Hi, I have a interesting ideology

[GodOfEvil]

I am the God of evil and i want to share my weird political mind set some of you will not like it & some of you will probably be indifferent so here we go. Ps my grammar sucks:p

Race/Ethnicity: i don't believe race exist but i do believe people's have the right their preserve "kind" from extinction because it keeps humanity unique in a way (race mixing adds more diversity but it would not solve racism look at Latin America), japan is not japan with out Japanese. but the new world nations have know excuse as long as immigrants assimilate

Culture/languages: similar to race i believe almost all cultures & all languages should be preserved, i believe westernization & globalization are the same they are kill the human cultural diversity on the planet.

Government: as an American i personally don't care what government we have. the Tea partyers are complaining that we are becoming authoritarian but as we all know democracies don't last forever so they shouldn't be surprised. in a lot of ways i like authoritarian governments it is arguably the oldest from of government on earth & it is a lot quicker in doing things. i don't hate democracy but i don't & would not advocate it because it's not for everybody and i didn't think it can bring "peace & freedom":rolleyes: plus i don't believe anarchy works

Economy: capitalism sucks:laugh: i don't hate it but it should be controlled. i like mixed economies, the government controls all the importation stuff like schools, health, etc and the people run their businesses and do whatever, i like Protectionism

Religion: all religion are not the same. i don't like it when "new atheist" paint religions under one brush, are they all "fake" yeah but theirs more to a lot of them you can't compare Islam to Wicca. i like a lot of religions (excluding Abrahamic religions, Islam being the worst in modern times) because it add to the human diversity of how should we act.

[Remus Bleys]

In its positive aims, however, this form of Socialism aspires either to restoring the old means of production and of exchange, and with them the old property relations, and the old society, or to cramping the modern means of production and of exchange within the framework of the old property relations that have been, and were bound to be, exploded by those means. In either case, it is both reactionary and Utopian.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Religion: all religion are not the same. i don't like it when "new atheist" paint religions under one brush, are they all "fake" yeah but theirs more to a lot of them you can't compare Islam to Wicca. i like a lot of religions (excluding Abrahamic religions, Islam being the worst in modern times) because it add to the human diversity of how should we act.

Over a billion Muslims, you can never stop Islam. Nanabooboo stick your head in doodoo. Salaam.

PS, you're just a liberal, you're not strange or weird.

[Sabot Cat]

I came here for an interesting ideology.

All I got was liberalism.

[exeexe]

capitalism sucks:laugh: i don't hate it but it should be controlled

So your ideology is for the continuation of capitalism.

[#FF0000]

Race/Ethnicity: i don't believe race exist but i do believe people's have the right their preserve "kind" from extinction because it keeps humanity unique in a way (race mixing adds more diversity but it would not solve racism look at Latin America), japan is not japan with out Japanese. but the new world nations have know excuse as long as immigrants assimilate

This isn't very clear but it sounds pretty stupid. Could you clarify?


Culture/languages: similar to race i believe almost all cultures & all languages should be preserved, i believe westernization & globalization are the same they are kill the human cultural diversity on the planet.
That will never happen because culture is a thing that is constantly developing and is constantly being created. When two cultures meet they don't just merge into one mono-culture.


Government: as an American i personally don't care what government we have. the Tea partyers are complaining that we are becoming authoritarian but as we all know democracies don't last forever so they shouldn't be surprised. in a lot of ways i like authoritarian governments it is arguably the oldest from of government on earth & it is a lot quicker in doing things. i don't hate democracy but i don't & would not advocate it because it's not for everybody and i didn't think it can bring "peace & freedom":rolleyes: plus i don't believe anarchy works
Authoritarianism isn't a "form of government". I'm also curious as to why you think this is the place for you if there's "a lot of things" you like about authoritarianism.

So yeah, what brings you here?

[BIXX]

You don't have an interesting ideology, you're just a racist liberal.

[Tim Cornelis]

Race/Ethnicity: i don't believe race exist but i do believe people's have the right their preserve "kind" from extinction because it keeps humanity unique in a way (race mixing adds more diversity but it would not solve racism look at Latin America), japan is not japan with out Japanese. but the new world nations have know [sic!] excuse as long as immigrants assimilate

This is really problematic. To say you want humanity to be diverse and unique is one thing, to accord ethnicities or races the right to 'preserve' themselves is another. It implies you think that a group with political power, the 'political elite', of a racial group (because it's never the self-rule of a group as a whole -- likewise, national self-determination is the right to use and abuse a country by its national political elite) is allowed to design policies to prevent its 'extinction', for which there is only two ways: banning race mixing, and banning or limiting women's reproductive rights. Both are highly undesirable.

[GodOfEvil]

This is really problematic. To say you want humanity to be diverse and unique is one thing, to accord ethnicities or races the right to 'preserve' themselves is another. It implies you think that a group with political power, the 'political elite', of a racial group (because it's never the self-rule of a group as a whole -- likewise, national self-determination is the right to use and abuse a country by its national political elite) is allowed to design policies to prevent its 'extinction', for which there is only two ways: banning race mixing, and banning or limiting women's reproductive rights. Both are highly undesirable.
people have the right to mixed just like people have the right not to mix nobody should care. tribes in the amazon are threaten to be "extinct" by outside activates do you not care?

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

people have the right to mixed just like people have the right not to mix nobody should care. tribes in the amazon are threaten to be "extinct" by outside activates do you not care?

No, I don't. I don't care about impure genes, I don't care about ruining cultures. If they are "going extinct," then surely they are mixing? Then aren't they making the choice to mix? Wherein lay the problem? Ought to be forbidden to mix because they "must be preserved" (whatever this means?)

[GodOfEvil]

This isn't very clear but it sounds pretty stupid. Could you clarify?

That will never happen because culture is a thing that is constantly developing and is constantly being created. When two cultures meet they don't just merge into one mono-culture.

Authoritarianism isn't a "form of government". I'm also curious as to why you think this is the place for you if there's "a lot of things" you like about authoritarianism.
yeah culture is consonantly changing but globalization killing tradtional ways of life & thinking all for the sake of "progress" it is killing human cultural diversity

[GodOfEvil]

No, I don't. I don't care about impure genes, I don't care about ruining cultures. If they are "going extinct," then surely they are mixing? Then aren't they making the choice to mix? Wherein lay the problem? Ought to be forbidden to mix because they "must be preserved" (whatever this means?)
they are kicked out of the forest for profit, lots of times they are killed thats not choice thats force. most of these people will and up in poverty, drugs etc

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

yeah culture is consonantly changing but globalization killing tradtional ways of life & thinking all for the sake of "progress" it is killing human cultural diversity

Good.


they are kicked out of the forest for profit, lots of times they are killed thats not choice thats force. most of these people will and up in poverty, drugs etc

Then what does it have to do with mixing as you were rambling about earlier? You're the one who brought it up as something that needs to be prevented.

