The Open Bar Chatroom

russ_russ1 wrote:

Anyone who idolizes any dictator isn’t right in the head

Joe Bartolozzi wrote:

russ_russ1 wrote:

Anyone who idolizes any dictator isn’t right in the head

No, salazar OP.

Is that directed at me?

And yeah, I never have said that I idolize Putin, dont assume because Im Russian.

No, Joe does. But anyhow, that’s a whole other matter.

Come on Joe! I expect better from you...

Literally you and the other Russian I know at least dislike him while the westerner does not… strange. But anyway, we should move on. This alone could spark an argument.

Carking the 6th wrote:

Joe Bartolozzi wrote:

russ_russ1 wrote:

Anyone who idolizes any dictator isn’t right in the head

No, salazar OP.

Oh yeah, the guy who idolizes Putin…

Almost like I hear a creature I was not directly speaking to, interesting.

Komrade Khrushchev wrote:

No, just showing the forum that I’m better than the racist Franco wannabe.

Atleast he didn't act like a baby throwing a tantrum like you. You got kicked out of power, sucks for you.

Talvisota wrote:

Yeah to be fair Claudio, I am a little uncomfortable with you idolising a literal dictator....

Well, he was a dictator which meant power was in his hands, but what has he done wrong? Has he commited any war crimes? Genocide? Has he destroyed the country? He pulled a nation out of economic failure and collapse, he modernised the place, kept it out from Spanish annexation, World War 2. He founded NATO, the EFTA.

He gave equal rights to everyone. He wasn't corrupt. He died poor. He was Authoritarian, no one is perfect.

You seem to have a problem with Salazar, but no problem with a person who has their literal account based after Krushchev? Was Krushchev not a dictator?

Claudio NVKP wrote:

Talvisota wrote:

Yeah to be fair Claudio, I am a little uncomfortable with you idolising a literal dictator....

I don't idiolize him? He was my pfp, that doesn't mean he's my idol, and godlike to me?

Well, he was a dictator which meant power was in his hands, but what has he done wrong? Has he commited any war crimes? Genocide? Has he destroyed the country? He pulled a nation out of economic failure and collapse, he modernised the place, kept it out from Spanish annexation, World War 2. He founded NATO, the EFTA.

He gave equal rights to everyone. He wasn't corrupt. He died poor. He was Authoritarian, no one is perfect.

You seem to have a problem with Salazar, but no problem with a person who has their literal account based after Krushchev? Was Krushchev not a dictator?

And I can't believe that you just said authoritarianism makes you just a "not perfect" person. Authoritarianism means a whole lot more. And Portugal remained poor compared to the rest of Europe after his premiership. So get this stupid fucking idea that he was somehow "good" when he WAS authoritarian. That trait should be unredeemable. Maybe you would feel differently if you were a family member of one of his opponents. Maybe you'd feel different about it then. Have some empathy.

He has a better say about Portugal than the people who have never visited Portugal.

Talvisota wrote:

And I can't believe that you just said authoritarianism makes you just a "not perfect" person. Authoritarianism means a whole lot more. And Portugal remained poor compared to the rest of Europe after his premiership. So get this stupid fucking idea that he was somehow "good" when he WAS authoritarian. That trait should be unredeemable. Maybe you would feel differently if you were a family member of one of his opponents. Maybe you'd feel different about it then. Have some empathy.

Claudio NVKP wrote:

Talvisota wrote:

And I can't believe that you just said authoritarianism makes you just a "not perfect" person. Authoritarianism means a whole lot more. And Portugal remained poor compared to the rest of Europe after his premiership. So get this stupid fucking idea that he was somehow "good" when he WAS authoritarian. That trait should be unredeemable. Maybe you would feel differently if you were a family member of one of his opponents. Maybe you'd feel different about it then. Have some empathy.

Opposition parties were allowed to an extent though, it's not that if you're against him, you get myrdered, that is not the case, it was only a single incident. He stabilized the country and improved literacy and economy, what ard uou even talking about? It was due to him that Portugal had social order, and started economic growth snd is not a part of Spain. "Under Salazar, the Portuguese budget went from insolvency to showing a substantial surplus every year from 1928. Portugal's credit worthiness rose in foreign markets and the external floating debt was completely paid".

Talvisota wrote:

Only one incident, so it's okay then. Frankly, anybody who kills a single one of his political opponents is evil, and deserves to be removed from office, let alone base your entire personality on him.

Claudio NVKP wrote:

Talvisota wrote:

Only one incident, so it's okay then. Frankly, anybody who kills a single one of his political opponents is evil, and deserves to be removed from office, let alone base your entire personality on him.

look, nobody is perfect, everyone has flaws in one way or the other.

Talvisota wrote:

"Nobody is perfect" is a phrase used to get past small things people have, like being irritable or annoying. If somebody forgets to set their alarm and turn out to school late, if your teacher is nice, they will say "ah well, nobody's perfect". "Nobody's perfect" is not a phrase that should be used in relation to the murder of political opponents.

Carking the 6th wrote:

Salazar should have been shot in the 50s.