Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1240 of 1791 FirstFirst ... 240740114011901230123812391240124112421250129013401740 ... LastLast
Results 18,586 to 18,600 of 26863
Like Tree10277Likes

Thread: The American Politics thread

  1. #18586
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    I'm saying that the reasons aren't universally applicable! In other words, don't be an idealogue. That is my point.

    This is not the same thing as post-modernism. This is simply rejecting unfounded claims when they don't apply.
    The people who claim the right to bear arms aren't claiming they will always be successful. They are using it to give them a chance.

    Being dogmatically random isn't a virtue.
    ★★★★★

  2. #18587
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    And why wouldn't it? You say Syria as if the reasons are apparent and universally applicable.

    The irony is you used dogma as your rationale when in reality I am open to the possibilities that it could happen and you are insistent it couldn't ever happen.
    Nope:

    "One of the main reasons for the amendment was so that they could overthrow a tyrannical government."

    - I am simply putting forth the notion that it's possible that access to guns doesn't help people to overthrow a tyrannical government.
    - Sometimes it may help them - e.g. in the past Toussaint and freed slaves etc
    - Sometimes it may not help them - e.g. numerous modern examples
    - It's even possible that it makes things worse
    See below post:

    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    I'm saying that the reasons aren't universally applicable! In other words, don't be an idealogue. That is my point.

    This is not the same thing as post-modernism. This is simply rejecting unfounded claims when they don't apply.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    "You don't look like me in this world without being firm on what you want to do."

    - Hashim Amla.
    Quote Originally Posted by DriveClub View Post
    He bowls with a lot of heart, his heart makes the ball bounce more

  3. #18588
    vcs
    vcs is offline
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend vcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    India
    Posts
    24,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    Then buy guns for people but then I guess it will move onto who has the better and newer gun and everyone should have equal amounts of that too.

    I think ultimately your conception of what government can and should do is fundamentally different from your ideological opposition so that until you give the subject the time and respect it probably deserves (if you're as curious about politics as you seem to suggest you are) you will think all your positions are not unreasonable and you will continue to caricaturize them.

    Stick to reality, even if it is not what you wish it were; in the long-run you'll learn more and be stronger for it.
    Er.. the reality is that every developed country apart from the US (and quite a few less developed ones) ban guns, or place heavy restrictions on their ownership, and are infinitely better for it.

    That's because your imagined reality about every owner being responsible is fiction, and any diversions from that utopia result in catastrophic effects.

    The US will come around to it eventually.

    Your patronizing tone doesn't help much either.
    Last edited by vcs; 06-10-2017 at 01:22 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    Chix love a man with a checkered posting history.

  4. #18589
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    The people who claim the right to bear arms aren't claiming they will always be successful. They are using it to give them a chance.

    Being dogmatically random isn't a virtue.
    It's a whole lot better than accepting false claims based on principle, also known as willful ignorance.


  5. #18590
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    Stick to reality, even if it is not what you wish it were; in the long-run you'll learn more and be stronger for it.
    It seems you should follow your own advice.
    vcs and Anil like this.

  6. #18591
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    Nope:

    "One of the main reasons for the amendment was so that they could overthrow a tyrannical government."

    - I am simply putting forth the notion that it's possible that access to guns doesn't help people to overthrow a tyrannical government.
    - Sometimes it may help them - e.g. in the past Toussaint and freed slaves etc
    - Sometimes it may not help them - e.g. numerous modern examples
    - It's even possible that it makes things worse
    See below post:
    What you put forth is an instance where the access to guns in and of itself was not enough to overthrow a government. There are many things that have to go your way to overthrow a government - like planning and infrastructure, as well as things like culture. This then doesn't become a viable counter to the idea that having guns helps you overthrow a tyrannical government.

    It's not enough of a rebuttal to someone who thinks it is an essential right for their liberty to say "in this one time it didn't work". Especially since all these instances have so many differing variables. Claiming they are dogmatic because they wouldn't agree with you is a bit ridiculous.

    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    It's a whole lot better than accepting false claims based on principle, also known as willful ignorance.
    Principles that have tended to work throughout human history are better than change for the sake of change.
    Last edited by Ikki; 06-10-2017 at 01:28 AM.

  7. #18592
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    What you put forth is an instance where the access to guns in and of itself was not enough to overthrow a government. There are many things that have to go your way to overthrow a government - like planning and infrastructure, as well as things like culture. This then doesn't become a viable counter to the idea that having guns helps you overthrow a tyrannical government.