Now the problem with the approach to forcing those natives off the land is the treatment of them, not the fact that they cannot live their "traditional ways". No traditional ways should be respected. Obviously that they are just forced off land and then thrown into a hell-fire where they end up in destitution and confusion is a problem, but one of approach and way (though it is unlikely that will ever change under the current order of things).

[Tenka]

yeah culture is consonantly changing but globalization killing tradtional ways of life & thinking all for the sake of "progress" it is killing human cultural diversity

Are you misspelling things on purpose? When I saw "consonantly" I could have put it down to an error of auto-correct, but then you proper fucked "tradtional". Anyway, your ideas aren't interesting or unique and you seem like a troll. "Cultural diversity" is not something to consciously "preserve".

[Zoroaster]

So... Liberalism plus Scientific Racism equals... Fuck all, I guess?

[GodOfEvil]

Are you misspelling things on purpose? When I saw "consonantly" I could have put it down to an error of auto-correct, but then you proper fucked "tradtional". Anyway, your ideas aren't interesting or unique and you seem like a troll. "Cultural diversity" is not something to consciously "preserve".
a mono cultural world (based on Europe) will be boring right?

[#FF0000]

yeah culture is consonantly changing but globalization killing tradtional ways of life & thinking all for the sake of "progress" it is killing human cultural diversity

So it goes. Traditions have been killed off over and over and over again throughout history. Why are the ones we have now so special that they need to be preserved (as if that's even possible)?

And like I said, it isn't killing cultural diversity and it can't kill cultural diversity because we aren't just getting giant monocultures. That isn't how "culture" works. Old cultures cross paths and synthesize and spawn new cultures

Again I'm really curious -- what were you looking for here?

[Five Year Plan]

An interesting ideology? Nah, just a fascist troll will a star wars imperial emblem and a few laughable racist views. We've seen this before.

[GodOfEvil]

So... Liberalism plus Scientific Racism equals... Fuck all, I guess?
what is "scientific racism" about persevering cultural/human diversity. lets make Xhosa the world language instead of English:) put this in youtube
watch?v=CdUEjpcKJ1E

[Tim Cornelis]

people have the right to mixed just like people have the right not to mix nobody should care. tribes in the amazon are threaten to be "extinct" by outside activates do you not care?

When you say people, do you mean a people, or individuals? Because in your opening post you mentioned Japanese people. Say that the Japanese are going extinct because of low birth rates and interracial mixing, would 'the Japanese', or their political representatives, have the right, as you said, to prevent the extinction of the Japanese? Because the only measures they could possibly take is banning race mixing and banning or limiting women's reproductive rights.

[GodOfEvil]

When you say people, do you mean a people, or individuals? Because in your opening post you mentioned Japanese people. Say that the Japanese are going extinct because of low birth rates and interracial mixing, would 'the Japanese', or their political representatives, have the right, as you said, to prevent the extinction of the Japanese? Because the only measures they could possibly take is banning race mixing and banning or limiting women's reproductive rights.
i mean individuals. oh japan is 98.5% Japanese so anyway japan is doomed if they don't start screwing. i left out the part that i think the "old world" can stay racially whatever, but in the new world i want America to look more like Brazil (of course people need to assimilate) because America is the land of immigrants

[PhoenixAsh]

too inside-the-box for me.

The obvious thing to do is build a clone army under water and then wage violent, violent war against everybody else. That and a space-arc. You have got to have a space-arc.

Also protests with silly costumes and signs.

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

An interesting ideology? Nah, just a fascist troll will a star wars imperial emblem and a few laughable racist views. We've seen this before.

Ok obviously OP's views are beyond stupid, but don't just throw around the word fascist like that. It is a specific thing, this person isn't a fascist, just a dumb liberal who picks random things to have an opinion about.

[GodOfEvil]

Ok obviously OP's views are beyond stupid, but don't just throw around the word fascist like that. It is a specific thing, this person isn't a fascist, just a dumb liberal who picks random things to have an opinion about.
in the American/european sense of the word?

[Five Year Plan]

Ok obviously OP's views are beyond stupid, but don't just throw around the word fascist like that. It is a specific thing, this person isn't a fascist, just a dumb liberal who picks random things to have an opinion about.

You are assuming he's not a troll. That's your error of judgment, not mine.

[GodOfEvil]

You are assuming he's not a troll. That's your error of judgment, not mine.
im not a troll i believe cultures & ethnicities are not some trivial thing.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

too inside-the-box for me.

The obvious thing to do is build a clone army under water and then wage violent, violent war against everybody else. That and a space-arc. You have got to have a space-arc.

Also protests with silly costumes and signs.

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100320232900/es.starwars/images/7/7f/Rally.jpg


Ok obviously OP's views are beyond stupid, but don't just throw around the word fascist like that. It is a specific thing, this person isn't a fascist, just a dumb liberal who picks random things to have an opinion about.

Do you honestly see any difference between the rhetoric of emperor Sotsdemocratine and "separate but equal", "anti-racism is code for anti-White!!!: rhetoric?

[#FF0000]

i left out the part that i think the "old world" can stay racially whatever, but in the new world i want America to look more like Brazil (of course people need to assimilate) because America is the land of immigrants

Immigrants hardly ever actively "assimilated" in the US.

[#FF0000]

im not a troll i believe cultures & ethnicities are not some trivial thing.

They might not be but they don't have any intrinsic value and they also don't work the way that you think they do

[Slavic]

in the American/european sense of the word?

Is there any other sense of the world Liberal considering Europe is where it originated.

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100320232900/es.starwars/images/7/7f/Rally.jpg



Do you honestly see any difference between the rhetoric of emperor Sotsdemocratine and "separate but equal", "anti-racism is code for anti-White!!!: rhetoric?

Actually yes, I see a big difference. Saying things like "muh culturural ethnicity" isn't the same thing as an ideology as specific as fascism. Is it condemnable? Yes. Is it fascism? No. You can't just throw that word around just because someone talks about ethnicity.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Actually yes, I see a big difference. Saying things like "muh culturural ethnicity" isn't the same thing as an ideology as specific as fascism. Is it condemnable? Yes. Is it fascism? No. You can't just throw that word around just because someone talks about ethnicity.

Except that this kind of rhetoric is used, almost exclusively, by fascists. I mean, hey, talking about the "leader principle" isn't technically fascist either but people who talk about it are almost always fascists and anyone sane will be reaching for the safety of their Browning as soon as they hear it.

