Political Memes.

GreatbigHippo wrote:

GreatbigHippo wrote:

Jay Pritchett

Defous wrote:

Tak, 2 i 3 skończyłem.

Sorry for Polish guys

Defous wrote:

Tak, 2 i 3 skończyłem.

Sorry for Polish guys

No, only games.

"Socrates after one drink with 'special pill' "

"Andrzej Duda after the third cake with arsenic"

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Sure all them commies are on the left..

on the Right we have, the likes of Milton Friedman and Bill gates

and no we dont have Donald Trump, he doesnt know much to be honest...

does anybody else think Donald trump, got the idea for the wall from Game of thrones?

Donald Trump is right, you can't pick and choose who is or isn't right/left/centrist. Hitler was right, as was Mussolini. What a pair of geniuses, they did nothing but succeed in WWII! Oh wait, one killed himself and the other was killed by his countrymen. Oops.

You all are wrong...there is no left and right. It's not a two-ended single spectrum ideology. It is a collection of separate ideologies that can mix and match together. Instead of a left and right of a line, it's more like multiple points on an "x" or an asterisk...or a many-pointed thing. Where one falls in the big government/full autonomy scale is separate from where one falls in the morality scale which is also separate from where one falls on the drug legalization scale, etc. etc. ad infinitum.

Ad the very least, there are two main scales that intersect. And different political (and other) views of individuals can create a trend between two centerpoints within those scales.

Diabolical wrote:

You all are wrong...there is no left and right. It's not a two-ended single spectrum ideology. It is a collection of separate ideologies that can mix and match together. Instead of a left and right of a line, it's more like multiple points on an "x" or an asterisk...or a many-pointed thing. Where one falls in the big government/full autonomy scale is separate from where one falls in the morality scale which is also separate from where one falls on the drug legalization scale, etc. etc. ad infinitum.

Ad the very least, there are two main scales that intersect. And different political (and other) views of individuals can create a trend between two centerpoints within those scales.

Diabolical wrote:

Quasi-duck wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Sure all them commies are on the left..

on the Right we have, the likes of Milton Friedman and Bill gates

and no we dont have Donald Trump, he doesnt know much to be honest...

does anybody else think Donald trump, got the idea for the wall from Game of thrones?

Donald Trump is right, you can't pick and choose who is or isn't right/left/centrist. Hitler was right, as was Mussolini. What a pair of geniuses, they did nothing but succeed in WWII! Oh wait, one killed himself and the other was killed by his countrymen. Oops.

You all are wrong...there is no left and right. It's not a two-ended single spectrum ideology. It is a collection of separate ideologies that can mix and match together. Instead of a left and right of a line, it's more like multiple points on an "x" or an asterisk...or a many-pointed thing. Where one falls in the big government/full autonomy scale is separate from where one falls in the morality scale which is also separate from where one falls on the drug legalization scale, etc. etc. ad infinitum.

Ad the very least, there are two main scales that intersect. And different political (and other) views of individuals can create a trend between two centerpoints within those scales.

But the dodecahedron may be the best definer of it. Besides, one can easily say that the Republican party platform is conservative in social issues and economic issues (most important?). And a Democrat is liberal in social issues and economic issues. But a Libertarian might be conservative on economic issues and liberal on social issues. So does that make them left or right?

Many consider that Libertarians are right wing, but I say they are actually left wing. Because, to me, social issues are paramount. And where one falls in social issues determines one's rightness/leftness. To you, the economic issues may be paramount, so to you, a Libertarian might be called right wing.

By this reasoning, it is fair to place Nazis at the left end of the single scale if morale issues are the most important to you. They are to me so I say that Nazism is a leftist ideology. But if you take the multi-scale concept, then you can better place ideologies relative to each other in a more reasonable manner.

So, anarchy and order are opposites so it would make sense to say that imperialism is the opposite end of the spectrum from libertarianism when it comes to overall measurements. Therefore, since Libertarianism is neither the opposite of Liberalism nor of Conservatism (as loosely defined), then Imperialism is not the opposite of Liberalism nor Conservatism. And this is just general political ideals. The specifics (as hinted above) changes everything.

If you go around a circle with multiple spectrums passing through the center, then Liberalism would be partway between Imperialism and Libertarianism even though those two concepts would be far apart on the circle.

This is the best way to describe it -- though an illustration would help. I had made one years ago, but I can't find the file at the moment and my backup archive is in a fire safe...not worth getting into right now.

Diabolical wrote:

But the dodecahedron may be the best definer of it. Besides, one can easily say that the Republican party platform is conservative in social issues and economic issues (most important?). And a Democrat is liberal in social issues and economic issues. But a Libertarian might be conservative on economic issues and liberal on social issues. So does that make them left or right?

Many consider that Libertarians are right wing, but I say they are actually left wing. Because, to me, social issues are paramount. And where one falls in social issues determines one's rightness/leftness. To you, the economic issues may be paramount, so to you, a Libertarian might be called right wing.

By this reasoning, it is fair to place Nazis at the left end of the single scale if morale issues are the most important to you. They are to me so I say that Nazism is a leftist ideology. But if you take the multi-scale concept, then you can better place ideologies relative to each other in a more reasonable manner.

So, anarchy and order are opposites so it would make sense to say that imperialism is the opposite end of the spectrum from libertarianism when it comes to overall measurements. Therefore, since Libertarianism is neither the opposite of Liberalism nor of Conservatism (as loosely defined), then Imperialism is not the opposite of Liberalism nor Conservatism. And this is just general political ideals. The specifics (as hinted above) changes everything.

If you go around a circle with multiple spectrums passing through the center, then Liberalism would be partway between Imperialism and Libertarianism even though those two concepts would be far apart on the circle.

This is the best way to describe it -- though an illustration would help. I had made one years ago, but I can't find the file at the moment and my backup archive is in a fire safe...not worth getting into right now.

Also, Fiscal/Economic policy is more important than Social views, it isnt the governments right to say who and who cant get married, and to oppose Gay Marriage, I considor horrible. Although, I have mixed thoughts about it, and yes I may not like it very much, the truth is ITS NONE OF MY DAMN BUSINESS, It isnt the governments job to flippin say who can and cant get married, and it is very un conservative in my view to oppose it.

Libertarians are extreme right wing, usually when you want to government to do 3 things, run courts, enforce law, and maintain a national defense, that sounds extreme right wing, to everybody else on the planet, and that isnt like marxist or communist thought, what so ever..

The main reason that economic policy is more important, is that people are happier. If I have more money, it means I can spent less time working, more time playing tennis. More time minding my family, more time listening to the arts, more time watching spectacular films. Social policy, is of no importance, it isnt the governments job to say who can have an abortion, or who can get married, or who can drink.

Hear is a video, if you want to learn about Libertarianism

Diabolical wrote:

But the dodecahedron may be the best definer of it. Besides, one can easily say that the Republican party platform is conservative in social issues and economic issues (most important?). And a Democrat is liberal in social issues and economic issues. But a Libertarian might be conservative on economic issues and liberal on social issues. So does that make them left or right?

Many consider that Libertarians are right wing, but I say they are actually left wing. Because, to me, social issues are paramount. And where one falls in social issues determines one's rightness/leftness. To you, the economic issues may be paramount, so to you, a Libertarian might be called right wing.

By this reasoning, it is fair to place Nazis at the left end of the single scale if morale issues are the most important to you. They are to me so I say that Nazism is a leftist ideology. But if you take the multi-scale concept, then you can better place ideologies relative to each other in a more reasonable manner.

So, anarchy and order are opposites so it would make sense to say that imperialism is the opposite end of the spectrum from libertarianism when it comes to overall measurements. Therefore, since Libertarianism is neither the opposite of Liberalism nor of Conservatism (as loosely defined), then Imperialism is not the opposite of Liberalism nor Conservatism. And this is just general political ideals. The specifics (as hinted above) changes everything.

If you go around a circle with multiple spectrums passing through the center, then Liberalism would be partway between Imperialism and Libertarianism even though those two concepts would be far apart on the circle.

This is the best way to describe it -- though an illustration would help. I had made one years ago, but I can't find the file at the moment and my backup archive is in a fire safe...not worth getting into right now.

oceanhawk wrote:

Also, Fiscal/Economic policy is more important than Social views, it isnt the governments right to say who and who cant get married, and to oppose Gay Marriage, I considor horrible. Although, I have mixed thoughts about it, and yes I may not like it very much, the truth is ITS NONE OF MY DAMN BUSINESS, It isnt the governments job to flippin say who can and cant get married, and it is very un conservative in my view to oppose it.

Libertarians are extreme right wing, usually when you want to government to do 3 things, run courts, enforce law, and maintain a national defense, that sounds extreme right wing, to everybody else on the planet, and that isnt like marxist or communist thought, what so ever..

The main reason that economic policy is more important, is that people are happier. If I have more money, it means I can spent less time working, more time playing tennis. More time minding my family, more time listening to the arts, more time watching spectacular films. Social policy, is of no importance, it isnt the governments job to say who can have an abortion, or who can get married, or who can drink.

Here is another big block of text full of religion and politics. You have been warned.

Diabolical wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

Also, Fiscal/Economic policy is more important than Social views, it isnt the governments right to say who and who cant get married, and to oppose Gay Marriage, I considor horrible. Although, I have mixed thoughts about it, and yes I may not like it very much, the truth is ITS NONE OF MY DAMN BUSINESS, It isnt the governments job to flippin say who can and cant get married, and it is very un conservative in my view to oppose it.

Libertarians are extreme right wing, usually when you want to government to do 3 things, run courts, enforce law, and maintain a national defense, that sounds extreme right wing, to everybody else on the planet, and that isnt like marxist or communist thought, what so ever..

The main reason that economic policy is more important, is that people are happier. If I have more money, it means I can spent less time working, more time playing tennis. More time minding my family, more time listening to the arts, more time watching spectacular films. Social policy, is of no importance, it isnt the governments job to say who can have an abortion, or who can get married, or who can drink.

You seem to be favoring Libertarianism. And that is your right. But to me, that is your left (pun intended).

Here is another big block of text full of religion and politics. You have been warned.

Spoiler

I'm sure that you will consider me to be a moral absolutist as I say this, but that's fine with me. For I am a person that does not see grays. There is right and wrong. There is up and down, left and right, inside and out. Yea, there are opposites. These are like switches. A scale that gauges may either have a constant slide or else ticks along the path between two endpoints. But a scale has to have length, therefore a scale is not dimensionless and must have at least three or more points (endpoint, midpoint, endpoint) [technically, there are infinite points along a line segment of any length, but that's beyond the scope of this].

Now, aside from my absolutist mentality, all peoples' opinions, ideologies, positions, etc., are best gauged using multiple scales to determine differing relationships between their individual opinions and whatnot. So, the asterisk shaped scale is the best way to gauge each person's overall exacting position(s).

However, I am a born-again Christian. And I interpret my Lord's Bible to be the completely accurate and inspired Word of God. And it teaches that moral absolutes are paramount. So is forgiveness. So is love. And the Lord is the Lord of all. So, while I love the sinner, I must also hate the sin. I don't see the sin and pretend it is OK. I cannot call a little white lie a little white lie...it is a lie, pure and simple.

I am a sinner. I am also a saint. Because I am a son of Adam, I am born in the flesh into the curse of sin -- being born with a sin-nature -- and thus I am a sinner. But because I have been born-again in the spirit into the family and Kingdom of God, I am a saint because my sin-nature and my history of sins (past, present, and future) have been covered by the blood of Christ. My guilt is washed away and my sins are deliberately forgotten by my Lord and Savior. So, I have a place in Heaven and in the Kingdom of God. I am a son of God by baptism in the spirit and I have publicly demonstrated my place in the family of God by baptism in water.

I am saved. I am a member of the family of God. As a member of God's royal family, I recognize sin for what it really is. It is a deliberate rebellion against the authority of God. Most sinners don't even realize they are in open rebellion against God. But a person who is indwelt by the Spirit of God (a part of what happens when being born-again), their eyes are opened and they can see the workings of the principalities of this world. They can see sin for what it is. They can recognize the works of evil and the works of God.

Thus it is, that I and other real Christians, must see morality first. Faithfulness, morality, compassion, charity, and forgiveness are virtues that a real Christian is both obligated to -- and joyfully desiring of -- being, doing, and using. So, I am faithful to my Lord. I am a faithful Christian first, loving my Lord above all else and above all other concerns.

I am a morale person second, being a faithful Christian, I see morality as right and wrong absolutes but also with forgiveness and love for others with a charitable heart that wants to save others, not hurt them. I am thus a social conservative while I am a fiscal moderate. But I'm a [secular] government conservative and believe that charity must be guided by the Church and not the government.

I'm also a military conservative and believe in a strong defense. But, I am also a believer in the union of Church and state -- not the denominational churches per se, but the unified body of Christ -- thus I favor imperialized theocracy as the best form of government. And I'd happily support and enforce that government if it's theology was truly Christian. But that's never going to happen in the present age, so I instead employ that strategy in the fictional world of CoW.

However, once Christ returns (Zechariah 14:1-4; Matthew 24:27,30,37-39; Luke 21:27; Revelation 1:7, 19:11-14), He will set up a real theocratic government centered in Jerusalem (Daniel 2:44; Zechariah 14:9; Revelation 20:6) while I and the other Christians that return with Him from Heaven (Revelation 19:14, 20:6) will rule over the world as priests and kings (Revelation 1:6, 5:10). So I will be a priest and a king which means also that I will be an authority to enforce the union of government and faith in this world. I will be a part of the imperial theocracy that Jesus establishes.

But don't worry though, if you don't like that idea that I would rule over you in the name of Jesus Christ, because you will likely never see it happen. Because, unless you yourself choose to become saved or else somehow manage to miraculously survive the Great Tribulation -- and unless you refuse to worship the Antichrist or accept his mark on your right hand or forehead -- and unless you then become a tribulation-era believer -- you won't see the imperial theocracy of Jesus' reign on earth. You will most likely be among the billions of people who die during the tribulation.

Fully half of all humanity will die in the tribulation. And many -- if not most -- of the other half will die by the sword of the Lord's mouth (the power of His Word, Revelation 19:15) upon His return to earth. Only those who remain -- who survive God's tribulation judgements upon the earth and who have not worshiped the Antichrist or received his mark upon their right hand or upon their forehead and have chosen to believe in the name of Jesus Christ -- will be left to be ruled by Jesus for a thousand years (Zechariah 14:16; Revelation 20:5). Their descendants also shall be under His rule (Isaiah 65:20).

If one believes all this -- that the Bible is true and that God rules completely -- then everything else must be secondary to the truth. Thus it is that I firmly believe that morality-based social issues are of paramount importance, and economic issues -- like everything else -- are not the basis in which to gauge one's "political" beliefs. Therefore, Nazis are leftists, Communists are leftists, Socialists are leftists, and Democrats are leftists.

Because ALL Nazis, Communists, Socialists, AND Democrats share the same basic core morality ... that of being in rebellion against the absolute rule of my God ... THEREFORE they are all the same in God's eyes and in mine. However, it is my wish -- and my God's wish -- that they are all saved. Thus I don't condemn the person that practices any of those ideologies, but I condemn their choices just as I don't condemn atheists but I do condemn their choices.

Repent and believe on the name and resurrection of Jesus Christ and be saved!

Diabolical wrote:

Here is another big block of text full of religion and politics. You have been warned.