Face it

[NewKindOfSoldier]

Immigration is the fault of the western world. The rest of the world is poor because we are rich. So ofcourse they want to come to our countries, why the f**k not? AS LONG AS WE KEEP ON DUMPING OUR GOODS IN 3RD WORLD COUNTRIES, THEREBY DESTROYING THEIR ECONOMIES, AND CONTINUING TO SUPPORT CAPITALISM, IMMIGRATION WILL NEVER STOP

black, white etc, hand in hand against oppression!

You guys probably know the bible dont yous, look, "GIVETH AND THOU SHALT RECIEVE", for f**king once FOLLOW THAT PRINCIPLE.

You can also turn that around ofcourse, its like, you cant f**k with people and not expect them to f**k you right back

[Guns R Cool]

Actual we give a lot to the world and all we recieve is immigrants. Nice communist belief, "Because some people are smart, successful, and good with their money, they should give everything to those who are idiots and poor money mangers." Yeah that makes since. Why punish those successful and reward the lazy? In case you didn't notice, Communism kind of failed in the USSR and all of her satellites states in East Europe. Now that entire area of that world is a shit hole. If they had embraced capitalism instead of Communism, they would be prosperous like us.

[Sgt.Miroku_Army]

It's soo sad that you think you know what you are talking about... They are poor because we are rich? WTF You honestly believe that? No. Not even close. The rest of the world depends on us, not because we made them that way. They choose to do things their way, we do it our way. Every other nation has been around for thousands of years. We have been here for less than 300. We are rich because our system works. We give more support, money, and food than anybody else in the world. Hell, if we pulled our troops out of Germany for instance, their economy would go to hell. We "Giveth" more than everyone else and get the most shit in return for it. Do some research...

[short circut]

Actual we give a lot to the world and all we recieve is immigrants. Nice communist belief, "Because some people are smart, successful, and good with their money, they should give everything to those who are idiots and poor money mangers." Yeah that makes since. Why punish those successful and reward the lazy? In case you didn't notice, Communism kind of failed in the USSR and all of her satellites states in East Europe. Now that entire area of that world is a shit hole. If they had embraced capitalism instead of Communism, they would be prosperous like us.I am not so sure that they would be more prosperous. THey may have been thay may not have been. And if they were more prosperous couldnt that inturn make this country less prosperous. Eother way communism sucks

[jackalope_herder]

Immigration is the fault of the western world. The rest of the world is poor because we are rich. So ofcourse they want to come to our countries, why the f**k not? AS LONG AS WE KEEP ON DUMPING OUR GOODS IN 3RD WORLD COUNTRIES, THEREBY DESTROYING THEIR ECONOMIES, AND CONTINUING TO SUPPORT CAPITALISM, IMMIGRATION WILL NEVER STOP

black, white etc, hand in hand against oppression!

You guys probably know the bible dont yous, look, "GIVETH AND THOU SHALT RECIEVE", for f**king once FOLLOW THAT PRINCIPLE.

You can also turn that around ofcourse, its like, you cant f**k with people and not expect them to f**k you right back

Scenario: We stop exporting to third world countries and close the broders.

Famine ensues, hundreds of thousands die, disease runs rampant, and the survivors take over significantly richer. It may equallize somethings, but typical commie has to purge a bunch of people to do it.

[NewKindOfSoldier]

"Actual we give a lot to the world and all we recieve is immigrants"

no you dont

" "Because some people are smart, successful, and good with their money, they should give everything to those who are idiots and poor money mangers."

No, because those "smart, succesful, and good with their money" people actually get their money from those "who are idiots and poor money man[a]gers" because the latter are actually THE ONES WHO WORK and the first are THE ONES WHO SIT ON THEIR ASS ALL DAY TELLING OTHER PEOPLE TO WORK. Those in the sweatshops are those who create the product, and those in company headquarters get the money...now i wouldnt call that fair..those in the sweatshops die and those in the headquarters get a new ride...

"Why punish those successful and reward the lazy?"

Because the succesful are succesful because they are the ones who have been able to exploit others (the working class) the most.