    It's not enough of a rebuttal to someone who thinks it is an essential right for their liberty to say "in this one time it didn't work". Especially since all these instances have so many differing variables. Claiming they are dogmatic because they wouldn't agree with you is a bit ridiculous.
    Lol, this is an amazingly obtuse turn of logic, Ikki. I'm saying it might help or it might not help, depending upon the case. That is a perfectly sound rebuttal to "guns should be legal to own freely in part because they help to overthrow tyrannical governments". It is simply pointing out that x + y doesn't always equal z, so it's not a black and white argument.

    It's not that hard to understand.

  8. #18593
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    69,003
    Loving Ikki calling people out for supposedly being dogmatic.
    Flem274* and Anil like this.

  9. #18594
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    Lol, this is an amazingly obtuse turn of logic, Ikki. I'm saying it might help or it might not help, depending upon the case. That is a perfectly sound rebuttal to "guns should be legal to own freely in part because they help to overthrow tyrannical governments". It is simply pointing out that x + y doesn't always equal z, so it's not a black and white argument.

    It's not that hard to understand.
    Your argument is a strawman. Who said guns will help you overthrow all governments every time? No one. Who said the sun shines down a pistol barrel? No one. I'm pretty sure that most people who actually use guns daily and who advocate guns rights aren't that stupid and actually realise there are inherent pros and cons to having guns. That they still fall on wanting guns rights doesn't make them dogmatic. You seem to assume there are no values that one could want perpetually in order to stave off tyrannical governments. Free speech doesn't work all the time either, sometimes against what you would consider right, but it is one absolute right the founders wanted. It is enshrined in a bill of rights to make it even more judiciously valuable because of that.

    Because being for change, without reason and for the sake of it is dogmatic. Using your logic any supporter of a law can be considered dogmatic.

    Quote Originally Posted by vcs View Post
    Er.. the reality is that every developed country apart from the US (and quite a few less developed ones) ban guns, or place heavy restrictions on their ownership, and are infinitely better for it.

    That's because your imagined reality about every owner being responsible is fiction, and any diversions from that utopia result in catastrophic effects.

    The US will come around to it eventually.

    Your patronizing tone doesn't help much either.
    Guns give people the opportunity to do bad things to a higher degree. How does that rebut the reason for people to want guns though?
    You said yourself you don't understand the libertarian position to which I said you should probably learn more about it if you want to have this discussion honestly.
    You now are back to telling me about the libertarian fantasy because you felt slighted? At which point does intellectual honesty kick in for you?

    When I said stick to reality, that's not just something for you but for everyone including me. Often we do not search for answers when the truth of what we're seeking may be especially heavy on us. Living in a coccoon isn't going to help you though. If you want to stick to your political ideology that's fine, but at least learn to characterise others accurately because it cheats yourself and is offensive to the holders of those ideas.
    Last edited by Ikki; 06-10-2017 at 01:53 AM.

  10. #18595
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    What you put forth is an instance where the access to guns in and of itself was not enough to overthrow a government. There are many things that have to go your way to overthrow a government - like planning and infrastructure, as well as things like culture. This then doesn't become a viable counter to the idea that having guns helps you overthrow a tyrannical government.

    It's not enough of a rebuttal to someone who thinks it is an essential right for their liberty to say "in this one time it didn't work". Especially since all these instances have so many differing variables. Claiming they are dogmatic because they wouldn't agree with you is a bit ridiculous.

    Principles that have tended to work throughout human history are better than change for the sake of change.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    Your argument is a strawman. Who said guns will help you overthrow all governments every time? No one. Who said the sun shines down a pistol barrel? No one. I'm pretty sure that most people who actually use guns daily and who advocate guns rights aren't that stupid and actually realise there are inherent pros and cons to having guns. That they still fall on wanting guns rights doesn't make them dogmatic. You seem to assume there are no values that one could want perpetually in order to stave off tyrannical governments. Free speech doesn't work all the time either, sometimes against what you would consider right, but it is one absolute right the founders wanted. It is enshrined in a bill of rights to make it even more judiciously valuable because of that.

    I was going through bolding what you've said, but I ended up bolding every sentence because pretty much everything you've written here supports my point. Amazing.

  11. #18596
    Global Moderator Teja.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    NDTV Propaganda Office
    Posts
    8,398
    It's not intellectually honest to be a mark for a specific principle to the exclusion of all others, consider it 'real' any more than others and consider any other perspective not sticking to reality.

    I actually am not sure there should be restrictions on guns but the moralizing on the nature of reality by Ikki is ridiculous.

