@Obsidian, I strongly suspect Nearing would never have been allowed near the reigns of government; and he wasn't interested in it, anyway. He wanted to live under good rulers, not rule, himself. He asked the question, "How can our governments enable their citizens to live a better life?" and came up with answers that infuriated his political contemporaries. (They still do.) One of the biggest "secrets" of Western-style democracies is that they rule the people they supposedly serve. Nearing reminded governments of this subservient role.
By such standards, which major governments would rate highest, do you think, on a quasi-Nearing index, today? Which would rate worst, and why?
Bush and Europe: moving apart?
I strongly suspect Nearing would never have been allowed near the
reigns of government; and he wasn't interested in it, anyway.
Sorry fable bud, but Nearing did in fact run for congress, as a socialist in 1918 against Fiorella LaGuardia, who was the fusion candidate of the democrats and the republicans because they were scared of Nearing and his backers. He eventually left in in 1922 (I think) partially due to espionage charges laid against him. (For speaking his mind). Later he was a communist for 5 years of some such sum.
However, I can't think of any political figure that is anything like Nearing, albeit my knowledge of european figures is limited, I can't think of a "Productive" nation having a leader like him. definately however, I'd say Dubyah is least like him, or perhaps Le Pen.
The waves came crashing in like blindness.
So I just stood and listened.
So I just stood and listened.
-
fable
- Posts: 30676
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
- Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
- Contact:
Sorry fable bud, but Nearing did in fact run for congress, as a socialist in 1918 against Fiorella LaGuardia, who was the fusion candidate of the democrats and the republicans because they were scared of Nearing and his backers.
Oh, I know he was involved in politics at that time and nearly got into office. When I meant the "reigns of power," I meant it--as in a "position of singular importance," such as a president, or head of a division of the cabinet. Individuality in congress counts for very little.
Oh, I know he was involved in politics at that time and nearly got into office. When I meant the "reigns of power," I meant it--as in a "position of singular importance," such as a president, or head of a division of the cabinet. Individuality in congress counts for very little.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
-
fable
- Posts: 30676
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
- Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
- Contact:
You and me both. There is so much to learn from the folks up here...!Originally posted by Gaxx_Firkraag
@fable, see, I have nothing really to add, because everything is already being said, and, hey, I'm in a little over my head with this topic.(But, I'm learning...)
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Hi,
It is resentment on the part of Europe. The U.S. rebuilt their cities after we saved them. Regretably I have to go to Europe every few months for work. I just got back from France about a month ago, and I HATE that place.
As for the Europeans being more humanitarian, that has to be a joke right. That continent has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.
A better name for the EU would be the People's Republic of Europe.
Thanks
It is resentment on the part of Europe. The U.S. rebuilt their cities after we saved them. Regretably I have to go to Europe every few months for work. I just got back from France about a month ago, and I HATE that place.
As for the Europeans being more humanitarian, that has to be a joke right. That continent has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.
A better name for the EU would be the People's Republic of Europe.
Thanks
@ island007
Don't judge this as a flame, but Game Banshee is an international board.
And the last thing you would want to do is to anger half the members who come from Europe. Whilst I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, you probably won't be winning any favours with a few of the regulars of SYM, with that comment about the peoples republic
Don't judge this as a flame, but Game Banshee is an international board.
And the last thing you would want to do is to anger half the members who come from Europe. Whilst I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, you probably won't be winning any favours with a few of the regulars of SYM, with that comment about the peoples republic
!
-
ThorinOakensfield
- Posts: 2523
- Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2001 11:00 pm
- Location: Heaven
- Contact:
Originally posted by island007
As for the Europeans being more humanitarian, that has to be a joke right. That continent has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.
Isn't that the reason that they are more humanitarian? Isn't thats why they aren't so intersted in going off to war, with the bloodthirsty
Americans, because they don't want anymore wars and such.[url="http://www.svelmoe.dk/blade/index.htm"]Blades of Banshee[/url] Are you up to the challenge?