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

Except that this kind of rhetoric is used, almost exclusively, by fascists. I mean, hey, talking about the "leader principle" isn't technically fascist either but people who talk about it are almost always fascists and anyone sane will be reaching for the safety of their Browning as soon as they hear it.

*sigh* I guess I just don't see this person as a fascist. I know what kind of language fascists use, and they wouldn't say something like "westernization is bad" and "preserve cultural diversity". Fascists don't use the word "diversity" and don't want to protect cultures for the sake of securing it.

OP made an extremely ambiguous and pretty common statement for a liberal. I am not going to condone calling someone a fascist so loosely when there are actual fascists out there doing serious damage. It makes the word lose its meaning. It's like if I was kicked out of a bar for being belligerently drunk and I'm like "those damn fascists! They are being authoritarian and fascists are authoritarian!"

[GodOfEvil]

Immigrants hardly ever actively "assimilated" in the US.
it is kind of Americas fought. ask a white person from brazil what are you and they would probably say Brazilian, ask a white american he would probably say german, Irish, Italian etc

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

*sigh* I guess I just don't see this person as a fascist. I know what kind of language fascists use, and they wouldn't say something like "westernization is bad" and "preserve cultural diversity". Fascists don't use the word "diversity" and don't want to protect cultures for the sake of securing it.

Except that's precisely what fascists have claimed, from Evola to the French New Right and beyond.

[Sabot Cat]

*sigh* I guess I just don't see this person as a fascist. I know what kind of language fascists use, and they wouldn't say something like "westernization is bad" and "preserve cultural diversity". Fascists don't use the word "diversity" and don't want to protect cultures for the sake of securing it.

I agree broadly, but I must point out that this is exactly the kind of thing fascists say, it's just usually "We must preserve the white culture/race/frosting/etc.!"

[GodOfEvil]

I agree broadly, but I must point out that this is exactly the kind of thing fascists say, it's just usually "We must preserve the white culture/race/frosting/etc.!"
i'm not white

[GodOfEvil]

Except that's precisely what fascists have claimed, from Evola to the French New Right and beyond.
:rolleyes: you don't like cultural diversity on this planet?

[PhoenixAsh]

Traditionally in Nazi theory racial mixing is a Judeo-commie fraud to destroy the races and races need to protect themselves and segregate.

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

I agree broadly, but I must point out that this is exactly the kind of thing fascists say, it's just usually "We must preserve the white culture/race/frosting/etc.!"


Traditionally in Nazi theory racial mixing is a Judeo-commie fraud to destroy the races and races need to protect themselves and segregate.

Right…. But they never said anything about the white race nor did they say anything about Judeo/Commie frauds.

I get your points, but I just don't see sufficient evidence to throw around such a loaded word. I think it's intellectually lazy to not be able to condemn something without having to call it fascist. If they had gone on to say something about nations and immigrants and corporatism then I would call them a fascist.

[Münchhausen]

Is there any other sense of the world Liberal considering Europe is where it originated.

Not sure if that's what OP meant, but i think they might be referring to the different meaning of the word in america in contrast to europe.

From what i've gathered it seems that the word is used in the USA to refer to anyone on the center-left and generally people favouring progressive economic and social reforms, while in europe it heavily implies a strong market orientation and a keep-the-government-out-of-personal-stuff-mindset, maybe comparable to american libertarianism. Or did i get it wrong?

[Cosmonaut]

OP, your's not a interesting ideaology, it is liberal-Fascism. I should know, I've dealt with your kind before. The kind of people who believe in an ideology that make ABSOLUTELY no sense. However, you are probably a Hitlerite and don't even know it. :cubaflag::hammersickle::marx::che::castro:

[Atsumari]

i'm not white
Does that make you any more right or wrong regarding racial and ethnic issues?

[#FF0000]

it is kind of Americas fought. ask a white person from brazil what are you and they would probably say Brazilian, ask a white american he would probably say german, Irish, Italian etc

It depends on who's asking. Why would an American tell someone who they assume is also from America that they're American? They'd take for granted that they're asking about their ethnic background or national origin, not nationality.

And my point with that was that there's nothing wrong with lack of assimilation. No one "assimilated" when they got here except for people who were assimilated by force, mostly southern and eastern european immigrants and Irish.


:rolleyes: you don't like cultural diversity on this planet?

You're totally begging the question with your line of thinking by acting as if cultures coming into contact with each other and "mixing" just merges both into one large monoculture, which is completely false.

[Q]

Moved from /intro to /learning.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Race/Ethnicity: i don't believe race exist but i do believe people's have the right their preserve "kind" from extinction because it keeps humanity unique in a way (race mixing adds more diversity but it would not solve racism look at Latin America), japan is not japan with out Japanese. but the new world nations have know excuse as long as immigrants assimilate


I am not sure I can understand you but just incase you mean to imply anything against race mixing you can go fuck yourself, I'm a product of race mixing. Otherwise disregard that statement.

So you don't like religion? You don't like shooting up with the lord? I'm not down for shooting Jesus, Mohammed, Moses or Noah in my veins either.

However, with your economic views, why do you even bother coming onto a revolutionary left website?

[GodOfEvil]

You're totally begging the question with your line of thinking by acting as if cultures coming into contact with each other and "mixing" just merges both into one large monoculture, which is completely false.
no but globalized/western culture is imperialistic & arrogant.

[GodOfEvil]

I am not sure I can understand you but just incase you mean to imply anything against race mixing you can go fuck yourself, I'm a product of race mixing. Otherwise disregard that statement.

So you don't like religion? You don't like shooting up with the lord? I'm not down for shooting Jesus, Mohammed, Moses or Noah in my veins either.

However, with your economic views, why do you even bother coming onto a revolutionary left website?
did i say that? no:rolleyes:. if a group wants to preserve their "kind's" culture, language, & look. they should have the right. you can't force mixing of different groups cause then you get Africa

[#FF0000]

did i say that? no:rolleyes:. if a group wants to preserve their "kind's" culture, language, & look. they should have the right. you can't force mixing of different groups cause then you get Africa

You should answer Tim's questions on this, because it doesn't sound like you've thought your "position" on this out very much, if at all. You don't sound like you know anything about what you're trying to talk about.

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

..too many posts and attention for either a troll or just a boring, ignorant liberal with a 'what? what did I say?' casual racist streak

[Tim Cornelis]

it is liberal-Fascism.

That is not a thing, and can't be a thing.



did i say that? no:rolleyes:. if a group wants to preserve their "kind's" culture, language, & look. they should have the right. you can't force mixing of different groups cause then you get Africa

You answered my question by saying you were talking about individuals, now you're talking about 'a group'. 'A group' has the right to preserve their 'look', which heavily implies a racial or ethnic group is allowed to preserve their racial look, or composition.