"Communism kind of failed in the USSR and all of her satellites states in East Europe. "

you know absolutely nothing about communism otherwise you wouldnt have made this absurd comment. USSR and all the other STATES were NOT communist.

"If they had embraced capitalism instead of Communism, they would be prosperous like us."

They have in the last 15 yrs, now they are even worse of than under state capitalism/degenerate workersstate

"prosperous like us"

http://www.plu.edu/~poverty/stats/home.html

"It's soo sad that you think you know what you are talking about... They are poor because we are rich?"

Yes, since the only way money can be made is by producing, and since "the rich" either simply do not produce or just a little (just as many as anyone else) and since they get more money than anyone else while not producing more they STEAL the money from those who do work and therefore those who do work get less than they actually made.

that is called EXPLOITATION.

"We give more support, money, and food than anybody else in the world. "

statistics please?
You also spend more on killing innocents than any other nation in the world.

"Every other nation has been around for thousands of years"

europe aint my rope to swing on, cant learn a thing from it

also any other nation...i dont like them either ok. I dont like China or North Korea etc either.

"Hell, if we pulled our troops out of Germany for instance, their economy would go to hell"

you really are a moron arent you. Please by all means get the ==== out of my neigboring country, they dont want you either.

Yankees raus
Yankees raus
wir sind millionen und schreien es raus!


"Do some research..."

i have..alot. Point is that the US treats the world as its servant, and people are fed up. On top of that, the entire western world is guilty, guilty of letting people starve while we grow fatter. People are fed up, look around you, your empire is crumbling.

"Scenario: We stop exporting to third world countries and close the broders."

Dumping goods is something different than exporting.

What should happen is the protection of third world economies by their own governments, problem is, if they do that, they dont get anymore aid.


and about the the amount of aid flowing into africa (which btw only benefits the local elite); its like the Marshall Plan and the USSR's COMECON...in other words, they are bribes

[FightinDaMan]

I guess I'll start by saying to NKoS that yes, the US does give the greatest amount in terms of dollars, but as a percentage of GDP, we are below many other 1st World countries.

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp has some information on US and 1st world foreign aid.

[HOKIEHUNTER]

funny how here and in other places we get bitched at for not giving enough to 3rd world countries, but as soon as one of us makes a comment about the percentage Mr. Moore gives to his scholarship we are told not to belittle him for giving. PEOPLE, IF WE'RE GIVING MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE WHAT DOES IT REALLY MATTER IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE? if we give 4 times the #2 giver, but it's only 1/10th the percent they gave are we really in the wrong? especially since the KEY WORD here is GIVING!!!

and NKOS, please enlighten me on all the innocents we're purposely killing. show me where we go in and shoot old ladies, kick babies, and kill kiddies.

[Avid_Liberal_Hater]

NKoS is a sorry excuse for a joke.

[Wadi66]

I'll respond to NKoS's post later when I have more time. For now, suffice it to say his logic is so utterly lacking in common sense.

[FightinDaMan]

PEOPLE, IF WE'RE GIVING MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE WHAT DOES IT REALLY MATTER IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE? if we give 4 times the #2 giver, but it's only 1/10th the percent they gave are we really in the wrong? especially since the KEY WORD here is GIVING!!!

If you truly wish to compare the generosity among donations, you cannot look at straight numbers. Somebody who gives a high quantity of money which is a small portion of their assets, is not making as much of a sacrifice as somebody who gives a lower quantity of money which is a higher portion of their assets.

I don't think that the argument (by most anyway, NKoS is a bit more extreme than most) is that the US is "in the wrong" so much as the US could be doing more, so that it's donations (as a fraction of GDP) were more on level with the rest of the industrialized world.

[therightman]

id have to say im on the other side of the fence to my money hungry right wing nut jobs on this one.sorry boys!AT LEAST WE WON THE ELECTION AYE BOYS???

because as a Christian the bible tells similar tales to this.what America does here is not in the true sense of the what us christians believe.

[Peace_by_superior _power]

I know i have posted this before but you need to read it again

"This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.

Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When distant cities are hit by earthquakes, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States Dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tristar, or the Douglas 10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American planes?

Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon — not once, but several times - and safely home again.

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the American who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.

I can name you 5,000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.

Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Gordon Sinclair

[NewKindOfSoldier]

"I guess I'll start by saying to NKoS that yes, the US does give the greatest amount in terms of dollars, but as a percentage of GDP, we are below many other 1st World countries.""

thats what i meant. Look if a beggar gives his last dollar to another beggar it is more of a gesture than when i rich dude gives 2 dollars out of the millions he got.

"and NKOS, please enlighten me on all the innocents we're purposely killing. show me where we go in and shoot old ladies, kick babies, and kill kiddies."

Iraqi Embargo (.5 million kids died according to NGO reports)
Cuban Embargo
Iraq War
War on Afghanistan
Venezuela (by supporting paramilitaries)
Mexico (by supporting paramilitaries)
Colombia (by supporting paramilitaries)
Saudi Arabia (by supporting dictatorship)
Kazakhstan it was i believe ((by supporting dictatorship)

and the list goes on and on. (btw: i refrained from giving any examples of these things which did not happen in the last say 5 years)

"I don't think that the argument (by most anyway, NKoS is a bit more extreme than most) is that the US is "in the wrong""

first lets make one thing clear: it isnt just the US. It is any other western country in the world and indeed probably all countries.
Point is, an economic system which allows people on the one hand to become obese and on the other hand to starve to death is simply a wrong system. Since the US is the primary guardian of said system, it should be targeted, as well as any other western nation.

"Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts."

germany, japan and italy were made into debris by the yanks + allies. Besides this, those loans aka the marshall plan (which werent actually loans but thats besides the point) was nothing more than a bribe in order to keep western Europe capitalist in the same way COMECON was used by the USSR to bribe its recently conquered territories.

"build its own airplane"

Fokker in the netherlands did. But they became bankrupt couple of years ago cuz of unfair competition (among others US competition) but i dont see how this is relevant.

"Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon?"

because why would you want to waste your money on that?
anyways money countries have considered that and some tried/are trying.

"I can name you 5,000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble"

and every single time i can tell you why they did it, and every single time they did it out of self interest. This is btw not just the case with the US but probably with almost all nations, nations under the types of rule we see today only intervene anywhere else when it concerns THEM. And they never do it to free people, its always to secure self interest/the countries sphere of influence.

"Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble?"

France and the netherlands in your war for independence against the brits. But this ofcourse was also in self interest, both countries were at war with the brits at the time.

[HOKIEHUNTER]

no shit sherlock, nations act out of self-preservation. it's common sense. any time anyone goes to war or supports another country it's out of self-intrest. do you honestly think any of the gov'ts involved in G8 are solely in it for the good of africa? no they want to see africa developed and become another places for trade, naatural resources, and military bases. none of the involved gov'ts really cares.
but on the "giving aid to africa" part, how many of you idealists have been to africa? how many of you have worked and lived there? ask WAA about the situation in Africa. A guy that i work with used to be a supervisor of a mining company in Africa. his company hired 4 different tribes of people to do the mining and ended up having to keep them seperate. originally they kept them all in the same hotel and they were killing each other at night with the fire axes. they ended up having to seperate the living spaces by miles, sectioning off the mining operations, and allowing the tribes no interfaces b/c everytime they mixed people were killed. this is not a continent like N.A or europe. these people are for a large part still barbaric feuding clans. Giving them money is not gonna unite them, make them all hold hands, and sing kumbaya.

did anyone here watch black hawk down? do you all know that that was a ture story? it wasn't hollywood only, it was a REAL FREAKIN STORY!!! what happened in the beginin of the movie? thats right, a truck carrying aid and supplies was dumped for the people of mogadishu to take home. you guys remember what happened next? muhammed aidid shot people trying to take the goods and claimed them all. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHY YOU TRY TO GIVE AID TO AFRICA!!! there are cruel dictators that take over everything. the more money we give them, the more these dictators are gonna steal from the people, and the more money will finance their private armies and private absues. you want to genuinely bring these people into the modern world, you're gonna have to take over the continent, get rid of these dictators, and then somehow create a decent gobernmental system. you people that hate us bein in iraq would have a damn fit if we occupied africa.

