David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post Reply
Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Seth » Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:56 pm

sandinista wrote:
It's the number I question. Period. It's propaganda.
No, it's not. It's fact. The precise numbers will never be known, of course, because unlike the Germans, Marxists don't keep detailed records, but the research has been done, and I've pointed to one credible source. There are others, but the consensus is that at least 100 million people have been killed by Marxist regimes in the last century.
If you want to put labels on governments (In some kind of vague left/right terminology), there have been many millions of deaths as a result of the "left" "right" and "center".
True enough, but few of the magnitude of Marxism, which explicitly calls for the elimination of counterrevolutionaries and other disruptive influences as a part of the ideology itself. The Marxist purges are not the result of "capitalist greed" or some other indirect cause such as famines or riots as the leftist so-called rebuttals you cited claim, they are an express part of the Marxist ideology, which as a basic function disregards the value of the individual and human life in favor of abstract collectivist principles that not only allow such purges, but DEMAND such purges in order to purify the Proletariat of disruptive influences. Marxism cannot tolerate dissent or counterrevolution, so it calls for such persons to be eliminated.

Capitalism does no such thing. It's merely an economic theory and model that says nothing about politics one way or another, and which, as we can see, is used in modified form even by some Marxist societies. So, it is simply ignorant propaganda to attribute democide to capitalism, since capitalism is not a political ideology.

While bad things may happen in any culture, under any political ideology, Marxism, and its progeny, are the prime purveyors of deliberate, intentional democide as a mechanism of social purification.

And that makes the ideology irredeemably corrupt and evil.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by sandinista » Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:00 pm

Seth wrote:
sandinista wrote:
It's the number I question. Period. It's propaganda.
No, it's not. It's fact. The precise numbers will never be known, of course, because unlike the Germans, Marxists don't keep detailed records, but the research has been done, and I've pointed to one credible source. There are others, but the consensus is that at least 100 million people have been killed by Marxist regimes in the last century.
Your one source is not credible...and there is no consensus. I also provided a source to the 100 million killed by capitalism, there's your consensus.
Seth wrote:
True enough, but few of the magnitude of Marxism, which explicitly calls for the elimination of counterrevolutionaries and other disruptive influences as a part of the ideology itself. The Marxist purges are not the result of "capitalist greed" or some other indirect cause such as famines or riots as the leftist so-called rebuttals you cited claim, they are an express part of the Marxist ideology, which as a basic function disregards the value of the individual and human life in favor of abstract collectivist principles that not only allow such purges, but DEMAND such purges in order to purify the Proletariat of disruptive influences. Marxism cannot tolerate dissent or counterrevolution, so it calls for such persons to be eliminated.

Capitalism does no such thing. It's merely an economic theory and model that says nothing about politics one way or another, and which, as we can see, is used in modified form even by some Marxist societies. So, it is simply ignorant propaganda to attribute democide to capitalism, since capitalism is not a political ideology.

While bad things may happen in any culture, under any political ideology, Marxism, and its progeny, are the prime purveyors of deliberate, intentional democide as a mechanism of social purification.

And that makes the ideology irredeemably corrupt and evil.
:funny: I guess...what can I expect from a pro-life atheist librarian. Your entire premise is laughable. Capitalism has no role in politics? :fp:
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
Santa_Claus
Your Imaginary Friend
Posts: 1985
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:06 pm
About me: Ho! Ho! Ho!
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Santa_Claus » Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:20 pm

I am sure most do gooders mean well, whether they be Lefties :ask: or Nazis :hehe:

But the problem with concentrating on the effects of a problem (Wino under a bridge) rather than the root cause is that the problems can never be reduced. And the problem is people who are no f#cking use to man nor beast. Society can only afford a certain percentage (and overall is probably a good thing for all that they be helped) - but comes a point where helping is part of the reason why f#ckwits are being generated on an industrial scale. If only there was an export market for benefit scrounging f#ckwits then Britain would be a world leader.

Labour may have pumped millions into helping the homeless. But giving them Council Houses (or rent subsidies) and benefits and counselling only makes them a more expensive problem. They may not all now be sitting under bridges drinking Meths whilst jabbering to the pixies, but giving them cash ain't solved the problem - they still be a waste of space. and at least under a bridge they be cheaper.

