Syria

Absolutely. Because it provokes thought. Thought is a form of progress. They will dislike or even hate you for it, just like many people dislike or hate me, but that is irrelevant. The goal is to provoke thought.

Don't mix apples with camels. This is an entirely different issue.

No, they create the illusion of peace. Much like our Western societies create the illusion of freedom. But one is only as free as their rulers allow them to be. For instance, the Nazis may have lost the war but fascism won. "Arbeit Macht Frei" is a saying that is still very much applicable in regards to the way our Western societies operate.

 

No, it is the same issue, It is Government 'Oppression' As you would call it, The Police Officer is a Governmental Asset

The way I see it, In the Absence of Conflict, it is Peace. So as long as no-one rocks the boat, It is Peace, and if someone Rocks the boat then he should be told to stop and let everyone enjoy the Voyage.

Wait, so If I go upto your Mother and say she is a fat bitch that Deserves to die because of Her skin color (etc...) it is Ok? This is what im understanding from you right now

 

Very interesting and intellectual discussion and thoughts going on here. Keep it up.

I've probably heard about the conflict earlier, but must've forgotten about it later on, because this thread is all I know about the conflict. From what I can tell from this thread, I can sum up how I see it:

A minor ammount of the civilians, mostly religious extremists, are fighting the Syrian military because they strongly dislike the 'dictators' ruling. The rebels are the ones who started the violence in the conflict, and the military are doing what they can to stop them without injuring innocent civilians. The media is twisting it all, especially towards America, making them believe that the dictator guy is worse than he truly is. Probably the worst and wrongest summary ever

 

Ah, the good old uneducated “Out of sight, out of mind”-argument. And, again, I refer you back to what I said about ideas remaining unchallenged. If no one rocks the boat, there is no way to verify if the boat is the appropriate method of transportation.

No, it isn't. A police officer telling you to shut up is the exact opposite of a citizen, like me, taking the time to explain to you the hows and whys. So, let's continue with this:

Again, you misinterpret everything. Such a remark is based on a bigoted and unenlightened primitive way if thinking and you have not a single fact to offer in support of it. Sure, you could say that but the person in question will have learnt nothing from it and the only thing you would accomplish by doing so is to make yourself look like the buffoon that you are (EDIT: To eliminate any misunderstandings: I am speaking hypothetically). Incidentally, I will illustrate what I meant with a short example Jacque Fresco gave on how to provoke thought and enlighten someone “who has it wrong”. Listen very carefully to this (it will take you exactly two minutes; from 26' to 28').

 

I can see how you prefer to have free expression, but by saying what I quoted above, you are saying that there is a sort of line that goes between what is reasonably offensive and unreasonably offensive. That line is stretchable. By saying "How can you be so stupid to say that?", you accomplish just as much teaching as how much teaching you accomplish when saying "Your mother deserves to die because she is a fat nigger bitch". In other words, calling someone "stupid" is just as useless and unnecessary as saying crap about his/her mother.

 

After reading all of this, i actually didn't understand a word, i kind of feel that im dumb when i read all this discussion.

Edit: C-C-C-C-COMBOBREAKER!!!!!!!!

 

That is very true, except I provided him with a reasonable and logical explanation of my train of thoughts, either before or after I said those words.

However, I admit that I wasn't very clear when I used the word buffoon. He would be a buffoon if he would tell my mother she should die because she's fat/black/etc. Which he hasn't, so I was obviously speaking hypothetically.

 

Agreed.

Interesting, Bamul, your point that no leader can care about their people. There were kings and queens in Europe who actually went out to the poor, giving food and helping the sick. Not their servants, themselves. So it can be done. You just need good people in position..

 

So your line of expression is closer to the offensive and free than the 'oppressed' and respectful one. I could go on about how one should always struggle to keep this line as close to the respectful one as one can, but that is a whole other subject that doesn't really matter in this discussion. I guess the closer your line is to 'Free and Offensive', the more people dislike you, and the closer to 'Oppressed and Respectful', the more they like you, but appareantly at the same time, the less they learn from you, according to the one who is on the disliked side of the line, and seems to be too obsessed with this side to try out the other side and see if that actually might be just as easy to teach with.

 

Let me copypaste this one again for ya:

"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist."
~ Salman Rushdie

Again, it doesn't matter what you or I think, what matters is what's true. Fact of the matter is: people don't like to deviate from their already established ideas, false or otherwise. The difference is that, at heart, I'm closer to a scientist than anything else: I eagerly wait for someone to prove me wrong and enlighten me with an ideology or concept that surpasses my own on both moral and intellectual grounds - and, just to clear things up, this has happened multiple times before when I was in my teens, otherwise I would be talking a load of gibberish now. The same will hopefully happen to you, Mr. Wolve or anyone who is reading this discussion. Otherwise, we are all doomed to endure the status quo.

EDIT:

There's no such thing. But I promise I will get back to this when I have recharged my battery. Cerberus isn't the Energizer bunny

 

So the Mohammed with bomb in the turban drawings published in a Danish newspaper are great, since they represent freedom of speech? I disagree with that. With freedom of speech comes responsibility, and that painter did not live up to it.

 

Yes, that is 100% True Darkbringer, Freedom is Speech is good and all, it presents change in the Community, but their is a limit to what you should be able to say as Freedom of Speech quickly turns into Freedom of Action, and Freedom of Action will turn into Violence in the Hands of Extremists

Without the Government 'Safeguards' that People call oppression, we would have people running around abusing people, looking at Libya after the Collapse we saw Muslim Groups Mass Killing Black Africans as they view them as lesser people, this is just an Evolution of Thought, and that Evolution came forward when the Government lost control.

In Physics we find "Every Reaction causes an Opposite Reaction", now, In Humans, Every Reaction causes a Greater Reaction allot of the time, this is where 'Oppression' Comes in.