And no one is "forcing" anyone to mix — the only instance of forced interracialism I'm aware of was in Paraguay and that was quite some time ago. It's the opposite really, apparently you want a racial group, meaning its political representatives, to force its members to not mix or 'encourage' them to have more (racially pure) babies, for instance by limiting abortion or family planning.

And also, the new world can become racially mixed, and the old world can stay racially "whatever", according to you, which implies non-mixed, or racially pure.

How about this, everyone is allowed to have romantic and sexual relationships with whomever they want; and if the consequence of this is that, say, Japanese people naturally disappear, so be it. That's not a problem and doesn't affect people really. Not that I think that it would lead to ethnic groups disappearing.

[Wonton Carter]

It's like a more-than-slightly racist American liberalism. This does not belong in a forum for the revolutionary left.

[Црвена]

Government: as an American i personally don't care what government we have. the Tea partyers are complaining that we are becoming authoritarian but as we all know democracies don't last forever so they shouldn't be surprised. in a lot of ways i like authoritarian governments
Economy: capitalism sucks:laugh: i don't hate it but it should be controlled,

Go vote for Obama.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

did i say that? no:rolleyes:. if a group wants to preserve their "kind's" culture, language, & look. they should have the right. you can't force mixing of different groups cause then you get Africa

So it is somehow okay that I would be considered a malinchista because I am in a relationship with a white anglo american protestant man? Or how about even in the case of my dad marrying and making children with a white american woman of protestant background (even that is more acceptable for him socially because he is a man and mexican machismo has a big part in it)

[VivalaCuarta]

Ban this fascist now.

[Comrade Jacob]

Well that wasn't interesting now was it?

[GodOfEvil]

Ban this fascist now.
if you don't agree with some think you're a "fascist":rolleyes:you guys.

[GodOfEvil]

Go vote for Obama.
democracy is fake. hell America was never supposed to be a democracy

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

democracy is fake. hell America was never supposed to be a democracy

Yes, it was supposed to be a democracy, as that was understood at the time. And no, a republic is simply the opposite of a monarchy, not the opposite of a democracy (I know some brain-dead fuck-wits somehow get this wrong all the time - but I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone would manage to have a brain so utterly short-circuited). Now tell me why there were elections from the beginning if it wasn't supposed to be a democracy? It built on enlightenment values that were popular in Europe at the time, particularly in France and the UK, and the liberal founding fathers owe much of their actions to a strain of this political current.

[GodOfEvil]

That is not a thing, and can't be a thing.




You answered my question by saying you were talking about individuals, now you're talking about 'a group'. 'A group' has the right to preserve their 'look', which heavily implies a racial or ethnic group is allowed to preserve their racial look, or composition.

And no one is "forcing" anyone to mix — the only instance of forced interracialism I'm aware of was in Paraguay and that was quite some time ago. It's the opposite really, apparently you want a racial group, meaning its political representatives, to force its members to not mix or 'encourage' them to have more (racially pure) babies, for instance by limiting abortion or family planning.
you are forcing people too give up their culture for some "cultural revolution" which reminds me of what Europe was doing to the world. anyway Paraguay only Latin American nation to do it. they called it "racial whitening"

[GodOfEvil]

Yes, it was supposed to be a democracy, as that was understood at the time. And no, a republic is simply the opposite of a monarchy, not the opposite of a democracy (I know some brain-dead fuck-wits somehow get this wrong all the time - but I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone would manage to have a brain so utterly short-circuited). Now tell me why there were elections from the beginning if it wasn't supposed to be a democracy? It built on enlightenment values that were popular in Europe at the time, particularly in France and the UK, and the liberal founding fathers owe much of their actions to a strain of this political current.
i don't know what was going on in their heads, they offered GW to be king but he said no.
here is a quote from Federalist No. 10
"democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

[GodOfEvil]

the Sentinelese people resist the outside world are they fascist
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/1509987/Stone-Age-tribe-kills-fishermen-who-strayed-on-to-island.html

http://assets.survivalinternational.org/static/lib/img/content/uncontacted/sentinelese_arrow.jpg
"Yet when a helicopter flew low over the island, a Sentinelese man rushed out on to the beach, aiming his arrow at the pilot in a gesture that clearly said, ‘We don’t want you here’. Alone of the tens of millions of people affected by the disaster, the Sentinelese needed no help from anyone."
http://www.survivalinternational.org/campaigns/mostisolated

[#FF0000]

you are forcing people too give up their culture for some "cultural revolution" which reminds me of what Europe was doing to the world. anyway Paraguay only Latin American nation to do it. they called it "racial whitening"

You never clarified though -- are you talking about individuals here, or are you talking about groups?

[GodOfEvil]

You never clarified though -- are you talking about individuals here, or are you talking about groups?
a little of both. whites, blacks will not go extinct no time soon since most people marred people who look like them but people have the right "mix" just like people have the right not to "mix" because they want there culture to stay alive. Aboriginal Tasmanian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Tasmanian)s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Tasmanian) are extinct, do you want more people to be gone because you want a less diverse world and only one way of thinking?
http://cdn.vellance.com/beforethey/beforetheypassaway/media/images/Maori/NELS120792-TRIBES-MAORI-003.jpg
Vm_Qfz-LryM

[#FF0000]

So you're okay with elites in small ethnic groups enforcing rules against race-mixing, then?

And have you ignored everything I've written in the thread? I'm saying that this doesn't make the world any less diverse. Besides, you're the one who just boiled down an entire spectrum of human cultures and ethnicities into "white" and "black".

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Why assume that cultural diversity is hurt by mixing? Why fetishize cultural purity? Imagine modern cuisine without cultural exchange - we would be much less healthy. We eat/drink tomatoes and corn from Mexico, Potatoes from Peru, chocolate from Mexico and Peru, tea from China, coffee from Ethiopia, fish recipes from all over the world, beef from Europe, spices from India and Indonesia, fruit from every continent ... this brings diversity of nutrients and flavors alike which enrich us. They do not hurt our diversity but expand it. Cultural diversity is not hurt by "mixing" but by power differentials.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Why assume that cultural diversity is hurt by mixing? Why fetishize cultural purity? Imagine modern cuisine without cultural exchange - we would be much less healthy. We eat/drink tomatoes and corn from Mexico, Potatoes from Peru, chocolate from Mexico and Peru, tea from China, coffee from Ethiopia, fish recipes from all over the world, beef from Europe, spices from India and Indonesia, fruit from every continent ... this brings diversity of nutrients and flavors alike which enrich us. They do not hurt our diversity but expand it. Cultural diversity is not hurt by "mixing" but by power differentials.