I AM GOD
I AM GOD
-
fable
- Posts: 30676
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
- Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
- Contact:
Isn't this a bit, well, ingenuous? Surely every large, expanisve empire in history has attempted to enslave neighboring peoples (reaching further afield as transportation methods became more efficient)? As for the coment about the European continent being responsible for "most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia," you may want to think that one over. First, you're generalizing, and I sincerely doubt that the Finns, the Irish, Czechs, the Estonians or the Hungarians (at least, after they settled down) were into enslaving anybody at anytime. Second, your comment is unprovable by numbers. We do know that the Mongol hordes of the Khans caused extraordinary suffering and displacement on an unprecedented scale when they erupted out of Asia; ditto the Mayans, whose solar religion evolved into one that required the constant sacrifice of ever-increasing numbers of hearts pulled from living warrior foes. The largest slaughter and enslavement of Africans was managed by--African rulers, who sold their own people, and are still torturing and killing them to this day. And what of the "People's Republic" of China? Millions were killed when Mao took over, and again when the Gang of Four decided to "re-revolutionize" the country--not to mention the wholesale destruction of the entire nation of Tibet. Is numbers the only factor to take into account when totalling atrocities? Does this mean centuries before the 20th were more humane than the most recent one? I sincerely doubt that.Originally posted by island007
As for the Europeans being more humanitarian, that has to be a joke right. That continent has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.
In the US, it was only lower numbers among the native indigenous peoples, not kindness, which makes the atrocities visited upon the American Indian tribes look lesser in stature than those achieved on other continents. "The Indian Removal Act] will place a dense and civilized population in large tracts of country now occupied by a few savage hunters." as President Andrew Jackson wrote in 1830, and he both enforced a similar policy across the country, and created a blueprint that subsequent administrations were to follow into the next century.
In the end, I think nobody has any business casting any stones.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
@Island. And yet, ironically, the US feels no anger towards Europe, especially those nations who created the major cities and states...
The fact being, the patriotic americans stole that out from under the UK, France and Spain primarily.
Don't feel bad, give America 2000 years and see where that gets em.
And on a personal note, I am not european, but I find the aggressive and accusitory nature of that reply offensive.
Not that I'm being hypocritical or anything
The fact being, the patriotic americans stole that out from under the UK, France and Spain primarily.
That continent has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two
Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and
themselves is countless.
Don't feel bad, give America 2000 years and see where that gets em.
Except that it deals primarily with economics...A better name for the EU would be the People's Republic of Europe.
And on a personal note, I am not european, but I find the aggressive and accusitory nature of that reply offensive.
Not that I'm being hypocritical or anything
The waves came crashing in like blindness.
So I just stood and listened.
So I just stood and listened.
Blood thristy I might be, but I realize in the real world, words sometimes don't get **** done. Sit down and talk with someone who doesn't care if they die and you will most likely be visiting a god.Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield
Isn't that the reason that they are more humanitarian? Isn't thats why they aren't so intersted in going off to war, with the bloodthirsty
"Vile and evil, yes. But, That's Weasel" From BS's book, MD 20/20: Fine Wines of Rocky Flop.
Hi,
Well well,
First, the humanitarian comment was directed to CM who claims the Europeans are more humanitarian than the US.
Second, Fable I really like how you cherry pick history to suit yourself. I noticed not one mention of the worst autrocities ummm... like the Holocaust, Inquesition, Partitioning of Africa, The Opium trade to China and on and on. Third, of course I generalized so did everyone prior to my post. I noticed you made no comment about their generalizations.
The countries in Europe are very small when compared to the US; therefore the need to generalize and compare the EU with the US. Also about those bloodthirsty comments, one would get the idea that every American is blood thirsty.
Ultimatly, it is for neither of us to decide because not one of us on this board has the power to affect any change. We just have to live with their (the people with the real power) choices.
I am glad we got a President who puts America first, he is our President. I mean eight years of Clinton was unbearable.
Anyway Cheers
Well well,
First, the humanitarian comment was directed to CM who claims the Europeans are more humanitarian than the US.
