Does the Alt-Right event exist? Or just Clinton fiction?

[Paranoid Android]

They traded for slaves they never captured slaves of their own ( or if they did it was in such small numbers to be insignificant.

I suggest you try reading some of the Wikipedia sources your link.

OMFG someone like you. With your logic. If the Africans captured them, what did the do with them? OH YEAH!! They sold them to the Europeans who DEMANDED the slaves.

You are seriously hopeless. For the reason I posted, saying that there was SLAVES IN AFRICA (maybe capitalization helps you). But slavery pre-Atlantic Slave Trade or European arrival was same as Europe. Mainly indentured servants, people captured in war, etc.

[JohnBrown1917]

They didn't create the slave trade so I don't really know what you are getting at.

Tell me you don't think the west was the only one buying slaves do you?

He is talking about the Atlantic slave trade. Because slavery in general sure as hell has not ended.

[Endus]

Just out of curiosity is it racist because it is wrong, or racist just because regardless of merit?

It's "racist" because it's discriminatory and prejudicial against people based on their race.

That this position lacks any merit whatsoever in addition to its ethical failures is the cherry on top of the cake.

They are not nation states.
In a nation state, the large majority speak the same language, worship the same god, and come from the same people - And most importantly they think they are one people, and that is not the same thing as citizens of the same country.

And that definition applies to those nations.

As we've been over ad nauseam, the focus shouldn't be on Stalinism, but on the fact that this happens every damned time. Mao, Pol Pot, take your pick. The glorious revolution doesn't end in stateless utopia, it ends in vicious murder of the propertied and educated.

Should we blame Capitalist thought for the transatlantic slave trade and all the horrors that wrought, the massive inequalities in some nations, the continuing slaveowning that exists throughout the world, and so forth? Because that's as relevant a point as what you're trying.

If you want to find someone to blame for the evils of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, you've got three people you just named who you can lay the blame upon. They aren't Marx, and their societies weren't Marx's communist utopia.

Marx's thinking is also the root of the social democratic movements in places like Canada and the Scandinavian states, which is working out pretty well, but for some reason, you keep ignoring that.

[Spectral]

For nations to cooperate most effectively, they shouldn't be seen as nations, only as a single entity.

I don't understand this claim at all.

[Theodarzna]

So you named Germany, which has Merkel as a centre-rigth leader.

'Refugees' is rather broad, so you have to be more specific.
Because allowing in refugees is not even something I would say is a bad thing.

Centre-Right means nothing, I am talking about broad policy and other people than Merkel, and I am not commenting on her policy but on the institutional Left and its lack of reaction to events like what happened on New Years Eve.

[primalmatter]

OMFG someone like you. With your logic. If the Africans captured them, what did the do with them? OH YEAH!! They sold them to the Europeans who DEMANDED the slaves.

You are seriously hopeless. For the reason I posted, saying that there was SLAVES IN AFRICA (maybe capitalization helps you). But slavery pre-Atlantic Slave Trade or European arrival was same as Europe. Mainly indentured servants, people captured in war, etc.

Europeans, Middle east, other Africans.

Its just what they did. It was just Britain that stood up and said "No more"

Trying to claim Europe or the States are responsible for slavery is almost comedic.

- - - Updated - - -

He is talking about the Atlantic slave trade. Because slavery in general sure as hell has not ended.

True it still exists today but it is a shadow of itself since the British Empire cracked down on it.

[JohnBrown1917]

Centre-Right means nothing, I am talking about broad policy and other people than Merkel, and I am not commenting on her policy but on the institutional Left and its lack of reaction to events like what happened on New Years Eve.

Yes, what Happend in Germany, which is under a centre-rigth government.

So anything else besides Germany? Really no examples? Just some small incidents? And the institutional left? the hell is that?

- - - Updated - - -

True it still exists today but it is a shadow of itself since the British Empire cracked down on it.

Within its own territory ye, the slavery they started themselves.


...wow

[Kraenen]

Arrest them if they break the law?

Is this really the only problem you can come up with from the 'global left', not to mention how its silly to generalize half the political spectrum. our most left-wing party is neither pro or anti-refugee and are euro skeptic.

So I take it you're not really into the whole 'preventative medicine' thing. If you get sick, get cancer, etc... just go to the hospital and pay money and be sick. What's the big deal?

[Spectral]

Should we blame Capitalist thought for the transatlantic slave trade and all the horrors that wrought, the massive inequalities in some nations, the continuing slaveowning that exists throughout the world, and so forth? Because that's as relevant a point as what you're trying.

The transatlantic slave trade predates capitalist thought by a long ways, so that'd be pretty stupid. Again, your historical analogies are just awful. Perhaps this owes to your general historical illiteracy, but I suspect it's more of an ideology problem.

If you want to find someone to blame for the evils of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, you've got three people you just named who you can lay the blame upon. They aren't Marx, and their societies weren't Marx's communist utopia.

Nope, no united ideology to see across those societies! Just a coincidence that revolutions subscribing to an ideology that advocates violence against elites seems to keep on killing elites. Nothin' to see here, it's all well meaning!

This is obviously absurd. Again, perhaps one can let Marx off the hook for having a pretty stupid idea that was relatively untested. You don't really have that excuse though.

Marx's thinking is also the root of the social democratic movements in places like Canada and the Scandinavian states, which is working out pretty well, but for some reason, you keep ignoring that.

That's objectively false. These societies are much more Smithian than Marxist. Social welfare isn't a Marxist idea and none of these societies have moved towards eliminating private property at all.