Thinking of foods from elsewhere, I could really go for some gazpacho.

[Tim Cornelis]

you are forcing people too give up their culture for some "cultural revolution" which reminds me of what Europe was doing to the world. anyway Paraguay only Latin American nation to do it. they called it "racial whitening"

Your conception of me "forcing" others to give up their culture seems to be me disapproving of using coercion to maintain culture or racial purity (the absence of force is force). :rolleyes:

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Communists fight coercion in cultural matters, particularly when it is used by the bourgeoisie to retard the class struggle. We are not orientalist liberals; whether a culture survives as it is or changes is unimportant to us. And surely, in communism we can expect the gradual merging of all cultures into a worldwide culture as the barriers to this process are removed.

[Rafiq]

This is the same user who prattled of "ancient wisdom" in that other thread.

Does anyone want to deny, still, the connection between eastern spirituality/paganism and reactionary politics?

[Rafiq]

Let every "racial group" disappear and lose their "uniqueness" for all anyone fucking cares, they do not look that way to aesthetically please you. Racial purity is bullshit anyway, genetic diversity is a biological necessity.

If different cultures are going to be annihilated, so be it. You want to glorify their food, you want to glorify their fascinating dances and their interesting 'ancient wisdom' but what, you want to ignore bride price? You want to ignore child abuse? Polygamy? Among other characteristics that are backward? Because you're an orientalist, you see them as people's, like the blue avatar people who are there to fascinate and please you, rather than a people's whose customs and culture were formed as a result of their less intricate social relationships to production. There is no other reason cultures should be intentionally preserved in the midst of globalization of modernisation, other than to to give you a sense of wonder and fascination. Well fuck you, people and their kids deserve education and a decent standard of living, regardless of whether you think they'll lose their aesthetic value.

[Rafiq]

The paradox is here: do Europeans also have a right to abandon universalism and enlightenment values and go back to their cultural "roots" (as seen by neopagans and fascists?) Such an argument can be applied to the Europeans that struggle so tirelessly to leave the EU and preserve their cultural uniqueness.

Everyone forgets that Europe too, once, was just another stinking pile of shit with its barbarism and lack of history. Europe became what it is NOT as a logical conclusion of those pagan, remote cultures, NOT as a logical conclusion of the culture of the Gauls, Kelts, Saxons, Franks or EVEN the Romans. Europe became what it is on accident, and the legacy of European thought extends far beyond itself as a series of nations. And yes, this universalism we unapologetically demand will be imposed upon the entire world.

[PhoenixAsh]

:thumbup:

Rafiqs passionate "resistance is futile" Borgian doctrine of revolutionary ideology calling capitalist bourgeois globalization "modernization" and thinking this modernization differs from the negative aspects he laments and blasts other cultures for. Never mind the blatant mysogeny, childabuse and forced sexual moralism and heteronormativity...never mind the triumph of commercialized "progress" and its origins in white imperialist supremacy theory (which ironically ridicules other cultures for being backwards)....this is UNIVERSALISM people. Bow for its might.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Geiseric]

This is the same user who prattled of "ancient wisdom" in that other thread.

Does anyone want to deny, still, the connection between eastern spirituality/paganism and reactionary politics?

Anybody who has a sane grasp on reality might deny a connection.

[Geiseric]

:thumbup:

Rafiqs passionate "resistance is futile" Borgian doctrine of revolutionary ideology calling capitalist bourgeois globalization "modernization" and thinking this modernization differs from the negative aspects he laments and blasts other cultures for. Never mind the blatant mysogeny, childabuse and forced sexual moralism and heteronormativity...never mind the triumph of commercialized "progress" and its origins in white imperialist supremacy theory (which ironically ridicules other cultures for being backwards)....this is UNIVERSALISM people. Bow for its might.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

So rafiq thinks colonialism had positive cultural rammifications such as the rape of nearly every living woman in the aztec empire by the spaniards?

I dont think sexual moralism is a thing in bourgeois culture. We live in a rape culture if anything.

[Rafiq]

:thumbup:

Rafiqs passionate "resistance is futile" Borgian doctrine of revolutionary ideology calling capitalist bourgeois globalization "modernization" and thinking this modernization differs from the negative aspects he laments and blasts other cultures for. Never mind the blatant mysogeny, childabuse and forced sexual moralism and heteronormativity...never mind the triumph of commercialized "progress" and its origins in white imperialist supremacy theory (which ironically ridicules other cultures for being backwards)....this is UNIVERSALISM people. Bow for its might.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:


So rafiq thinks colonialism had positive cultural rammifications such as the rape of nearly every living woman in the aztec empire by the spaniards?

I dont think sexual moralism is a thing in bourgeois culture. We live in a rape culture if anything.

Was the forced modernization of the Central Asian republics a form of colonialism? It was not.

Pheonix once again demonstrates his utter lack of understanding by refusing to recognize that all feminist, anti-racist, and anti-colonial movements that emerged from colonies could only have formed as a result of the introduction of western ideas. Concepts like egalitarianism, even freedom, things we take for granted were alien to such societies before. European powers then became the barbarous, and those fighting against colonists became the egalitarian fighters of enlightenment values. This is why Marx had supported British rule in India only up to a point - people forget that Marx in his later years began to support anti-colonial movements in India.

In many societies - including the Aztecs, anti-colonialism would have been a ridiculous thing. Societies where might made right. We do not call globalization in its current form universalism (One could look at the steady alliance between liberal capitalism and the despots of the near east), we call Communism and the rejection of liberal 'multiculturalism' universalism. By Phoenix's logic, we 'Chauvinists' have no right to tell others how to live. Does he really think that 'organic' sexual slavery of the Middle East is better than capitalist patriarchy? Only through capitalism and its contradictions (Communism) was feminism able to actually develop. Our Communism and all the values it entails will reduce to rubble those cultures which stand at odds, our standards must be applied universally OR THEY MEAN NOTHING. To Pheonix, non-white people are incapable of modernization and social progress. It's a bullshit false dichotomy, a postmodern lie. What about all the progressive movements of the third world which DESPISED their own backward cultures, where clerics and conservative landowners had the full backing of the European powers? Were they brainwashed by the white man? Even the British highly respected the Indian caste system and the former ruling class of India and all of their backward values, it was the later anti-colonial movements that introduced western ideas. But without the introduction to western ideas in the first place, it would never have happened.