anyone seen Hotel Rawanda? once again, TRUE STORY!!! these aren't americans, europeans, asians, people. this continent is backwards as hell and nothing short of a miracle is gonna fix it. 100% of the GDP would do nothing to fix the country. our leaders understand that africa is a blackhole in its current state and don't wanna dump money wastelessly in. you talk about the war being a waste of money, giving to africa is worthless.

now bush's plan was to try and build industry there. while this may not work and may fail miserably, at least it empowers the people and lets them see there is reason to change their ways.

and fianlly, i'm pretty sure there are tribes in africa that don't want to come into the present day situation. ya'll talk about destroying culture, what about the african bushmen that hunt lions, deer, etc., have their own languages, etc. THEY ARE HAPPY LIKE THEY ARE AND I'M PRETTY SURE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE THEIR WAYS.

i'm gladyou people give a damn about something in this world (b/c you sure don't about this country), but the world is not the idealistic love fest you people have in your minds. the world is a harsh place full of people set in their ways. throwing money and love at these people is not gonna make them magically come together. africa is a losing cause. you wanna do somehting about it, go over there and build an orphanage, wells, etc., b/c that will do a whole hell of a lot more than millions of dollars. ask someone who's lived and worked in africa and see what they say, right WAA?

[HOKIEHUNTER]

"and NKOS, please enlighten me on all the innocents we're purposely killing. show me where we go in and shoot old ladies, kick babies, and kill kiddies."

Iraqi Embargo (.5 million kids died according to NGO reports)
Cuban Embargo
Iraq War
War on Afghanistan
Venezuela (by supporting paramilitaries)
Mexico (by supporting paramilitaries)
Colombia (by supporting paramilitaries)
Saudi Arabia (by supporting dictatorship)
Kazakhstan it was i believe ((by supporting dictatorship)

and the list goes on and on. (btw: i refrained from giving any examples of these things which did not happen in the last say 5 years)


see you missed the key word here, chief: PURPOSELY!!! show me one time when we flew a plane into a building directly targeting innocents. show me where dropped a bomb on a groupd of school children as a tactical target. NONE of the examples on your list involed the US maliciously attacking innocents. I'm not saying innocent haven't been killed in war before, but NEVER was our goal to attack them. war has side effects. innocent casualties is one of them. the goal of the embargos was to hurt the dictatorships, but i guess you don't understand the concepts of world policies. you're stuck in your pot-filled, anarchy bullshit, shroomfest world where you think everyone in the world is gonna accept your beliefs because they're neato! the world doesn't operate by your thoughts and morals and to think everyone's gonna come together, hold hands, and be one world race is ridiculous. the very nature of man is selfish and conflict filled. that's the way it is and the way its always gonna be. accept that what we have in america is the most profitable, longest-lasting system to date and therefore by laws of social darwinism is the best in the world.

[NewKindOfSoldier]

"do you honestly think any of the gov'ts involved in G8 are solely in it for the good of africa? no they want to see africa developed and become another places for trade, naatural resources, and military bases. none of the involved gov'ts really cares.
"
"NO SHIT SHERLOCK" duhh i know that thats the entire ====ing point, all those governments arent out to free people or to give them a better life, they just want to exploit them more. and thats why those countries suck and thats why every time a US soldier gets blown to pieces 3/4 of the world thinks "woohoo, 1 down, just some millions to go". (not me btw)

"but on the "giving aid to africa" part, how many of you idealists have been to africa?"

im going after i finish high school

"this is not a continent like N.A or europe. these people are for a large part still barbaric feuding clans"

i would call ww2 a barbaric feud between clans.

