Liberal Tolerance is a Total Fallacy

[dank69]

I can call myself Emperor of the United States, it doesnt make it true.

I clearly meant and be taken seriously about being tolerant.

The liberal definition is only tolerant of liberal positions.

I clearly meant that they would also be taken seriously.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Precisely.

I guess some people are able to read simple English, and others are not.

Reading may be fundamental,


but comprehension is key.

 

[nehalem256]

What do you mean by that? Please be specific.

What does it mean to be "only tolerant of liberal positions"?

Specific.

See liberal views on gay marriage. If you are opposed to it you are a homophobe and a bigot.

Saying that everyone who disagrees with you is a homophobe and a bigot doesnt sound very tolerant to me.

 

[jackstar7]

Specific.

See liberal views on gay marriage. If you are opposed to it you are a homophobe and a bigot.

Saying that everyone who disagrees with you is a homophobe and a bigot doesnt sound very tolerant to me.

Straw man carefully set up and BOOM! KNOCKED DOWN!

 

[Ninjahedge]

Words coming to mind:

Recalcitrant
Obstinate
Inflammatory
Dissident

This whole argument is more about not admitting being wrong than about the actual OP....

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Saying that everyone who disagrees with you is a homophobe and a bigot doesnt sound very tolerant to me.

Well, this again boils down to the difference between tolerance of who people are, and tolerance of what they choose to believe or to express.

Believing in or opposing gay marriage are positions, beliefs. I agree that it is intolerant to say that someone who opposes gay marriage is automatically a homophobe or a bigot. (Most of them are, but not all.)

But if someone has shown that they are a homophobe or a bigot, there's nothing hypocritical about saying you don't want to associate with them. You can tolerate their right to have a dissenting viewpoint, but decide that you don't want to work or recreate with someone who holds that viewpoint.

 

[Howard]

again for good measure

 

[-Slacker-]

Thank you for helping educate an ignorant child

What? So this crappy thread was still alive 7 pages later. How fascinating.

Anyway, not to sound ungrateful for that generous handout of "education", but you and your pal do understand that the civil liberties act does not extend to the right to protest wherever the hell you like, do you? It is meant to protect people form discrimination "based on race, color, religion or national origin", not on personal belief.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#Title_I

 

[Incorruptible]

liberals are the most intolerant people around and dumb hypocrites

 

[jackstar7]

liberals are the most intolerant people around and dumb hypocrites

They are also funnier and better looking.

 

[Steeplerot]

Only 50 million more to go.

Historical statistics created for reinforcement of partisan political bias against those pesky economic boogeyman systems you hate is fun! Lets all do it kids!

Capitalism killed 1.6 billion


Second Boer War 75,000
Japanese Massacre of Singapore 100,000
Burma-Siam Railroad Construction 116,000
Japanese Germ Warfare in China 200,000
Rebelling Shia Killed by Saddam 300,000
US Bombing of Yugoslavia 300,000
US Bombing Iraq Water Supply '91 500,000
US Civil War 700,000
Iraq-Iran War 1,000,000
US sanctions on Iraq 1,000,000
US Backed Suharto 1,200,000
Irish Potato Famine 1,500,000
Japanese Democides 5,964,000
Famine of 1932-33 7,000,000
Bengal Famine of 1943 10,000,000
Famine in British India 30,000,000
US Intervention in the Congo 5,000,000
Indonesian Anti-Com. Purge 1,000,000
Stateless Capitalist Somalia 1,000,000
Industrial Revolution USA 100,000
1898 US War vs Philippine 3,000,000
Palestinians Killed by Israel 826,626
Guatemala 300,000
Nanking Massacre 300,000
Iraq (Selling Gas to Saddam) 400,000
Iraq (Desert Storm) 500,000
Invasion of the Philippines 650,000
Feudal Russia 1,066,000
Afghanistan 1,200,000
Iraq 1,300,000
South African Apartheid 3,500,000
US Aggression on Latin America 6,000,000
Japanese Imperialism 6,000,000
Vietnam War - including Cambodia & Laos 10,000,000
Korean War 10,000,000
British Occupation of India 20,000,000
Great Depression (America alone) 12,000,000
World War One 16,500,000
World War Two 60,000,000
Native American Genocide 95,000,000
Capitalist Policy in India 1947 - 1990 120,000,000
African Slave Trade 150,000,000
US Backed murder of Tamils 30,000
Spanish-American War 100,000
Spanish Civil War 400,000
Union Carbide Bophal Disaster 15,000
Massacre of Paris Commune 20,000
First Indochina 1946-1954 1,500,000
Belgian Congo Colonization 1,000,000
French Madagascar 80,000
Nigerian Civil War 1,000,000
Rwandan Genocide 1,000,000
US Made Famine Bangladesh 100,000
Children Died fr Hunger '09 5,256,000
Children Killed by Hunger Since 9/11 235,000,000
Children Killed by Hunger during the 1990s 100,000,000
Ciggarette Related Deaths Worldwide (1960 - 2010) 300,000,000