The whole of Africa could be "saved" if they could only reach a UK Council - and I know enough folks who would try to put all of them on my Council Tax bill :fp:

What's the answer? 30 years of Orphanages and early adoptions (1 week) to break the cycle of f#ckwit breeding f#ckwit. and cold weather (like we already do with old people).

It's hard, but it's fair :hehe:
I am Leader of all The Atheists in the world - FACT.

Come look inside Santa's Hole :ninja:

You want to hear the truth about Santa Claus???.....you couldn't handle the truth about Santa Claus!!!

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by sandinista » Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:29 pm

Santa_Claus wrote:I am sure most do gooders mean well, whether they be Lefties :ask: or Nazis :hehe:

But the problem with concentrating on the effects of a problem (Wino under a bridge) rather than the root cause is that the problems can never be reduced. And the problem is people who are no f#cking use to man nor beast. Society can only afford a certain percentage (and overall is probably a good thing for all that they be helped) - but comes a point where helping is part of the reason why f#ckwits are being generated on an industrial scale. If only there was an export market for benefit scrounging f#ckwits then Britain would be a world leader.

Labour may have pumped millions into helping the homeless. But giving them Council Houses (or rent subsidies) and benefits and counselling only makes them a more expensive problem. They may not all now be sitting under bridges drinking Meths whilst jabbering to the pixies, but giving them cash ain't solved the problem - they still be a waste of space. and at least under a bridge they be cheaper.

The whole of Africa could be "saved" if they could only reach a UK Council - and I know enough folks who would try to put all of them on my Council Tax bill :fp:

What's the answer? 30 years of Orphanages and early adoptions (1 week) to break the cycle of f#ckwit breeding f#ckwit. and cold weather (like we already do with old people).

It's hard, but it's fair :hehe:
When it comes to welfare the poor don't even measure into the equation. Corporate welfare is where the true handouts lie. The scrounging fuckwits are more likely to wear a suit than to be living under a bridge.
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
Feck
.
.
Posts: 28391
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Feck » Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:30 pm

Santa Claus ^ a post truly worthy of you .
:hoverdog: :hoverdog: :hoverdog: :hoverdog:
Give me the wine , I don't need the bread

User avatar
Santa_Claus
Your Imaginary Friend
Posts: 1985
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:06 pm
About me: Ho! Ho! Ho!
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Santa_Claus » Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:41 pm

sandinista wrote:When it comes to welfare the poor don't even measure into the equation. Corporate welfare is where the true handouts lie. The scrounging fuckwits are more likely to wear a suit than to be living under a bridge.
Yeah, I agree got to cut out sh#t like those tax credits. for scrounging f#ckwits without the wit to get a proper job that pays a living wage......or to create there own business. Surprisingly I too despise Spivs in suits, albeit probably for very different reasons :lol:

Like it or not, everyone is in competition. Indvidually and collectively - as families, firms, towns, cities and as Countries. Always have been - always will be. And no "fair" involved. But good on those who don't want to compete. and tough luck on those who don't understand they need to......but either way, don't affect what others will be doing. Competing. having a team of too many f#ckwits ain't gonna be succesful.
I am Leader of all The Atheists in the world - FACT.

Come look inside Santa's Hole :ninja:

You want to hear the truth about Santa Claus???.....you couldn't handle the truth about Santa Claus!!!

User avatar
Feck
.
.
Posts: 28391
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Feck » Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:31 pm

Yes Santa it's dog eat dog ,kill or be killed .....put the newborns out on the moutain side and leave the old people out in the snow :twisted:
:hoverdog: :hoverdog: :hoverdog: :hoverdog:
Give me the wine , I don't need the bread

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by sandinista » Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:36 pm

Feck wrote:Yes Santa it's dog eat dog ,kill or be killed .....put the newborns out on the moutain side and leave the old people out in the snow :twisted:
hmmm Librarianism. Sounds good.
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
Santa_Claus
Your Imaginary Friend
Posts: 1985
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:06 pm
About me: Ho! Ho! Ho!
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Santa_Claus » Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:42 pm

Feck wrote:Yes Santa it's dog eat dog ,kill or be killed .....put the newborns out on the moutain side and leave the old people out in the snow :twisted:
To be honest, I wasn't looking for converts :yes:

folks either understand this stuff (at some level). or they be poor. and puzzled :ask:
I am Leader of all The Atheists in the world - FACT.

Come look inside Santa's Hole :ninja:

You want to hear the truth about Santa Claus???.....you couldn't handle the truth about Santa Claus!!!

User avatar
.Morticia.
Comrade Morticia
Posts: 1715
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:14 am
About me: Card Carrying Groucho Marxist
Location: Bars and Communist Dens of Iniquity

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by .Morticia. » Mon Mar 14, 2011 10:20 pm

seth has not proved that any of the regimes he so loves to cite as being marxist genocidal regimes actually ever enacted marxist or communist policy.

labels are easy and despots use labels to fool the masses

but you have to check reality against the label
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies. ~ Marx

Do you really think it is weakness that yields to temptation? I tell you that there are terrible temptations which it requires strength, strength and courage to yield to. ~ Oscar Wilde

Love Me I'm A Liberal

The Communist Menace

Running The World

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Seth » Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:01 am

sandinista wrote:
Seth wrote:
sandinista wrote:
It's the number I question. Period. It's propaganda.
No, it's not. It's fact. The precise numbers will never be known, of course, because unlike the Germans, Marxists don't keep detailed records, but the research has been done, and I've pointed to one credible source. There are others, but the consensus is that at least 100 million people have been killed by Marxist regimes in the last century.
Your one source is not credible
Why is it not credible? Where's your peer-review analysis of his research data and conclusions? Or do you maintain it's not credible because to admit that it is would be to destroy your entire ideology and it's justification for existence? I suspect the latter.
I also provided a source to the 100 million killed by capitalism, there's your consensus.
No, you didn't, you just cited some leftist propaganda linking unrelated economic and natural events to capitalism with no evidenciary support or scholarly analysis to support the conclusion or demonstrate that Marxism is any better at dealing with natural disasters and economic difficulties.
Seth wrote:
True enough, but few of the magnitude of Marxism, which explicitly calls for the elimination of counterrevolutionaries and other disruptive influences as a part of the ideology itself. The Marxist purges are not the result of "capitalist greed" or some other indirect cause such as famines or riots as the leftist so-called rebuttals you cited claim, they are an express part of the Marxist ideology, which as a basic function disregards the value of the individual and human life in favor of abstract collectivist principles that not only allow such purges, but DEMAND such purges in order to purify the Proletariat of disruptive influences. Marxism cannot tolerate dissent or counterrevolution, so it calls for such persons to be eliminated.

Capitalism does no such thing. It's merely an economic theory and model that says nothing about politics one way or another, and which, as we can see, is used in modified form even by some Marxist societies. So, it is simply ignorant propaganda to attribute democide to capitalism, since capitalism is not a political ideology.

While bad things may happen in any culture, under any political ideology, Marxism, and its progeny, are the prime purveyors of deliberate, intentional democide as a mechanism of social purification.

And that makes the ideology irredeemably corrupt and evil.
:funny: I guess...what can I expect from a pro-life atheist librarian.


Except that I'm neither "pro-life," an "atheist," nor a "librarian."
Your entire premise is laughable.
Delusional Marxist denial.
Capitalism has no role in politics? :fp:
Didn't say that, now did I? I said that capitalism is an economic model, not a political ideology, which happens to be true.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Seth » Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:09 am

sandinista wrote:
When it comes to welfare the poor don't even measure into the equation. Corporate welfare is where the true handouts lie. The scrounging fuckwits are more likely to wear a suit than to be living under a bridge.
The thing about "corporate welfare" is that it generates profits, which creates jobs, businesses and industry, which employs more people, keeping them off the dole, which is why governments offer tax rebates, low tax rates and other incentives for corporations to open businesses and factories in their communities, which creates long-term sustainable economic progress and benefits to everyone. The economic benefits to the entire community of such "corporate welfare" almost always far exceeds the tax revenue that would be realized by not having the corporation locate in the community.