If the Boat is Sailing, then it is Sailing, their a limit to Everything. think about a Truck, yes, it works, yes you can load a shit ton of stuff in a trailer, but if the load is not tied down and moves about freely, the truck will tip over. The 'Truck' or the 'Boat' is the Nation, and the 'Ties'/'Ropes'/'Chains' are what keep the Nation stable

What you find is Logical to me is Utter Rubbish, I dont understand how a world would act on such idea's as yours, The world is a like a Room full of Volitile Chemicals, if you throw them at each other, nothing may happen, you may get a cure to cancer, or you may just blow the room up. Its like What they say about running a company, their Surviving, Expansion and Failing. From what ive learnt in Life, Surviving is the best, sure your not going foward, but at least your not going backwards.

Wait, Freedom to Offend, Am I right? If I go upto a Devout Muslim and abuse his views in life, am I not offending?

 

I can see good points in that statement, but I also disagree. In my opinion, you won't ever completely convince someone to accept a point of view that opposes their own until they experience what you're saying themselves.

For example: you won't convince a homophobic person to treat homosexuals fairly until they meet a homosexual themselves and realize that homosexuals are just like us but interested in their own gender; you won't convince a white racist to treat black people fairly until he or she has the chance to peacefully talk with a black person, discuss their points of view together, even shout hate at each other until the racist eventually learns to respect the black person and realizes that he/she him/herself is not so different from someone of different skin colour; you won't convince a happy employed person that he is simply a tool in the capitalist system until he or she experiences the oppression of workers him/herself.

Of course, this is complete bull when it comes to a person who hasn't formulated an opinion regarding any of these subjects, but I think we're talking about people who have views vastly different to your own so I stand by my point.

Many Nazi officers were very nice family men; they killed Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, Homosexuals and anyone else who they didn't like or who opposed them, but they came back home on Christmas to enjoy a nice afternoon with their families. Never beat their wives (even though they left bodies of raped women on the front) and treated their children well (whilst causing the deaths/starvation of, or sometimes even directly executing, many others). People act very differently depending on the situation they're in.

Anyway, that example proves my first point ("people act very differently depending on the situation they're in"), but a completely different point can also be applied to leaders. Firstly: populism/propaganda. The ruling class will try to appeal as much as it can to the proletariat in order to stay in power (with exceptions, such as extremely authoritarian governments). Populists do even more of that. Ever wondered why politicians go to all of these events, present all those speeches and make plenty of promises but they never keep them? It's all just to get voted in. In the case of a king, it is to stay in power. I assure you that no monarch in the history of this planet was a good ruler, because there is no such thing as a "good" ruler.

History is written by the victors, with elements of it manipulated, omitted, glorified, modified, exaggerated or reduced accordingly. Sure, you'll hear many nice stories of a king that went out on the streets and fed the homeless, but you'll never hear about how later that day he went back to his palace, introduced new ways to control the population and sent his troops to slay another uprising of peasants. Things are never as simple as they are in glorified stories of "good" monarchs.

So you believe that all corporations and companies should be free from any & all restrictions? You believe that the Middle East should adopt a free market economy? Because that's what laissez-faire means. Unless you mean that we just shouldn't get involved in the wars of the Middle East, just like the government does not regulate the market in a laissez-faire economic environment? If so, then I agree. However, personally I am completely against a laissez-faire system.

 

"Extremist" is such an empty and pointless word.

Why do you keep completely taking out of context everything that cerberus says relating to that quote? Also, I'm pretty sure he isn't talking of offending for the sake of offending or with a goal to make someone upset. He is talking about offending whilst criticizing and fuelling an intelligent discussion in order to make people rethink their views. Not by screaming some pointless hate at them, but by invading their complex comfort zone with clever arguments that they cannot win. However, the examples you give are the exact opposite: they are offending in order to offend and nothing else.

 

Donno what Laissez Farie was until it was just said, but Free markets are the worst thing man has Invented, all it does is make it expensive for Locals to make Money and makes it easier for Big Company's to make money. So im with Bamul on that.

Your Good leader is a Tyrant, and your Tyrant is a Good Leader is what it boils down to, you cant please everyone, so its best to be decent to everyone in my mind, Apart from the jews, No offense to People that are jews, but I just dont like your kind, Old Habbits die hard

This, is the Key to it all, Vastly Different Opinions cause conflict, if cerberus was here right next to me, I would of Punched him in the face and told him to get a brain as thats not how the world can work

 

Please keep this in the "Communists?" thread, ok? I'm getting a little fed up with the constant communist aggresion I'm feeling from all angles (IRL as well).

 

Wait, But this is what im Saying, an Extremist would be saying things like what I have been 'Saying', Noting at how Muslim Extremists seam to hate Everyone or how White Supreamists also hate all blacks, it is just pure Offending, and Offending leads to Advancement in their eyes, if they Cull Blacks/Gays/Whites/Non-Belivers etc... the world has Advanced. Advancement (as cerberus has talked about being a good thing) is not something that all can relate to, your Advancement may not be mine. To Me, Kicking out Foreigners is Advancement, while to a Foreigner, bringing in more of their 'CuzyBro's from the islands is Advancement. Everything in Relative

 

Its more Economics than my Own Communist Thoughts, all a Free-Market does is force companys that are local, normally smaller ones to go broke because some bigger company in some other place can make things cheaper than you. So not Communist aggression at all

 

What?! Seriously man - WTF. There is NOTHING communist about any of our statements. What communist aggression?

 

I think maybe some people just view 'Communist' as another word for something they dont like xD

if it was Communist Statement, we would be saying how Markets are stupid, and we should all work together to forward our world into more progressive times. Not how Freemarkets are stupid