Total Killed by Capitalism: 1,559,657,267

 

[Ninjahedge]

The Irish Potato Famine?

Really?

If we are actually counting something like Cigarettes, you can also add obesity to the ticket as many more people are fat in the US not only from availability, but incredible (sad) marketing.

Who cares if it will kill them in 30 years if you can get them to eat 2X as much of it before then?

 

[Steeplerot]

The Irish Potato Famine?

Really?

One historian calculated that between 1801 and 1845, there had been 114 commissions and 61 special committees inquiring into the state of Ireland and that "without exception their findings prophesied disaster; Ireland was on the verge of starvation, her population rapidly increasing, three-quarters of her labourers unemployed, housing conditions appalling and the standard of living unbelievably low."

You could argue that other parts of europe were far more prepared.


Landlords and tenants
During the 18th century, a new system for managing the landlord's property was introduced in the form of the "middleman system". Rent collection was left in the hands of the landlords' agents, or middlemen. This assured the (usually Protestant) landlord of a regular income, and relieved them of any responsibility; the tenants however were then subject to exploitation through these middlemen.

According to Woodham-Smith, the ability of the middlemen was measured by the amount of money they could contrive to extract.[18] Described by the Commission as "the most oppressive species of tyrant that ever lent assistance to the destruction of a country," they were invariably described as "land sharks" and "bloodsuckers."[19]
The middlemen leased large tracts of land from the landlords on long leases with fixed rents, which they then sublet as they saw fit. They split the holding into smaller and smaller parcels to increase the amounts of rents they could then obtain, a system called conacre. Tenants could be evicted for reasons such as non-payment of rents (which were very high), or if the landlord decided to raise sheep instead of grain crops. The cottier paid his rent by working for the landlord.[20] Any improvements made on the holdings by the tenants became the property of the landlords when the lease expired or was terminated, which acted as a disincentive to improvements. The tenants had no security of tenure on the land; being tenants "at will" they could be turned out whenever the landlord chose. This class of tenant made up the majority of tenant farmers in Ireland, the exception being in Ulster where there existed a practice known as "tenant right", under which tenants were compensated for any improvements made to their holdings. The commission according to Woodham-Smith stated that "the superior prosperity and tranquility of Ulster, compared with the rest of Ireland, were due to tenant right."[19]
Landlords in Ireland used their powers without remorse, and the people lived in dread of them. In these circumstances, Woodham-Smith writes "industry and enterprise were extinguished and a peasantry created which was one of the most destitute in Europe."

A textbook case of Capitalist exploitation of workers leading to a total collapse of a society. Luckily for the capitalists they were safe and well fed in London or Dublin while the serfs emigrated (mostly illegally) for their lives to the USA -or starved.

 

[werepossum]

Historical statistics created for reinforcement of partisan political bias against those pesky economic boogeyman systems you hate is fun! Lets all do it kids!