Isn't this a bit, well, ingenuous? Surely every large, expanisve empire in history has attempted to enslave neighboring peoples (reaching further afield as transportation methods became more efficient)? As for the coment about the European continent being responsible for "most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia," you may want to think that one over. First, you're generalizing, and I sincerely doubt that the Finns, the Irish, Czechs, the Estonians or the Hungarians (at least, after they settled down) were into enslaving anybody at anytime. Second, your comment is unprovable by numbers. We do know that the Mongol hordes of the Khans caused extraordinary suffering and displacement on an unprecedented scale when they erupted out of Asia; ditto the Mayans, whose solar religion evolved into one that required the constant sacrifice of ever-increasing numbers of hearts pulled from living warrior foes. The largest slaughter and enslavement of Africans was managed by--African rulers, who sold their own people, and are still torturing and killing them to this day. And what of the "People's Republic" of China? Millions were killed when Mao took over, and again when the Gang of Four decided to "re-revolutionize" the country--not to mention the wholesale destruction of the entire nation of Tibet. Is numbers the only factor to take into account when totalling atrocities? Does this mean centuries before the 20th were more humane than the most recent one? I sincerely doubt that.
Second, Fable I really like how you cherry pick history to suit yourself. I noticed not one mention of the worst autrocities ummm... like the Holocaust, Inquesition, Partitioning of Africa, The Opium trade to China and on and on. Third, of course I generalized so did everyone prior to my post. I noticed you made no comment about their generalizations.
The countries in Europe are very small when compared to the US; therefore the need to generalize and compare the EU with the US. Also about those bloodthirsty comments, one would get the idea that every American is blood thirsty.
Ultimatly, it is for neither of us to decide because not one of us on this board has the power to affect any change. We just have to live with their (the people with the real power) choices.
I am glad we got a President who puts America first, he is our President. I mean eight years of Clinton was unbearable.
Anyway Cheers
Time to wake up and smell the coffee, we the American people have been found guilty and sentenced.Originally posted by island007
Also about those bloodthirsty comments, one would get the idea that every American is blood thirsty.
"Vile and evil, yes. But, That's Weasel" From BS's book, MD 20/20: Fine Wines of Rocky Flop.
-
fable
- Posts: 30676
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
- Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
- Contact:
Second, Fable I really like how you cherry pick history to suit yourself.
You don't see your exclusionist remarks focusing entirely on Europe ("That continent [Europe] has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.") as "cherry-picking history," but my pointing out a variety of instances drawn from the history of three other continents is? Interesting.
I asked you earlier if size of population enslaved/killed was the sole criteria for your statement, or whether other factors were involved. I've yet to hear an answer in reply that can allow us to reasonably consider your methodology, and would appreciate receiving one.
The countries in Europe are very small when compared to the US; therefore the need to generalize and compare the EU with the US.
First off, the EU is the European Union, not Europe, not even half of Europe; nor are the nations within it a true "union" at this point. Second, the argument itself is specious. The geographical size of nations has nothing to do with their histories, policies, cultures, or records in dealing with other peoples. The only reason to deal with Europe in this fashion is to further the guilt trip you appear to have foisted on an entire continent; but until you can show that Finland was responsible for the Castillian enslavement of most of South America--or Stalin, or Hitler, or just about any major atrocity, your argument remains untenable. Individual nations at specific times in history demonstrate weaknesses that demagogues can abuse, but I would no more think of blaming the modern-day UK for England's part in the Crusades than I would blame Dubyah for Jackson's massacring of Indians.
A better name for the EU would be the People's Republic of Europe.
This is a smear against a good portion of GB's membership, rather than a reasoned remark that can be deduced from any series of facts. Moderator's hat on: I suggest you refrain from such comments in the future. They are neither in good taste, nor representative of your better judgement. Read the forum rules if you seek details.
Moderator's hat off.
You don't see your exclusionist remarks focusing entirely on Europe ("That continent [Europe] has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.") as "cherry-picking history," but my pointing out a variety of instances drawn from the history of three other continents is? Interesting.
I asked you earlier if size of population enslaved/killed was the sole criteria for your statement, or whether other factors were involved. I've yet to hear an answer in reply that can allow us to reasonably consider your methodology, and would appreciate receiving one.
The countries in Europe are very small when compared to the US; therefore the need to generalize and compare the EU with the US.