And therein resides the paradox. Europeans bring western ideas, but in doing so they make inevitable their own doom. Because you can't have one without the other, the bourgeois-liberal demand for freedom will necessarily follow any attempt at colonialism. But the Communists do not seek to colonize countries of the East, rather, a preferable choice is to assist the revolutionary movements of other countries, be it militarily or otherwise to power regardless of their level of popularity.

[Rafiq]

Also, capitalist globalization compared to what? If these societies were not capitalist before, does that mean their pre-capitalist societies are preferable? For what? For you bullshit morals to be satisfied? If we are Communists, then we must recognize Communism as an impossibility without the class by which Communism manifests its interests - the proletariat!

Phoenix likes to hurl his shitty slanderous archetypes of what he thinks I'm trying to argue for because he is incapable of arguing with me. He couldn't just address my post for what it is, instead he has to accuse me of adhering to beliefs that I do not, and then he precedes to attack them. He is only capable of straw-man arguments. Of course we cannot expect much from the likes of him (Oh, and by the way, before someone accuses me of speaking as though I'm a 'schizophrenic talking with his split personality' I speak not to myself, but to everyone in this thread), after all he is quite adamant about his reactionary beliefs as a petty bourgeois ideologue.

Communism is universal, Communists do not tolerate backwardness and that which opposes us solely because "it's their culture" or "it's their way/nature". IT"S NOT THEIR CULTURE, it is the culture that is IMPOSED on them by their according ruling classes, it is the culture which formed not as a result of their conscious will or 'choice' but as a result of their social relationships to production. But no, talk more of how it is their 'consensual choice' to remain backward, just as many slave societies existed 'consensually'. No radical gives a fuck about that, it's meaningless. It is the will of their according hegemonic ideologies which serve only the interests of those in power, those of whom would benefit in the infinite reproduction of their existing conditions. All who speak of 'tolerance' of other cultures are thus speaking of 'tolerance' toward the ruling classes of other cultures, Phoenix the orientalist scum sees them as animals whose nature is 'just the way it is' for whatever fucking reason.

Honestly I absolutely despise such an obnoxious way of arguing. It boils my blood when people try to form a coherent argument with this bullshit sarcastic internet humor and 'smileys' and whatever. Grow the fuck up and actually try to form a coherent argument, honestly there are few people on this site who have ever tried to have a go at me, whose arguments weren't wholly composed of just slander and nonsense.

[PhoenixAsh]

To Pheonix, non-white people are incapable of modernization and social progress.

After making a passionate endorsement of colonialism and imperialism for educating and enlightening the poor savages...Rafiq comes up with this gem in his attempt to white wash his "white mans burden" speech.

You know....while opening with this:


that all feminist, anti-racist, and anti-colonial movements that emerged from colonies could only have formed as a result of the introduction of western ideas. Concepts like egalitarianism, even freedom, things we take for granted were alien to such societies before.

Basically saying these "backwards cultures" (and yes...that IS a Rafiq quote) would never have been able to develop on their own without the white man.

:rolleyes:

Naturally Rafiq ignores what is glaringly obvious:


their own backward cultures, where clerics and conservative landowners had the full backing of the European powers?

So western intervention basically artificially stopped the development of their own movements, ideas and development. But never mind this. Of course I am arguing these backwards cultures where incapable of coming up with western bourgeois brilliance rather than saying that endorsing one over the other...you are still backing enforced culture. Rafiq is simply too blind to understand this position.

In Rafiq's eyes it is good that the white man came along and colonized these backward cultures. All in the name of communism.

Which is basically the lamest excuse for imperialism I have ever heard.

But coming from Rafiq, a user who completely and uncritically backs the bourgeois state and wants it to be even more repressive in enforcing their moraliity....and in the process completely backs petit-bourgeois laws and morality....this shouldn't at all be surprising.

Naturally Rafiq then tries to give some revolutionary dressing to his imperialism and bourgeois culture endorsing politics by saying:


it is the culture which formed not as a result of their conscious will or 'choice' but as a result of their social relationships to production.

One mere post after completely validating, and endorsing, the enforcement of western ideas and the assimilation of other cultures by western bourgeois culture Rafiq THEN proceeds to defend the culture which is basically more of the same. Luckily white people were so enlightened as to bring their education to these backward cultures.



Phoenix likes to hurl his shitty slanderous archetypes of what he thinks I'm trying to argue for because he is incapable of arguing with me.

I know what you are trying to argue. We have been here a thousand times and I am tired of your ad hominem and obscenity filled epistels where you trump bourgeois states, law, culture and morality and try to pass it off as revolutionary. Arguing with you is like playing chess with a pigeon. You simply don't understand, don't want to understand and are incapable of understanding.

[PhoenixAsh]

So rafiq thinks colonialism had positive cultural rammifications such as the rape of nearly every living woman in the aztec empire by the spaniards?

I dont think sexual moralism is a thing in bourgeois culture. We live in a rape culture if anything.

You don't think. Period. As is evident from most of your replies.

And yes. Evident to the two posts Rafiq made after yours....he does think imperialism and colonialism had positve rammifications. In fact he thinks they are entirely ncessary because the backwards cultures as he calls them were unable to develop on their own and needed the western man to educate and enlighten them. The rape, cultural and economic displacement is justified and he uncritically backs the western culture as far more advanced than those of non-whites which was enforced on them by their elites. Naturally...Rafiq conveniently forgets that this western culture is really nothing more than that.

How does it feel jumping to somebodies defence when they completely undermine and invalidate your defence of them?

[radiocaroline]

Is this guy drunk? wtf... Oh well I am. Perhaps I should be on another forum

[MEGAMANTROTSKY]

I came here for evil and all I got was a heaping load of "meh".

[Rafiq]

After making a passionate endorsement of colonialism and imperialism for educating and enlightening the poor savages...Rafiq comes up with this gem in his attempt to white wash his "white mans burden" speech.

You know....while opening with this:

Basically saying these "backwards cultures" (and yes...that IS a Rafiq quote) would never have been able to develop on their own without the white man.


What a damned bore you are Pheonix, what a stupid and incredibly predictable argument. I begin to wonder if you're even human, rather than some kind of spambot.

Colonialism and Imperialism are not the only means of bringing modernization to people's outside the sphere of capitalist development, but this was the means by which it did. It was barbarous, it was vicious and brutal, there can be no doubt about that, but it happened. And while we can talk of the other means by which such space could have been brought (I.E. The soviet state and their treatment of THE CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS, why do you keep ignoring this?) it is over. Lenin himself made it very clear that by the onset of the first world war, all forms of Imperialism had lost any historically progressive role, and that all forms of colonialism and so on could only be opposed by any Communist. I have not said anything that is indicative of saying otherwise. All outside cultures are, by the standards of our existing conditions as well as by the standards of Communism were indeed incredibly backward. INCLUDING Europe before it gained the holy ghost of universalism.