    The truth and religion are different destinations and it's not my place to comment on which one to choose but it's highly ironic that Ikki views the world through the religious prism of freedom yet claims he is trying to look at objective reality. Reality/truth has no such prisms.

    Ikki has a child's capacity for self-delusion.
    Last edited by Teja.; 06-10-2017 at 02:16 AM.
    hendrix and Anil like this.
    Isnít it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too? Ė Douglas Adams



    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    The reason people don't cheer for India is nothing to do with them being number one

    It's because Teja is a ****, FTR

  12. #18597
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post

    I was going through bolding what you've said, but I ended up bolding every sentence because pretty much everything you've written here supports my point. Amazing.
    You have muddied the waters so much you don't even know what you're arguing anymore. You went from trying to pin me for having a libertarian position as dogma and wanting to be nihilistic about it, to claiming it didn't work in Syria as if that is some counter to wanting guns rights

    I'm not sure you actually have positions any more. The only way your tedious accusation of dogma makes sense is if we apply it to every law, which shows you how nonsensical your whole argument is. Ironically, not too long ago in this thread you had the dogmatic position that all killing is bad, even self-defence which was merely justified in your view.

    So what is your position? Should there be a constitution at all? Should there be laws? Because all these can be argued as dogmatic if we want to take dogma seriously as a rebuttal of whether we should hold certain views. Being principled is not the same as being dogmatic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teja. View Post
    Ikki has a child's capacity for self-delusion.
    You're a mod right? You're supposed to moderate the forum not insult the posters - nevermind the rest which was nonsense - or is this part of my capacity to self-delude?
    Last edited by Ikki; 06-10-2017 at 02:21 AM.

  13. #18598
    Global Moderator Teja.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    NDTV Propaganda Office
    Posts
    8,398
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post

    Again, I think libertarians would be better served thinking nihilistically for a second:
    - the concept of "rights" is a construct and doesn't actually exist. Just as no one has the right to health care, no one has the right to own a gun or own anything for that matter just because someone wrote it down
    - "Freedom" also doesn't exist.
    While the above are prerequisites from a nihilistic perspective, I don't they are necessarily exclusively nihilistic principles at all. Mindfulness which reaches the opposite conclusions of nihilism (reduction of desire is a good thing) also shares the above principles.
    Last edited by Teja.; 06-10-2017 at 02:36 AM.

  14. #18599
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    You have muddied the waters so much you don't even know what you're arguing anymore. You went from trying to pin me for having a libertarian position as dogma and wanting to be nihilistic about it, to claiming it didn't work in Syria as if that is some counter to wanting guns rights

    I'm not sure you actually have positions any more. The only way your tedious accusation of dogma makes sense is if we apply it to every law, which shows you how nonsensical your whole argument is. Ironically, not too long ago in this thread you had the dogmatic position that all killing is bad, even self-defence which was merely justified in your view.

    So what is your position? Should there be a constitution at all? Should there be laws? Because all these can be argued as dogmatic if we want to take dogma seriously as a rebuttal of whether we should hold certain views. Being principled is not the same as being dogmatic.
    Huh? I said the opposite! I said that violence is not actually the worst thing in the world!

    Your comments are beyond parody now. I've articulated my position very, very clearly. I'm afraid I don't have the time to teach you to read.

  15. #18600
    Hall of Fame Member hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    15,048
    These are my exact quoted statements, no edits.

    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    Violence...even violence resulting in death...there are many worse things in the world than this. I just don't think it bears any logic to refrain from using violence when you need to. Even Gandhi said as much, I believe.

    I'm vegan but I'm going to set mouse traps in my house and if a mangey dog confronts me on the streets I don't mind if it gets shot. I don't even have much of a problem with the Harambe incident.
    Quote Originally Posted by MW1304 View Post
    What is worse than violence? I mean the word itself encompasses many things.
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    Many things.

    - Mass poverty and disease - particularly if it's caused by theft, corruption and/or systematic barriers such as colonialism
    - Slavery - given the scenario people like Toussaint were faced with I think violence probably was the answer. A horrible answer but necessary



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The British Politics Thread
    By cover drive man in forum News and Politics
    Replies: 18012
    Last Post: Yesterday, 07:21 PM
  2. Media
    By SirBloody Idiot in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 06-08-2011, 07:10 AM
  3. FAQ & Introduction Thread
    By Magrat Garlick in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 20-06-2011, 12:06 PM
  4. Finally ! A Last Word Thread
    By SJS in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 08:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •