The Greatest American

[Vic]

Originally posted by: conjur
That explains a lot about your "logic".

Hey, you're free to refute my logic anytime you should choose to come up with some actual logic of your own. I'll be waiting.

 

[DealMonkey]

I was gonna say, "WHAT?!? No Keith Richards? Come on..." but then I realized he may not be an American citizen. Hmmmm...

 

[filterxg]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
I nominate Che Guevera for the greatest 'American' ever.


"Whenever death may surprise us, let it be welcome if our battle cry has reached even one receptive ear and another hand reaches out to take up our arms."

"dying words:
"I don't care if i fall as long as someone else picks up my gun and keeps on shooting."

"In fact, if Christ himself stood in my way, I, like Nietzsche, would not hesitate to squish him like a worm"



- Ernesto 'Che' Guevara

I've read his book, the man was brilliant. But he did not do good with it, he became a murderer. In the end he cared more about his revolution than the principles he belived in.

To say the poor in South America is a mischaraterization. They recognize him as a criminal and murderer. But they have a certain romanitzation about him, because he offered another option, even if it wasn't real. The way the west is preaching to get out of poverty is slow, it takes generations for a country to get there. Thats not much hope.

Oh and my family is Cuban, my Finance is Argentinean. So I may have a bias, but I am informed.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur
That explains a lot about your "logic".

Hey, you're free to refute my logic anytime you should choose to come up with some actual logic of your own. I'll be waiting.

Guess you'd better start re-reading my posts, then.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Being an Ayn Rand fan I know you harbor a certain degree of hatred for mankind. But please read the quotes relating to Che. Some of the brightest and bravest minds of the 20th century see him as greater than them.

Once again, you must be joking. To appreciate Rand's philosophy is to have the deepest love for humankind, as it requires the acknowledgment that humankind is comprised of intelligent, creative, feeling individuals, and not just a mindless blob. I would not harm nor forcibly take from another person even if my own life depended on it. My respect for the freedom and the dignity of the individual is far too great, as is my own self-respect and moral integrity. Compare that to Che, who would swim in a pool of human blood of his own making if he thought it served his own personal cause (conveniently and arbitrarily labeled as the "common good"). How confused must you be if you see freedom and respect as hatred and violence and thievery as love?

Yea... he would swim in the blood of the oppressors to free the hearts and minds of the oppressed. He gave people hope, he hugged lepers, he actively tried to bridge the gap between those with no hope and those with only selfishness in their hearts. Like I said, watch the Motorcycle Diaries. If nothing else it is a fantastic movie.

"The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall. "

Admit it on a certain level you're a shell man. That picture of the Chiapas miner being abused or the Vietnamese monk immolating himself means nothing to you. You would just find some cold Randian logic to explain the horror and absurdity you view. Ayn Rand preaches such a barren world. All disconnected individuals by themselves. Some of her stuff seems really libertari... I mean anarchistic. I think thats the most absurd philosophy ever. Everyone being moral, everyone doing their own thing on their little island. The problem with that, is like it has been said before, no man is an island.

 

[Infohawk]

Ayn Rand is interesting if you are a freshman in college (if even then).

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Yea... he would swim in the blood of the oppressors to free the hearts and minds of the oppressed. He gave people hope, he hugged lepers, he actively tried to bridge the gap between those with no hope and those with only selfishness in their hearts. Like I said, watch the Motorcycle Diaries. If nothing else it is a fantastic movie.

"The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall. "

Admit it on a certain level you're a shell man. That picture of the Chiapas miner being abused or the Vietnamese monk immolating himself means nothing to you. You would just find some cold Randian logic to explain the horror and absurdity you view. Ayn Rand preaches such a barren world. All disconnected individuals by themselves. Some of her stuff seems really libertari... I mean anarchistic. I think thats the most absurd philosophy ever. Everyone being moral, everyone doing their own thing on their little island. The problem with that, is like it has been said before, no man is an island.

