people, most of them passers-by. The Sheikh survived!. President Reagan cancelled the CIA's "license to assassinate" after this bloody failure!
1988: USS Vincennes invaded iranian territorial water and shot down Iran Air flight number 655 to Dubai over the straits of Hormuz, killing 290 civilians and crew. It was a mistake:rolleyes:
etc. |
|
|
| psychosomatica |
| This thread is at 127 posts. I have not read a single post yet.. and I'm telling you that there are at least 3 people engaged in an argument over middle east issues. |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by psychosomatica
This thread is at 127 posts. I have not read a single post yet.. and I'm telling you that there are at least 3 people engaged in an argument over middle east issues. |
no !
what's supposed to be then, Australian politics?!?!:rolleyes: |
|
|
| psychosomatica |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
no !
what's supposed to be then, Australian politics?!?!:rolleyes: |
Nah.. making fun of french canadians. |
|
|
| Superstar |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
LOL, that's exactly the point! Relative to Canadians! Doesn't the fact that this country votes Liberal almost every election show that it is a Liberal country? Doesn't the fact that some 80-90% of Canadians polling to vote for Kerry and only 40% of Americans voting for him show you in a heartbeat that Canada is a Leftist country? |
First of all, you really shouldn't equate being liberal with being a leftist, they are not the same thing. Check it out:
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/a...cal_spectru.htm
Now, by using your absolute scale, Canadians supporting Kerry would mean they are not leftists. Since Kerry and the Democratic party aren't leftists on the absolute scale (someone like Nader is), they are only leftists relative to Republicans. Didn't you just support my point?
| quote: | | Are you actually trying to say that Canadians do not lean left simply because there are other countries that are FARTHER left? |
Not exactly. My argument was based on the political scale being relative, so if you don't consider that valid you really shouldn't make assumptions beyond that.
| quote: | | The political scale IS NOT relative, for the simple reason that we can identify an absolute left (Communism) and an absolute right (anarchy). |
That reason is not a very good one. Consider the measurement of speed on a scale. There is an absolute minimum (0) and an absolute maximum (c), but speed is still relative. Let's say you are travelling at 10 000 km/h, is that fast or slow? It's on a scale that has an absolute minimum and an absolute maximum, so based on your reasoning it is a slow speed, since it is closer to the absolute minimum. To most people in everyday life however, speeds that approach c are not meaningful, and so 10 000 km/h is considered very fast.
| quote: | | Averaging out world opinion means nothing as the political scale itself isn't determined by a democracy - that would be like saying, if half the world thinks the sun is yellow, and half the world thinks the sun is blue, then the sun must obviously be green! |
That's a bad analogy. Relating something subjective like political standings to something quantifiable (measuring wavelengths) like colours doesn't make sense. A better analogy would be if you were writing a test and got a mark of 50% on it, on an absolute scale it is a very bad mark. But if it happens to be the highest mark in the class, and most people got 25% then you should be happy, and releatively speaking you got a great mark. Unless it was a province-wide or nation-wide test, you will only be graded against your classmates. The absolute scale means nothing and you will end up performing well.
| quote: | | No, the political scale IS an absolute scale. Affirmative Action, welfare, "universal" health care, state-sponsored abortions, gay marriages, anti-trust suits, junk food bans and petroleum taxes ARE left wing. Income tax cuts, foreign isolationism, military spending cuts, abolishment of the Constitution and law enforcement, bible thumping and cultural assimilation ARE right wing. I'm not an anarchist. Take a look at Jayx1 - my political standpoint is quite a bit to the left of his. Simply because I am further to the right than someone else, even 80% of Canadians, does not make me "right wing" by an objective standard. |
I hope you mean military spending is right wing, and not military cuts. But anyway, the problem is that no country does ALL of those things, otherwise it would be really easy to label a country as either left wing or right wing. As soon as they start to adopt a few policies from each end it's not so easy to tell where they sit on an 'absolute' scale.
| quote: | | I do not believe in "relativism", I believe in this thing called "objectivism", look it up sometime. |
Relativism and objectivism aren't mutually exclusive, you can objectively look at something that is in a relative frame of reference. Either that or time dilation, length contraction, and simultaneity don't exist and Einstein was wrong. |
|
|
|
|