There is not some linear, inevitable predisposition for all societies of all corners of the globe to develop in the same way Europe did, Europe had become the most advanced by accident, Europe distinguished itself as a result of very specific historical circumstances, dating back from the Roman Empire. If we were to go back in time, say two thousand years, it is very unlikely Europe as it exists today would look the same. As such, it is astronomically unlikely that backward societies, from neo-feudal societies to remote tribes would ever create the necessary conditions of Communism, they would never "advance" on their own, Europe did so on accident. It's quite a simple thing to understand really, and there's no going around it. You simply don't understand how social relationships to production are so definitive of ideological circumstances, culture, standards and way of life and so on. The context for your ideas, AND THEY ARE IDEAS, i.e. Feminism, and so on, do not exist within them. And why don't you understand? Because you're not a Marxist, you're an intellectually lazy petty bourgeois ideologue who thinks his own ideological universe is superior to that of any other ideology just for the fuck of it, even though their universe is just as consistent, and coherent.

But please, go on and claim I'm apologizing for colonialism, go on and make these emotional arguments, well fuck it, I don't care. Yes non-western societies were incredibly backward and manifested in them everything that we here in the west are fighting against. You've still ignored the fact that I said these has nothing cosmetically to do with "western culture" or "western people" but the specific evolution of social relations in Europe. As Kautsky said, there is no genetic or inherent predisposition towards advancement or progress for European peoples.

I guess your emotions stop you from truly recognizing the reality of thigns: Tell me, Pheonix, how would the conditions of Communism (AND COMMUNISM is a phenomena exclusive to Europe, and capitalist relations, Communism is not some eternal fucking idea so don't give me that shit about "Communal societies". Communism as an ideology is so much more complicated than that!)? Again, do you think there is some kind of linear path towards Communism or Capitalism?

And here's the real hilarity: Phoenix accuses me of chauvinism and yet he truly believes that European history, that is, European social history is some kind of path that is universally followed by all humans. History inherent only to Europe's, to him, can be applied to the rest of the world. And he speaks of Eurocentricism and 'western bias'?



So western intervention basically artificially stopped the development of their own movements, ideas and development. But never mind this. Of course I am arguing these backwards cultures where incapable of coming up with western bourgeois brilliance rather than saying that endorsing one over the other...you are still backing enforced culture. Rafiq is simply too blind to understand this position.


Colonial rule hindered and violently opposed the development of western ideas in the countries they had colonized, but such movements and such ideas would have never existed without the introduction to and imposition of western culture in the first place. Phoenix thinks every fact, every truth is something to be celebrated. No, this is reality, like it or not. I've said this countless times before, Marxists who had existed decades before I was even born have said this countless times before, the bourgeoisie as a class developed specifically as a result of Europe's social evolution (or revolutions, I should say), such backward cultures are backward BY OUR STANDARDS. Again, Europe did not achieve what it did because they are superior, they achieved what they did on accident, as a result of their very specialized and specific social relations, as a result of a series of events which could have just easily not have happened. You're a complete moron because you don't understand a very basic truth: OUR PRESENT CONDITIONS are not something humans would have wished for thousands of years ago, THEY ARE OUR PRESENT CONDITIONS and we derive Communism and our ideology FROM EXISTING CONDITIONS. Communism IS A PHENOMENA exclusive to THIS social epoch! And all talk of 'previous communist societies' is done so from the lens, bias of our existing premises! God you're fucking stupid, I thought this was a given!

Do you think that the Indian National Congress and it's demand for democracy, liberty and whatever would have ever developed INSIDE India if not for the introduction of ideas like democracy by western powers such as Britain, and the social context for democracy that they had brought? No!

This isn't a matter of brilliance or moral desirability, this is about developing the conditions for Communism as we are Communists. But let me be very clear, as Lenin had pointed out Imperialism and colonialism have no positive implications since (or quite before) the onset of the first world war.


In Rafiq's eyes it is good that the white man came along and colonized these backward cultures. All in the name of communism.

Which is basically the lamest excuse for imperialism I have ever heard.

But coming from Rafiq, a user who completely and uncritically backs the bourgeois state and wants it to be even more repressive in enforcing their moraliity....and in the process completely backs petit-bourgeois laws and morality....this shouldn't at all be surprising.


Do you deny that progressive national-liberation movements, and anti-colonial movements had their ideological origins in exclusively and originally western ideas? Or do you think they pulled them out of your ass? You're just stupid, I'm not trying to insult you, you're literally just a very stupid person. I'm sorry about that too, but don't think you can argue with me here. You don't understand the origin of ideas, you take things that have their origin in Europe for granted and just magically assume that they have context everywhere else in the world. That's nothing short of fucking Eurocentricsim.

But the rotten scoundrel you are, where have I claimed that the "white man" has anything to do with it? Where the fuck have I claimed capitalist powers being composed of white people has anything to do with anything? You're a dishonest piece of shit, is all. At least my arguments are coherent, at least behind the rightfully leveled insults there are real arguments that apply to yours, at least I'm not arguing with a fucking strawman.

Oh and if anyone is unfamiliar, Phoenix claims I uncritically back the bourgeois state because he believes in the right for children as young as 8 years old to consent to being molested and fucked by adults, (maybe he's a pedophile himself). What else? He also, as a result of his 'anarchism' supports the defense of child abusers and women beaters against the state, because the state has no business interfering in the affairs and power of the patriarchal man. So I'll let you all decide as to whether violently opposing his poistions translates into "supporting the bourgeois state".

But truly, the petty bourgeois ideologue you are, the militia-movement esque reactionary you are, I am truly honored to be accused of supporting the bourgeois state. I would give me whole-hearted support to the bourgeois state that crushes the petty bourgeois scum, that I assure you (this is something that rarely happens). But because it is something that either never happens, or happens half-assed, Phoenix's petty bourgeois convictions are signified by the fact that he over-exaggerates the role of the state in the affairs of families and small buisnesses/communities. So be happy, Pheonix, Sheriff Bob reigns supreme in your little small town, the big scary federal government is not going to intervene, and Sheriff Bob will make sure women know there place, and make sure he can express his reactionary perogatives without federal intervention. The same federal state, mind you, which adopts laws against reactionaries as a result of forced pressure by the proletarian movement. Where does it end? Is it state-repression to enforce the minimum wage? To fight against child labor? What gives you the right to claim that the state arresting pedophiles, is bad, but the state making sure the minimum wage is enforced is good? The proletariat and all progressive movements fought with their blood to force the state into doing such things, only to have a little petty bourgeois 'leftist' twat come along and call it oppressive. Go fuck yourself.