So it is moral and right to love some while you kill others? One can be honest AND steal? Hardly. Che spoke words that his actions proved he did not believe in. Simple as that.

As for Rand, it seems you completely misunderstood. If a man is an island (to use your analogy), then humanity is an archipelago. If there is shell man, then it must be you, selling hatred, murder, and the oppression of the individual disguised as love. The world can be an ugly place, filled with ugly people, but I hardly see that as any reason to foolishly fall for the communism con. As for your examples meaning nothing to me, WTF do you even know about me? If people are abused, then the abuser should be brought to fair justice. If a person wishes to end their own life, by what right would I use force to stop them? The communist revolutionary justification goes something along the lines of how you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette. To which I say: human lives are not chicken eggs. You oughta ask yourself, just how much do you hate and distrust your fellow humans that you feel it necessary to put a gun to their head to get what you want?

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: filterxg

Originally posted by: Proletariat
I nominate Che Guevera for the greatest 'American' ever.


"Whenever death may surprise us, let it be welcome if our battle cry has reached even one receptive ear and another hand reaches out to take up our arms."

"dying words:
"I don't care if i fall as long as someone else picks up my gun and keeps on shooting."

"In fact, if Christ himself stood in my way, I, like Nietzsche, would not hesitate to squish him like a worm"



- Ernesto 'Che' Guevara

I've read his book, the man was brilliant. But he did not do good with it, he became a murderer. In the end he cared more about his revolution than the principles he belived in.

To say the poor in South America is a mischaraterization. They recognize him as a criminal and murderer. But they have a certain romanitzation about him, because he offered another option, even if it wasn't real. The way the west is preaching to get out of poverty is slow, it takes generations for a country to get there. Thats not much hope.

Oh and my family is Cuban, my Finance is Argentinean. So I may have a bias, but I am informed.

What is criminal; killing spies and informants? Killing enemy soldiers? I think not. Do you realize what he was up against? The American empire. A vast array of technology, satellietes, planted saboteurs, puppet leaders, ingenious propaganda and legions of almost robotic soldiers commanding the most fierce and horrific machinery this planet has ever seen.

There are many sides to Che, there is the doctor, the humanist who gave up a comfortable life to fight wars against oppressors in far-away lands, there was also the compassionate Che who tended to wounded enemy soldiers even though they were the root of the problem, fighting for foreign interests against the people of their homeland. Towards the end, yes he did get more brutal, but as did the enemy. It seems to become more apparent to me with each passing day that cruelty must be fought with cruelty; just like fire must be fought with fire. When you are dealing with an enemy who puts sanctions on a country and starves millions of children, all because of the actions of errant but contained dictator who was once fueling his cruel regime from the food out of said enemies pocket sometimes you must be brutal.

And really who is to know if his solution wasn't real? No one gave it a chance except himself. The American sanctions on Cuba after the rebellion against the dictator, and threats against other countries who would trade with Cuba, pretty much doomed the Cuban economy from the start. To this day we have sanctions. over 30 years after Che's death.

Che, to me, is a real-life Luke Skywalker. A warrior almost from another galaxy. To give up everything and just live for rebellion and the battle against worldwide Imperialism is amazing.

Shoot coward, you are only killing a man

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Ayn Rand is interesting if you are a freshman in college (if even then).

Usually because after then people sell out to one gang or another.

Regardless, I just put a quote of hers in my sig and commie boy can't stand it. Whatever. I personally am not too fond of her fiction novels but find her non-fiction interesting. Truth is often hated I suppose. Greenspan knocking the Fed is very amusing. Anyway, can he refute that quote from my sig? Can you? Of course not. It's true regardless of who said it. I only note that Rand said it because I would never not cite my sources.
Whatever... go love a murderer.

 

[Moonbeam]

I. P. Freely

 

[Moonbeam]

Pickup Andropov was our greatest Russian chauffeur.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Pickup Andropov was our greatest Russian chauffeur.

Didn't he work for Click-n-Clack?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Pickup Andropov was our greatest Russian chauffeur.

Didn't he work for Click-n-Clack?

Yes, for the law firm, I think. What was their name? Definitely America's greatest law team.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Yea... he would swim in the blood of the oppressors to free the hearts and minds of the oppressed. He gave people hope, he hugged lepers, he actively tried to bridge the gap between those with no hope and those with only selfishness in their hearts. Like I said, watch the Motorcycle Diaries. If nothing else it is a fantastic movie.

"The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall. "

Admit it on a certain level you're a shell man. That picture of the Chiapas miner being abused or the Vietnamese monk immolating himself means nothing to you. You would just find some cold Randian logic to explain the horror and absurdity you view. Ayn Rand preaches such a barren world. All disconnected individuals by themselves. Some of her stuff seems really libertari... I mean anarchistic. I think thats the most absurd philosophy ever. Everyone being moral, everyone doing their own thing on their little island. The problem with that, is like it has been said before, no man is an island.

So it is moral and right to love some while you kill others? One can be honest AND steal? Hardly. Che spoke words that his actions proved he did not believe in. Simple as that.

As for Rand, it seems you completely misunderstood. If a man is an island (to use your analogy), then humanity is an archipelago. If there is shell man, then it must be you, selling hatred, murder, and the oppression of the individual disguised as love. The world can be an ugly place, filled with ugly people, but I hardly see that as any reason to foolishly fall for the communism con. As for your examples meaning nothing to me, WTF do you even know about me? If people are abused, then the abuser should be brought to fair justice. If a person wishes to end their own life, by what right would I use force to stop them? The communist revolutionary justification goes something along the lines of how you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette. To which I say: human lives are not chicken eggs. You oughta ask yourself, just how much do you hate and distrust your fellow humans that you feel it necessary to put a gun to their head to get what you want?

Obviously you haven't read ANYTHING about Che. I've read quite a bit about Ayn Rand and I don't like her take whatever you want just because you can philosophy, which deals with the fact that you are screwing over people with the absurd logic that if you aren't actively thinking about screwing over people, you aren't doing it. Remember, to her:

"Objectivism rejects any form of altruism"

I'd also like to talk about this archipelago theory, but first a quick question: are you high? That still means everyone is an island. An archipelago is a chain of islands. It is still a bunch of different entities; there may be less space in between them but there is still water and if you follow her philosophy you will never have enough to actually make that boat and go out and connect with another island.

If people are abused, then the abuser should be brought to fair justice.

Ok we all agree about this... and? When in the history of Western civilization has the imperialist stood on trial for his crimes except in Cuba. Che did it. He put the vile men who would rob an entire people of a life on trial. People who would sell out to a foreign power for some money and leave their own poor and diseased to rot. Unfortunately, to him, the only proper punishment at this trial was death.

As for my love of humanity, it is my love for humanity that does not allow me to let me succumb to Gandhian ideals of self-mutiliation. Ideals which insured the almost perpetual proxy and sometimes live war in the Subcontinent and the perpetual gain for richer countries who can sell arms to both sides. It is my love for humanity that does not allow me to succumb to the searing negativity and soul-less vitriol of the South-Park/Simpsons generation.

Che was also never a true communist. Che was Che. He realized that Communistic ideals were much more humanistic, so like you said earlier he stuck with the the lesser of two evils. Sadly he was impatient, he had a fire burning in his heart. He spread himself too thin, too fast.

 

[Vic]

Some of her stuff seems really libertari... I mean anarchistic.

Libertarianism is not anarchy, btw. That is a common misconception, but extremely inaccurate. In a way, Libertarianism is a type of authoritarianism unto itself. The authoritarianism of the individual. Balanced by justice and equality. No other political system can say that. It is also the system that the United States was founded on, and the system that made it successful, where even the poor live better than the rich in many countries. Think on that.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: Vic

Some of her stuff seems really libertari... I mean anarchistic.

Libertarianism is not anarchy, btw. That is a common misconception, but extremely inaccurate. In a way, Libertarianism is a type of authoritarianism unto itself. The authoritarianism of the individual. Balanced by justice and equality. No other political system can say that. It is also the system that the United States was founded on, and the system that made it successful, where even the poor live better than the rich in many countries. Think on that.

The term libertarian originally meant anarchist. This use is still common in Europe. I'm not going to think on anything until you get the facts straight man.

Many European countries have actually banned Anarchism.

Click Vic

Don't let the Dark Side consume you

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Click Vic

Hitler was teh shite, btw.

Click Proletariat

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Obviously you haven't read ANYTHING about Che. I've read quite a bit about Ayn Rand and I don't like her take whatever you want just because you can philosophy, which deals with the fact that you are screwing over people with the absurd logic that if you aren't actively thinking about screwing over people, you aren't doing it. Remember, to her:

"Objectivism rejects any form of altruism"

I'd also like to talk about this archipelago theory, but first a quick question: are you high? That still means everyone is an island. An archipelago is a chain of islands. It is still a bunch of different entities; there may be less space in between them but there is still water and if you follow her philosophy you will never have enough to actually make that boat and go out and connect with another island.

If people are abused, then the abuser should be brought to fair justice.

Ok we all agree about this... and? When in the history of Western civilization has the imperialist stood on trial for his crimes except in Cuba. Che did it. He put the vile men who would rob an entire people of a life on trial. People who would sell out to a foreign power for some money and leave their own poor and diseased to rot. Unfortunately, to him, the only proper punishment at this trial was death.

As for my love of humanity, it is my love for humanity that does not allow me to let me succumb to Gandhian ideals of self-mutiliation. Ideals which insured the almost perpetual proxy and sometimes live war in the Subcontinent and the perpetual gain for richer countries who can sell arms to both sides. It is my love for humanity that does not allow me to succumb to the searing negativity and soul-less vitriol of the South-Park/Simpsons generation.

Che was also never a true communist. Che was Che. He realized that Communistic ideals were much more humanistic, so like you said earlier he stuck with the the lesser of two evils. Sadly he was impatient, he had a fire burning in his heart. He spread himself too thin, too fast.

I have read Che, but disagree strongly.
Am I high? No. Perhaps I should clarify myself better. You cannot regard a whole without addressing its parts. That is what communism tries to do. Perhaps a better analogy would be that communism would cut off its right arm in order to play the piano better. You would not increase an archipelago by destroying some of its islands, would you?

Altruism is inherently dishonest, that is why it is to be rejected. No one operates in a state of true disinterest, or possibly could. Even Mother Teresa did what she did because she wanted to. Even Christ was motivated by self-interest, that being his own moral absolutism. The ideal system is one where everyone voluntarily operates to their own individual self interests, and those self interests add up to the betterment of society of the whole. In this fashion, society improves, not by force, but by choice. Oddly enough, that's exactly how evolution works as well, and are not the existence of humans proof of its success? Hence, reality.

Imperialism != capitalism. That is yet another political misconception you've brought up. Imperialism is a type of fascism (or more rightly, fascism is a type of imperialism).

The system you love loves that negativity and apathy. Rights cannot be stolen from the vigilant, only from the apathetic.

Still a murderer. Ends do not justify means, means are ends unto themselves.

Edit: as for your Gandhi example, all I can say is that most people talk the talk, and while a few actually walk the walk. Gandhi definitely walked the walk.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Click Vic

Hitler was teh shite, btw.

Click Proletariat

Why...? I've read that. Are you comparing me with Hitler or something? If so thats pretty offensive and I would so knock you out if this was RL dude.

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Click Vic

Hitler was teh shite, btw.

Click Proletariat

Why...? I've read that. Are you comparing me with Hitler or something? If so thats pretty offensive and I would so knock you out if this was RL dude.

Wow, funny logic trail you followed there. I liked the Motorcycle Diaries. I also know that it is an effective fictional portrayal of him, based around a loose cobbling of facts. I wouldn't trust a movie like that which is obviously heavily biased towards Che if I wanted to form an opinion about the man. Just like I wouldn't use Mein Kampf in order to form an opinion about Hitler.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
The term libertarian originally meant anarchist. This use is still common in Europe. I'm not going to think on anything until you get the facts straight man.

Many European countries have actually banned Anarchism.

Click Vic

Don't let the Dark Side consume you

American Libertarianism should not be confused in any way or fashion with European Social Anarchism (aka Libertarian Socialism). The 2 political ideologies are about as opposite as any 2 can be. Text Text Get your own facts straight.

Banning a political philosophy, regardless of how idiotic, would be a suppression of free speech, would it not?

You are the Dark Side.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Click Vic

Hitler was teh shite, btw.

Click Proletariat

Why...? I've read that. Are you comparing me with Hitler or something? If so thats pretty offensive and I would so knock you out if this was RL dude.

Wow, funny logic trail you followed there. I liked the Motorcycle Diaries. I also know that it is an effective fictional portrayal of him, based around a loose cobbling of facts. I wouldn't trust a movie like that which is obviously heavily biased towards Che if I wanted to form an opinion about the man. Just like I wouldn't use Mein Kampf in order to form an opinion about Hitler.

Wow you people are so negative dude.

Its not fictional, his friend, the people he met on his journey, the doctors, his parents, the god damn newspaper articles all corroborate his story. The only thing that makes it fictional is the amazing music. You can feel him change when he sees the Communist family who was kicked of their land because they were communist. You can feel him change with every meeting along the way.

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Click Vic

Hitler was teh shite, btw.

Click Proletariat

Why...? I've read that. Are you comparing me with Hitler or something? If so thats pretty offensive and I would so knock you out if this was RL dude.

Wow, funny logic trail you followed there. I liked the Motorcycle Diaries. I also know that it is an effective fictional portrayal of him, based around a loose cobbling of facts. I wouldn't trust a movie like that which is obviously heavily biased towards Che if I wanted to form an opinion about the man. Just like I wouldn't use Mein Kampf in order to form an opinion about Hitler.

Wow you people are so negative dude.

Its not fictional, his friend, the people he met on his journey, the doctors, his parents, the god damn newspaper articles all corroborate his story. The only thing that makes it fictional is the amazing music. You can feel him change when he sees the Communist family who was kicked of their land because they were communist. You can feel him change with every meeting along the way.

The movie is a theatrical production. A dramatization. Anything like that, when coupled with producers with a heavy bias towards Che, will put him in an overbearingly positive light. His journey, his politics, his catharsis. Using that movie to demonstrate what a great man Che (ostensibly) was is a very bad idea.

Edit: By the way, what do you mean by "you people"? Are you somehow lumping me in with Vic? I haven't even said whether or not I think Che is a great man. For all you know, I do. I don't, but that's besides the point.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Proletariat
The term libertarian originally meant anarchist. This use is still common in Europe. I'm not going to think on anything until you get the facts straight man.

Many European countries have actually banned Anarchism.

Click Vic

Don't let the Dark Side consume you

American Libertarianism should not be confused in any way or fashion with European Social Anarchism (aka Libertarian Socialism). The 2 political ideologies are about as opposite as any 2 can be. Text Text Get your own facts straight.

Banning a political philosophy, regardless of how idiotic, would be a suppression of free speech, would it not?

You are the Dark Side.

That was a bad link to put up. The criticism part is very large for Wikipedia and it completely destroys the philosophy especially in the Americas, which is what we are talking about currently.

As far as banning things, I don't necessarily see any negative side to banning things like Nazism and Anarchism. They are philosophies of pure hate. If you can find a good reason not to please support it. I prefer not to live like a Caveman (Anarchist) or Monster (Nazi).

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: kogase
Are you somehow lumping me in with Vic?

:brokenheart: *