First off, the EU is the European Union, not Europe, not even half of Europe; nor are the nations within it a true "union" at this point. Second, the argument itself is specious. The geographical size of nations has nothing to do with their histories, policies, cultures, or records in dealing with other peoples. The only reason to deal with Europe in this fashion is to further the guilt trip you appear to have foisted on an entire continent; but until you can show that Finland was responsible for the Castillian enslavement of most of South America--or Stalin, or Hitler, or just about any major atrocity, your argument remains untenable. Individual nations at specific times in history demonstrate weaknesses that demagogues can abuse, but I would no more think of blaming the modern-day UK for England's part in the Crusades than I would blame Dubyah for Jackson's massacring of Indians.
A better name for the EU would be the People's Republic of Europe.
This is a smear against a good portion of GB's membership, rather than a reasoned remark that can be deduced from any series of facts. Moderator's hat on: I suggest you refrain from such comments in the future. They are neither in good taste, nor representative of your better judgement. Read the forum rules if you seek details.
Moderator's hat off.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
@island: Er.. most Americans (the non-native ones anyway) find their roots in Europe, so our history is your history, sorry
As for your "holier than thou" attitude, may I remind you America was one of the last countries to outlaw slavery and make discrimination illigal.
Oh, and may I remind you of Vietnam? You pulled that one off yourselves.
No worries
As for your "holier than thou" attitude, may I remind you America was one of the last countries to outlaw slavery and make discrimination illigal.
Oh, and may I remind you of Vietnam? You pulled that one off yourselves.
No worries
I'm not evil I'm morally challenged
Man this thread grew over night.
My comments in regard to europe are orientated to the present set up. The Humanitarian NGO's a great deal of their money from private donations in europe as well as volunter workers. The UK private donations out matched their govts in 1999 for UNHCR - i believe. I have the documentation at home, i will post it from there. Due to the past atrocities i believe the Europeans are far more sensitive to any thing that smacks of violations of human rights or stuff that is very similiar to acts committed in the past. Thus i believe they are far more humanitarian than the US adminstration and maybe the politicians over all.
To add things like the ICC, the geneva conventions on war and civilian rights were all created and backed by European countries. Heck Yugoslavia is credited with the concept and actual paper of the UN convention (I think) on minorities. It was onlz until 1979 when Andrew Young spoke in the UN, that america even thought about Human rights being a major issue. However in Europe these doctrines were established and put into practice very early on.
Not having lived in the US for a long time - i did when i was very young - i can't comment on the society itself. However having lived and moved around Europe i can say that what is common in Switzerland as humanitarian values is very much the same for the all of Western Europe, barring the UK in my opinion. The UK is a mixture of Western europe and the US. Europe has done alot more to further the cause and need to for humanitarian intervention and preparedness than the US or any other region has done.
My comments in regard to europe are orientated to the present set up. The Humanitarian NGO's a great deal of their money from private donations in europe as well as volunter workers. The UK private donations out matched their govts in 1999 for UNHCR - i believe. I have the documentation at home, i will post it from there. Due to the past atrocities i believe the Europeans are far more sensitive to any thing that smacks of violations of human rights or stuff that is very similiar to acts committed in the past. Thus i believe they are far more humanitarian than the US adminstration and maybe the politicians over all.
To add things like the ICC, the geneva conventions on war and civilian rights were all created and backed by European countries. Heck Yugoslavia is credited with the concept and actual paper of the UN convention (I think) on minorities. It was onlz until 1979 when Andrew Young spoke in the UN, that america even thought about Human rights being a major issue. However in Europe these doctrines were established and put into practice very early on.
Not having lived in the US for a long time - i did when i was very young - i can't comment on the society itself. However having lived and moved around Europe i can say that what is common in Switzerland as humanitarian values is very much the same for the all of Western Europe, barring the UK in my opinion. The UK is a mixture of Western europe and the US. Europe has done alot more to further the cause and need to for humanitarian intervention and preparedness than the US or any other region has done.
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? - Khalil Gibran
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
A swift note regarding Europe and it's history: Europe today consists of 42 countries (and counting ), each with their own goverment and laws as well as culture and language. Whereas the colonisation powers in Europe committet horrible atrocities, please also remember that the colonial powers where only a small minority of Europe's nations. Many European have no part at all in this, and neither took any colonies nor supported the colonial nations.