Capitalism killed 1.6 billion


Second Boer War 75,000
Japanese Massacre of Singapore 100,000
Burma-Siam Railroad Construction 116,000
Japanese Germ Warfare in China 200,000
Rebelling Shia Killed by Saddam 300,000
US Bombing of Yugoslavia 300,000
US Bombing Iraq Water Supply '91 500,000
US Civil War 700,000
Iraq-Iran War 1,000,000
US sanctions on Iraq 1,000,000
US Backed Suharto 1,200,000
Irish Potato Famine 1,500,000
Japanese Democides 5,964,000
Famine of 1932-33 7,000,000
Bengal Famine of 1943 10,000,000
Famine in British India 30,000,000
US Intervention in the Congo 5,000,000
Indonesian Anti-Com. Purge 1,000,000
Stateless Capitalist Somalia 1,000,000
Industrial Revolution USA 100,000
1898 US War vs Philippine 3,000,000
Palestinians Killed by Israel 826,626
Guatemala 300,000
Nanking Massacre 300,000
Iraq (Selling Gas to Saddam) 400,000
Iraq (Desert Storm) 500,000
Invasion of the Philippines 650,000
Feudal Russia 1,066,000
Afghanistan 1,200,000
Iraq 1,300,000
South African Apartheid 3,500,000
US Aggression on Latin America 6,000,000
Japanese Imperialism 6,000,000
Vietnam War - including Cambodia & Laos 10,000,000
Korean War 10,000,000
British Occupation of India 20,000,000
Great Depression (America alone) 12,000,000
World War One 16,500,000
World War Two 60,000,000
Native American Genocide 95,000,000
Capitalist Policy in India 1947 - 1990 120,000,000
African Slave Trade 150,000,000
US Backed murder of Tamils 30,000
Spanish-American War 100,000
Spanish Civil War 400,000
Union Carbide Bophal Disaster 15,000
Massacre of Paris Commune 20,000
First Indochina 1946-1954 1,500,000
Belgian Congo Colonization 1,000,000
French Madagascar 80,000
Nigerian Civil War 1,000,000
Rwandan Genocide 1,000,000
US Made Famine Bangladesh 100,000
Children Died fr Hunger '09 5,256,000
Children Killed by Hunger Since 9/11 235,000,000
Children Killed by Hunger during the 1990s 100,000,000
Ciggarette Related Deaths Worldwide (1960 - 2010) 300,000,000

Total Killed by Capitalism: 1,559,657,267

Boy, somebody's not gonna risk losing the Stupidest All Time Internet Post award!

 

[werepossum]

The Irish Potato Famine?

Really?

If we are actually counting something like Cigarettes, you can also add obesity to the ticket as many more people are fat in the US not only from availability, but incredible (sad) marketing.

Who cares if it will kill them in 30 years if you can get them to eat 2X as much of it before then?

The Irish Potato Famine is practically the only thing on his list which makes sense, the other being the African slave trade. (Although seriously, 150 million?) It really was a massacre of capitalism, for capitalism - although it existed only because England military conquered Ireland and used it basically for slave labor. As for the rest - well, suffice it to say that he attributes 10,000,000 deaths to capitalism for the Vietnam war. Discounting for a moment that the Communist North Vietnam invaded the semi-capitalist South Vietnam, the combined population of both Vietnams, Cambodia, and Laos in 1960 was roughly 45,000,000 and any sane counting of total dead at perhaps 2 million - including hundreds of thousands directly massacred by the Communists.

 

[nehalem256]

Children Killed by Hunger Since 9/11 235,000,000
Children Killed by Hunger during the 1990s 100,000,000
Ciggarette Related Deaths Worldwide (1960 - 2010) 300,000,000

Total Killed by Capitalism: 1,559,657,267

Absolute bullshit.

People continue to begin smoking even today when its dangers are blindingly obvious.

Capitalism does not make children in 3rd world countries die of starvation.

 

[Steeplerot]

Capitalism does not make children in 3rd world countries die of starvation.

So why does anyone starve?

We are on a rich fertile planet that just in the USA throws out enough calories from restuaraunt trash in a weekend that can feed the world.


We have not evolved socially to adapt to our technology, we are still stuck in a exploitative system from the days of serfdom.

In a time when automation is so proliferat, why is the system stuck on exploiting labor?

Since the days the 1860s these power structures have had a name in the modern post-industrial era: Capitalism

The excuse for the profit motive is still based off of specious religious reasoning, just like the priests of egypt, nowadays the kinges/pharohs are those who have exploited the system for wealth accumulation instead of the old-school religious birthright of tyranny.

Capitalism has not changed much really, workers are still slaves in the choice field really, its not work or die its: "work for the elites or starve" the only real difference nowadays is that you can be powerful and wealthy without the backing of the church.

Good for the exploiters, same old same old for the bulk of humanity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

 

[Incorruptible]

They are also funnier and better looking.

liberals are usually uglier, have you seen Hillary Clinton, michelle obama?

 

[nehalem256]

So why does anyone starve?

We are on a rich fertile planet that just in the USA throws out enough calories from restuaraunt trash in a weekend that can feed the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

So in other words you think the US owes other countries food.

 

[Steeplerot]

So in other words you think the US owes other countries food.

Owe? You are a worker, you own nothing really since the capitalists lend you your existence for your lifetime of labor. Or you can starve.

You are so hung up on fighting over the scraps like a lowly manipulated animal you miss who is farming all of us.

This is how exploitation of the human race has worked since time immemorial.

 

[nehalem256]

Owe? You are a worker, you own nothing really since the capitalists lend you your existence for your lifetime of labor. Or you can starve.

You are so hung up on fighting over the scraps like a lowly manipulated animal you miss who is farming all of us.

This is how exploitation of the human race has worked since time immemorial.

Funny how I live better than 99% of Kings have ever lived. I am so exploited

 

[Steeplerot]

Funny how I live better than 99% of Kings have ever lived. I am so exploited

If you want to gauge quality of life as the triumphal final endgame of capitalism then the bourgeoisie Democratic Socialists of Europe are winning.

And they themselves are a total basket case.

Things are not looking so good for Capitalism here either, seems likely the situation here is that the USA is in full on "eat its own" mode of predatory capitalism, the government is bought out and on the way to fail.

We have no enemy to be the "shining beacon the hill" for. Thus the capitalist class will now consume this country South American style with no worry about the USSR or someone finding them and "redistributing the wealth" if they compromised our economy too much with rampant greed.

Who will win? Maybe China? I doubt it.

Capitalism/Neo-Liberalism rocks, the world still hangs on a razors edge while you got a cheap flashy toaster that will probably fall apart and possibly burn your house down. Good for you comrade.

 

[Ninjahedge]

My toaster is not shiny.....



REVOLT!

 

[werepossum]

So why does anyone starve?

We are on a rich fertile planet that just in the USA throws out enough calories from restuaraunt trash in a weekend that can feed the world.


We have not evolved socially to adapt to our technology, we are still stuck in a exploitative system from the days of serfdom.

In a time when automation is so proliferat, why is the system stuck on exploiting labor?

Since the days the 1860s these power structures have had a name in the modern post-industrial era: Capitalism

The excuse for the profit motive is still based off of specious religious reasoning, just like the priests of egypt, nowadays the kinges/pharohs are those who have exploited the system for wealth accumulation instead of the old-school religious birthright of tyranny.

Capitalism has not changed much really, workers are still slaves in the choice field really, its not work or die its: "work for the elites or starve" the only real difference nowadays is that you can be powerful and wealthy without the backing of the church.

Good for the exploiters, same old same old for the bulk of humanity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

People starve because capitalism, freedom and the benefits they bring are not evenly distributed. During European serfdom, the feudal lord controlled the land. You needed his permission to farm it, or to leave it. He decided which crops were to be grown, whether or not new land could be cleared and farmed, what implements were crafted or imported. He controlled the markets and set his share - which of course came off the top from buyer and seller alike - and left the peasants and serfs to survive as best they could on what he allowed them to retain. He controlled what COULD be sold. He claimed for himself monopolies - the dove cote, the apple press, the grist mill and the bake oven - which use he imposed on his subjects at prices he set. He claimed a portion of every person's labor, even free men and women, and since he came first, he took the prime time and might well choose for his benefit the only sunny days in a harvest season, leaving everyone else to try harvesting wet fields if not actually in the rain. When your child married he took a tax from you, when his child married he took a tax from you, when you died he took your best animal (or if you had none, your best tool or even your best suit of clothes), and then when your child inherited your land the lord took another tax to allow him to do so - even though your child was not allowed to choose to leave rather than farm. He selected the trade of every villager, or rather, he had veto power. And if labor ever increased to the point that farming was economically viable for HIM, he could and did evict his peasants and serfs with nothing and turn the land to herding pasturage.

And yet, as bad as those times were, a surprising number of people want to recreate them under the state, in the forlorn hope that the state will make them prosperous in spite of their own utter inability to do so.

Funny how I live better than 99% of Kings have ever lived. I am so exploited

Excellent point. Even where Marxists states are experiencing prosperity, they do so only by embracing capitalism.

My toaster is not shiny.....


REVOLT!

+1

 

[jackstar7]

liberals are usually uglier, have you seen Hillary Clinton, michelle obama?

Liberals have George Clooney. And thousands of beautiful girls he converts to the liberal way.

Conservatives have the weak Baldwin brother.