Contrary to your asinine Marxist ideas, governments don't grant corporations breaks in return for coming to a community because public officials personally benefit, they do it to benefit the entire community and create jobs.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by sandinista » Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:32 am

Seth wrote:
sandinista wrote:
Seth wrote:
sandinista wrote:
It's the number I question. Period. It's propaganda.
No, it's not. It's fact. The precise numbers will never be known, of course, because unlike the Germans, Marxists don't keep detailed records, but the research has been done, and I've pointed to one credible source. There are others, but the consensus is that at least 100 million people have been killed by Marxist regimes in the last century.
Your one source is not credible
Why is it not credible? Where's your peer-review analysis of his research data and conclusions? Or do you maintain it's not credible because to admit that it is would be to destroy your entire ideology and it's justification for existence? I suspect the latter.
I also provided a source to the 100 million killed by capitalism, there's your consensus.
No, you didn't, you just cited some leftist propaganda linking unrelated economic and natural events to capitalism with no evidenciary support or scholarly analysis to support the conclusion or demonstrate that Marxism is any better at dealing with natural disasters and economic difficulties.
Did you read the book?
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by sandinista » Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:26 pm

sandinista wrote:
Seth wrote:
sandinista wrote:
Seth wrote:
sandinista wrote:
It's the number I question. Period. It's propaganda.
No, it's not. It's fact. The precise numbers will never be known, of course, because unlike the Germans, Marxists don't keep detailed records, but the research has been done, and I've pointed to one credible source. There are others, but the consensus is that at least 100 million people have been killed by Marxist regimes in the last century.
Your one source is not credible
Why is it not credible? Where's your peer-review analysis of his research data and conclusions? Or do you maintain it's not credible because to admit that it is would be to destroy your entire ideology and it's justification for existence? I suspect the latter.
I also provided a source to the 100 million killed by capitalism, there's your consensus.
No, you didn't, you just cited some leftist propaganda linking unrelated economic and natural events to capitalism with no evidenciary support or scholarly analysis to support the conclusion or demonstrate that Marxism is any better at dealing with natural disasters and economic difficulties.
Did you read the book?
Didn't think so. Guess you didn't want to destroy your entire ideology.
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: David Cameron's Assault on the Homeless

Post by Seth » Tue Mar 15, 2011 8:34 pm

sandinista wrote:
Didn't think so. Guess you didn't want to destroy your entire ideology.
Don't have access to a copy, but if I can find an english translation, I will. I read the Wikipedia precis and it was pretty clear from that that the comparison is strained at best. But I'll get back to you if I can find a copy.

Not that it's germane. The question is not one of comparative guilt, the question is one of fact: Have Marxist governments killed 100 million people in the last century. The answer is emphatically yes, and the facts are in the record.

Even if "capitalism" had killed the same number of people, it would be irrelevant because two wrongs do not make a right. Presumably you feel that Marxism is superior to Capitalism, which appears to be your assertion, which means that to actually be "better" it would have to provide for better social outcomes than Capitalism. Even if I accept your specious assertions as true, it's evident that Marxism is NOT "better" than Capitalism at providing just and useful social outcomes.

Where Capitalism may (and I emphasize "may" in the "arguendo" sense) not prevent deaths due to disaster or may contribute to economic inequality that results in death, such things occur as a side-effect of Capitalism, not as a necessary function or intentional result. This cannot be said of Marxism, which is inherently radical, revolutionary and violent, BY DESIGN AND INTENTION OF ITS AUTHOR. Marxism does not allow death to happen, Marxism CALLS FOR and RECOMMENDS the deaths of and the killing of counterrevolutionaries and traitors to the cause, as well as the violent expropriation of the goods of the bourgeoisie merchant class and their subjugation and eventual destruction for being reactionaries.

There is a substantial moral difference between an economic system that does not prevent people from suffering the consequences of either nature or their own actions, and a socio-political system that openly advocates and engages in genocide and murder as a desirable and necessary part of purging the society of disruptive and reactionary elements.

That's what makes Marxism an utterly fucking evil and irredeemable socio-political ideology that must be extirpated from the face of the earth.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 28 guests