One mere post after completely validating, and endorsing, the enforcement of western ideas and the assimilation of other cultures by western bourgeois culture Rafiq THEN proceeds to defend the culture which is basically more of the same. Luckily white people were so enlightened as to bring their education to these backward cultures.


I do support the enforcement of western ideas upon other cultures, just as the Soviets enforced gender equality and the forced education of the people's of the central asian republics, I make no apologies, I wholly support this, yes. You can go cry about your blue avatar people losing their aesthetic value. As I said, Europeans themselves didn't encourage the development of western ideas to the people's of the east, they repressed it. They supported conservative landowners and so on. But none the less they brought these ideas without intending to. You're not a Marxist, I know it's hard to understand these kinds of concepts, such as doing things without intent. And even then, nowhere did I claim this had anything to do with 'race' or some kind of genetic predisposition. So shut the fuck up, and no, I make no apologies, of course white people in the 18th century were on average more educated and more technologically advanced than others, though this has nothing to do with their 'whiteness' but their specific social relations to production which were formed on accident, as any other. Communism, and even Anarchism was derived from European culture solely. Don't show me some bullshit communal society from thousands of years ago, that has fuck all to do with anything and you know it, the anarchist movement was by no means influenced by them. My line has been consistent with Hegel's, and any Marxists. The people's of the East are organized into backward, repressive social relationships and cultures, but that does not mean they have to remain as such, and it is just unlikely, impossible even that they would have attained the conditions for proletarian consciousness or capitalism on their own, and why? Because this phenomena was exclusive to Europe's historical social changes, there is no 'meaning' to it, it was all on accident. And we are Communists as a result of present conditions. It's not hard to understand.

But go ahead, keep whitewashing and glorifying things like bride price and other such backward practices, keep looking at other cultures from your shit stained orientalist glasses. You're a white European, and my parents were born in the Near East. You're going to accuse me of thinking the white man is superior? Clearly, he is not, as my argument is undoubtedly superior to yours as far as this discussion goes.


I know what you are trying to argue. We have been here a thousand times and I am tired of your ad hominem and obscenity filled epistels where you trump bourgeois states, law, culture and morality and try to pass it off as revolutionary. Arguing with you is like playing chess with a pigeon. You simply don't understand, don't want to understand and are incapable of understanding.

The achievements of the liberal state (or will you claim there are none?) are the presupposition of the proletariat's liberation, while for the petite bourgeoisie the liberal state is opposed for all the wrong reasons. I don't think there's an easier way to describe you. You don't get it. You just don't. You're a moron, I'm sorry about that. But why recycle the same arguments? Didn't you learn from the thread that got closed? I addressed ALL of this, and you wouldn't reply (you had more than a while to, the thread didn't get closed until after a few days). You don't dodge my fucking post and then recycle the same shit that I addressed. http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2764586&postcount=7

You can keep arguing Phoenix. You'll never win. Not because I'm better, but because you're wrong. You're an idiot. I predict that you will level the same recycled straw man arguments against me and accuse me of 'endorsing colonialism' and racism or whatever, and you're free to do so. I'll be here to shove those accusations right back up your ass where you got them.

[PhoenixAsh]

You already lost when you called the cultures of non whites backward by its very nature. :rolleyes:

But then again your passionate defense of the bourgeois state and petit-bourgeois morality already put you behind the curve. So keep digging.

Naturally you try to white-wash this by pretending I am a pedophile for arguing that anybody who believes the bourgeois state and legal system can and will actually protect people against exploitation are totally insane. Especially when they back laws which originate in heteronormativity and patriarchal desire for controlling womens sexuality. I can understand you want to straw man my actual arguments to cover up your defence of the bourgeois & petit-bourgeois morality tale there. And naturally you need to create an argument I never actually made....because you haven't got an actual leg to stand on. But no amount of rethorics will whipe away your statement that we need more bourgeois state to regulate individual behavior as an opposition to my argument that we need laws that actually protect children rather than trump bourgeois legal systems and laws created by the petit-bourgeois that actually don't do shit rather than be able to control and violate.

His entire argument is based in opposition to the main argument I made: Everybody is autonomous and this autonomy (both psychological and physical) needs to be central in legislature. This is the only way people will be adequately protected from their family, other individuals and the state. Rafiq, as a huge fan boy of the bourgeois state and legal system, argues that the state needs to actually interfere more with the lives of people and needs to adopt laws which unilaterally takes the right and legal ability away of people to make their own decisions.

So there we have it. You're a white mans burden apologist of bourgeois state, morality and culture over the working class and non-whites...who would be totally helpless without it and would never ever have developed from their backwards nature.

[Rafiq]

The American south, composed of whites is infinitely more backward than black cultures in the North. I don't see what 'whites' or race has anything to do with the topic.

But fine, if you want to just declare things, sure Phoenix, you won, champ. You claimed things baselessly, and winning equates to saying whatever the fuck you want.

I mean, if you want to believe all of those things, you can. You have the freedom to go on believing all of that, sure. It's just, you know, not true. But go ahead sport, believe what you want. Let's let everyone else here decide http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2764586&postcount=7 (isn't it funny that everything in his post was addressed in this one?)

[PhoenixAsh]

Perhaps you should concern yourself with reading some post colonialism and post colonial feminist theories. I think you could benefit from it insteaf of uncritically trumping western culture and advances as being superior and lying and straw manning your way through your foul mouthed exchanges and attempts at strong arming.

[Rafiq]

Perhaps you should concern yourself with reading some post colonialism and post colonial feminist theories.

Or maybe you yourself can link anything which would defend your apparent claims. No thanks, my line is the Marxist one, the same one that has been shared since Hegel.

[PhoenixAsh]

I don't have to link anything. People can simply read your posts and the quotes I made. And I am not sure Marx would like what you are doing to him.

But as soon as you are trying to trump one culture over another by claiming other cultures were either backwards and /or unable to come up with development on their own and based on elite force in the context of colonialism and imperialism you are trumping the bourgeois. Western culture is not the cure for all and it most deifnitaley isn't free from being enforced by the elite nor from its negatives. Deciding it is superior is in fact subjective moralism of behavior you yourself claim are enforced by the elites. This is a duplicitous standard.

And of course saying that these cultures would not have developed on their own is weird considering that these cultures did not exist in a stasis. They did however exist in conditions where one elite enforced its entire cultural and ethnical dominance over them directly preventing further development. Not only that but in doing so it negatively impacted this development and surplanted it by westernized theories which do not actually consider any other development rather than the western white development relevant.