[JohnBrown1917]

Should we blame Capitalist thought for the transatlantic slave trade and all the horrors that wrought, the massive inequalities in some nations, the continuing slaveowning that exists throughout the world, and so forth? Because that's as relevant a point as what you're trying.

If you want to find someone to blame for the evils of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, you've got three people you just named who you can lay the blame upon. They aren't Marx, and their societies weren't Marx's communist utopia.

Marx's thinking is also the root of the social democratic movements in places like Canada and the Scandinavian states, which is working out pretty well, but for some reason, you keep ignoring that.

Put it way better than I could, thanks.


Somehow forgot about how he influenced other European countries. Even though i'm voting for the Dutch socialist party(Democratic/moderate socialism), and our welfare state.

- - - Updated - - -

So I take it you're not really into the whole 'preventative medicine' thing. If you get sick, get cancer, etc... just go to the hospital and pay money and be sick. What's the big deal?

Then do what? Not let in refugees in at all?

- - - Updated - - -

The transatlantic slave trade predates capitalist thought by a long ways, so that'd be pretty stupid. Again, your historical analogies are just awful. Perhaps this owes to your general historical illiteracy, but I suspect it's more of an ideology problem.

Started by the Dutch, the first capitalistic country on earth.

[primalmatter]

Yes, what Happend in Germany, which is under a centre-rigth government.

So anything else besides Germany? Really no examples? Just some small incidents? And the institutional left? the hell is that?

- - - Updated - - -


Within its own territory ye, the slavery they started themselves.


...wow

Not at all it cut off almost all routes to the middle east as well.

Why are you so quick to down play what was a massive accomplishment for the British Empire?

[Felya]

Europeans, Middle east, other Africans.

Its just what they did. It was just Britain that stood up and said "No more"

Trying to claim Europe or the States are responsible for slavery is almost comedic.

True it still exists today but it is a shadow of itself since the British Empire cracked down on it.

I don't understand this argument. Yes, Europe and US was responsible for the slave trade. There isn't much else to it... The fact that it happened before, happened after, who sold the slaves or how they were treated, doesn't negate the undeniable fact that US and Euorope hold a lot of responsibility in the slave trade.

[Paranoid Android]

Europeans, Middle east, other Africans.

Its just what they did. It was just Britain that stood up and said "No more"

Trying to claim Europe or the States are responsible for slavery is almost comedic.

You double talked so much incoherent bullshit and cannot stay on topic. In bold makes no fucking sense.

Welcome to ignore.

[Endus]

The transatlantic slave trade predates capitalist thought by a long ways, so that'd be pretty stupid.

And socialist thought predates Marx.

That's objectively false. These societies are much more Smithian than Marxist. Social welfare isn't a Marxist idea and none of these societies have moved towards eliminating private property at all.

I see, so the ways that these societies diverged from pure Marxism is important and reason to not consider them "Marxist" at all, but the way that Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot's societies diverged isn't important, and they're reason to slander Marx.

You're being wildly inconsistent.

[Kraenen]

And socialist thought predates Marx.

You're being wildly inconsistent.

Didn't you just say Canada's social democracy was based on the root of marx?

[Spectral]

That is not how this works, at all.
Marx has no murderous intent, What Stalin did to it probably made him turn in his grave so hard that we could generate enough energy for thousands of years for the whole world.

The Communist Manifesto:

The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.

While Endus and other dishonest interlocutors argue that this is (somehow) not advocacy of violence, it's pretty plain that a philosophy that is based on removing all material possessions and overthrowing social conditions is one that is predicated on spilling the blood of those with material goods.

The notion that communism is about peaceful creation of a stateless utopia is plainly absurd - this cannot happen.

And where exactly did Marx write that the rich should be killed?

The Communist Manifesto. It's short. Go read it.

But with people like you, its no wonder Marxism exists.
Almost makes me convert to it, if it was not impossible to implant.

Yeah, I know, there will always be jealous people that want to hurt those those that have more than them and take their things. Perhaps that's why I'm more than a little disturbed that we still have people wandering around blithely treating an idiotic, murderous ideology as though it's perfectly credible.

[JohnBrown1917]

Not at all it cut off almost all routes to the middle east as well.

Why are you so quick to down play what was a massive accomplishment for the British Empire?

Why are so you quick to make them look far better than they where?
You don't see me saying the Dutch empire was a good thing.

[Endus]

Didn't you just say Canada's social democracy was based on the root of marx?

I said it drew some inspiration from his writings. But I also don't see how your comment is in any way criticising anything I said, since Canadian social democracy is a mid-20th-Century thing, it didn't exist back in 1867.

[Kraenen]

Then do what? Not let in refugees in at all?

Idk man, you gave me the impression there were no real problems with refugees since if they commit crime you just send them to jail and everything is fine. Why not prevent that in the first place? I mean why not. You are under no real obligation, with respect to national sovereignty, to take in refugees.

[JohnBrown1917]

Yeah, I know, there will always be jealous people that want to hurt those those that have more than them and take their things. Perhaps that's why I'm more than a little disturbed that we still have people wandering around blithely treating an idiotic, murderous ideology as though it's perfectly credible.

Not really, just annoyed with the arrogant fucks who like to fuck over other people.


But it really seems the red scare did its job during your youth, so i'll stop here and let the american propaganda machine do its job.
Yes, Karl Marx wanted to murder people, yes he was an idiot for having a different worldview than, happy now?