@Island007: Regarding WWII, perhaps you didn't know that most of Europe was in war against Nazi-Germany, so it's rather strange to use this as a marker for Europe in general. For instance, Germany invaded and occupied the Czech republic, Denmark, Norway, France, Belgium, the Netherlands as well as attacking Britain and the former ally Soviet union. In the end, it was the Soviets who captured Berlin, and what was then Soviet Union is now part of both Asia and Europe. A quick overview of WWII can be found here:
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/t ... w2time.htm
It's an American site.
), each with their own goverment and laws as well as culture and language. Whereas the colonisation powers in Europe committet horrible atrocities, please also remember that the colonial powers where only a small minority of Europe's nations. Many European have no part at all in this, and neither took any colonies nor supported the colonial nations. @Island007: Regarding WWII, perhaps you didn't know that most of Europe was in war against Nazi-Germany, so it's rather strange to use this as a marker for Europe in general. For instance, Germany invaded and occupied the Czech republic, Denmark, Norway, France, Belgium, the Netherlands as well as attacking Britain and the former ally Soviet union. In the end, it was the Soviets who captured Berlin, and what was then Soviet Union is now part of both Asia and Europe. A quick overview of WWII can be found here:
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/t ... w2time.htm
It's an American site.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
Hi,
Fable,
My remarks seem exclusionist because of you misquote. If you take my quote in context.
Once again this was in regards to the comment about Europeans being more humanitarian than Americans.
I agree. Do you think they formed the EU to be specious?
The first part is a presupposition, so by definition it is illogical. If you read my first post there is only one country I hate. I just regret going to Europe because I always spend the most time in that country. My favorite European country is the UK they are the most like us and I feel more at home there. Actually there is no need to show a specific country did a specifc act, since I clearly wrote the continent.
It is a statement on their economic system that can be supported with facts. An over simplified explanation, when looking at the "IS" & "LM" curve for aggregate demand and the policies put forth to affect the movement of the curve or movement along the curve. When the policies used are mostly fiscal affect the (IS curve) in an effort to maximize output one would tend to call that system Socialism- ( A People,s Republic). The opposite would be using mostly monetary policies to affect the "LM" curve, what we call Capitalism. I do not see how describing an economic system of a Union of Countries as being a smear against the individuals in those countries.
I am not offended when my Country's economic system is referred to as capitalism. I actually live in a state which is appropriately referred to as The People's Republic of Hawaii. Forbes' just recently wrote an excellent article on that topic.
C Elegans
I never made a refference to WWII, however since you brought it up. That is a clear example of Europeans causing death and pain amongst themselves, which latter spread to encompass most of the world
Whew.
Fable,
You don't see your exclusionist remarks focusing entirely on Europe ("That continent [Europe] has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.") as "cherry-picking history," but my pointing out a variety of instances drawn from the history of three other continents is? Interesting.
My remarks seem exclusionist because of you misquote. If you take my quote in context.
As for the Europeans being more humanitarian, that has to be a joke right. That continent has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.
Once again this was in regards to the comment about Europeans being more humanitarian than Americans.
First off, the EU is the European Union, not Europe, not even half of Europe; nor are the nations within it a true "union" at this point. Second, the argument itself is specious. The geographical size of nations has nothing to do with their histories, policies, cultures, or records in dealing with other peoples.
I agree. Do you think they formed the EU to be specious?
The only reason to deal with Europe in this fashion is to further the guilt trip you appear to have foisted on an entire continent; but until you can show that Finland was responsible for the Castillian enslavement of most of South America--or Stalin, or Hitler, or just about any major atrocity, your argument remains untenable.
The first part is a presupposition, so by definition it is illogical. If you read my first post there is only one country I hate. I just regret going to Europe because I always spend the most time in that country. My favorite European country is the UK they are the most like us and I feel more at home there. Actually there is no need to show a specific country did a specifc act, since I clearly wrote the continent.
This is a smear against a good portion of GB's membership, rather than a reasoned remark that can be deduced from any series of facts.
It is a statement on their economic system that can be supported with facts. An over simplified explanation, when looking at the "IS" & "LM" curve for aggregate demand and the policies put forth to affect the movement of the curve or movement along the curve. When the policies used are mostly fiscal affect the (IS curve) in an effort to maximize output one would tend to call that system Socialism- ( A People,s Republic). The opposite would be using mostly monetary policies to affect the "LM" curve, what we call Capitalism. I do not see how describing an economic system of a Union of Countries as being a smear against the individuals in those countries.
I am not offended when my Country's economic system is referred to as capitalism. I actually live in a state which is appropriately referred to as The People's Republic of Hawaii. Forbes' just recently wrote an excellent article on that topic.
C Elegans
@Island007: Regarding WWII, perhaps you didn't know that most of Europe was in war against Nazi-Germany, so it's rather strange to use this as a marker for Europe in general. For instance, Germany invaded and occupied the Czech republic, Denmark, Norway, France, Belgium, the Netherlands as well as attacking Britain and the former ally Soviet union. In the end, it was the Soviets who captured Berlin, and what was then Soviet Union is now part of both Asia and Europe
I never made a refference to WWII, however since you brought it up. That is a clear example of Europeans causing death and pain amongst themselves, which latter spread to encompass most of the world
Whew.
-
fable
- Posts: 30676
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
- Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
- Contact:
It is a statement on their economic system that can be supported with facts. An over simplified explanation, when looking at the "IS" & "LM" curve for aggregate demand and the policies put forth to affect the movement of the curve or movement along the curve. When the policies used are mostly fiscal affect the (IS curve) in an effort to maximize output one would tend to call that system Socialism- ( A People,s Republic). The opposite would be using mostly monetary policies to affect the "LM" curve, what we call Capitalism. I do not see how describing an economic system of a Union of Countries as being a smear against the individuals in those countries.
I am not offended when my Country's economic system is referred to as capitalism.
Moderator's hat on: That doesn't wash. You didn't write that a particular European nation was a socialist state, and then offer arguable proofs; that would have been acceptable. You wrote: "A better name for the EU would be the People's Republic of Europe," after first lambasting every citizen of a European nation as though their distinctive cultures were only one, and as though living people, including those who frequent this board, were responsible for horrific atrocities committed by specific groups or individuals in previous times. ("As for the Europeans being more humanitarian, that has to be a joke right. That continent has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.") You thus indirectly equate a modern, humanitarian resident of Germany or Sweden with the perpetrators of the Holocaust, which you specifically named in a succeeding post (along with the Inquisition, the Opium trade, etc as examples of "European atrocities"). There is *no* excuse for this on a board that doesn't tolerate flames or bigotry.
If you had wanted to present information concerning economic or political information as evidence that socialism exists in Europe or the EU, that would have been tenable, and could have furnished adequate matter for a separate thread. Instead, you were intentionally insulting in your presentation, off-topic in your remarks, and supplied no evidence to back your claims up. Consider yourself warned. That kind of behavior isn't tolerated on GameBanshee.
If you wish to complain about this, take the matter to the website owner, Buck, via a PM.
Moderator hat off.
I am not offended when my Country's economic system is referred to as capitalism.
Moderator's hat on: That doesn't wash. You didn't write that a particular European nation was a socialist state, and then offer arguable proofs; that would have been acceptable. You wrote: "A better name for the EU would be the People's Republic of Europe," after first lambasting every citizen of a European nation as though their distinctive cultures were only one, and as though living people, including those who frequent this board, were responsible for horrific atrocities committed by specific groups or individuals in previous times. ("As for the Europeans being more humanitarian, that has to be a joke right. That continent has been responsible for most of the death and pain in the last two Millennia. The atrocities they commited against Americans, Africans, Asians, and themselves is countless.") You thus indirectly equate a modern, humanitarian resident of Germany or Sweden with the perpetrators of the Holocaust, which you specifically named in a succeeding post (along with the Inquisition, the Opium trade, etc as examples of "European atrocities"). There is *no* excuse for this on a board that doesn't tolerate flames or bigotry.
If you had wanted to present information concerning economic or political information as evidence that socialism exists in Europe or the EU, that would have been tenable, and could have furnished adequate matter for a separate thread. Instead, you were intentionally insulting in your presentation, off-topic in your remarks, and supplied no evidence to back your claims up. Consider yourself warned. That kind of behavior isn't tolerated on GameBanshee.
If you wish to complain about this, take the matter to the website owner, Buck, via a PM.
Moderator hat off.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.