"did anyone here watch black hawk down? do you all know that that was a ture story?"

yea did you also see how much of it was propaganda? seriously dude it was all like "we are going to die for our country, aint that cool". and i hate those guys too! its just that you hypocrite yanks dont do anything about it, you make it worse, you just support the guy who is doing the SAME but who then gives you some money as well.

"nothing short of a miracle is gonna fix it"

and that miracle would be rising up against US-backed ruling classes

"100% of the GDP would do nothing to fix the country"

not on its own ofcourse not. If western corporations keep hiring one tribe to kill off the other so that said corporation can have the diamond mines in the area, shits gonna continue.
point is: its the system which ====s it up; capitalism.

"now bush's plan was to try and build industry there. while this may not work and may fail miserably, at least it empowers the people and lets them see there is reason to change their ways."

are you ====ing serious? WHO THE ==== DO YOU THINK WILL OWN THOSE INDUSTRIES???? THE US AND ITS ====IN ALLIES, and thereby they keep africa under their control, and exploited by them.

"b/c you sure don't about this country"

ofcourse i care about the people of the US, i can see how they are being brainwashed day in day out, even more so like people in europe, i can see how they are being exploited by the companies, how some people have to have 2 jobs while being a single parent and then still dont have enough money, that breaks my heart, honest. I am not against the american people, i am against its leaders, the same way i am against my own leaders.

"see you missed the key word here, chief: PURPOSELY!!! "

executing an iraqi which is on the floor of a mosque isnt purposely?
bombing a hospital isnt purposely?
blockading the import of medication isnt on purpose? (do you think saddam suffered under the blockade? ofcourse not!)
bombing an afghani wedding isnt purposely?
bombing kosovarian schools isnt purposely?
supporting paramilitaries who slaughter an entire village isnt purposely?

oh yea that makes sense, i gues My Lai was just an accident too.

"pot-filled"

never touched it

"shroomfest"

ditto

"the very nature of man is selfish and conflict filled"

if one lives in a system based on greed and selfishness, one is inclined to become so.

"longest-lasting system to date "

feudalism lasted a thousand years
roman imperialism (as in rome under an emperor) lasted 400 years
spartan dual monarchy (etc) lasted longer than your system as well.
etc
etc

" laws of social darwinism "

you a nazi now as well?

it figures.

[HOKIEHUNTER]

"the very nature of man is selfish and conflict filled"

if one lives in a system based on greed and selfishness, one is inclined to become so.


ever seen a baby? ever noticed how selfishly they cling to their mother? ever notice how selfish they are when it comes to having their needs fulfilled? ever seen little kids (3 and under) fight over toys they aren't playing with? the inborn nature of man is selfish and conflict filled. what makes us civilized is the ability to quell most if not all of those selfish, conflict-filled tendencies. until a culture can realize this, they have no hope of joining the modern world. a great portion of africa has not come to this realization, and will not be able to join the modern world anytime soon.


" laws of social darwinism "

you a nazi now as well?

it figures.

ahh, the typical leftist NAZI label, i was waiting for it. no actually social darwinism was a leftist term used to describe welfare and needs. I was throwing it out there b/c libs love the evolution / darwinism label attached to everything.

See NKOS, we have some things in common. You may not see it and you will call me a Nazi for what I've said, but both of us think the Africans, and for the larger matter the poor around the world need a great deal of help. you want to legislate it. you want the governments of the world to completely change their ways and pass "heartfelt policies" that will love the africans into changing their ways. I understand that this isn't gonna happen, and instead of calling on gov'ts to do the work, call on citizens to help out. A donation and a humanitarian trip mean a whole lot more to the people of africa than just getting money. also a forced gift (taxes from the gov't) mean nothing to the giver, and lose their emphasis to the reciever. instead of ranting and raving about needing to overthrow the gov't, i encourage volunteer organizations such as Gleaning for the World, child sponsoring organizations, and other like organizations. I understand that the world and it's people are for a large part selfish and uncaring and call on those of us who give a damn to help out. my way convicts people into helping. by showing them what their small efforts can mean to an entire people group, I can convince people to join my cause, donate money, volunteer where applicable, or join a child sponsoring group. I've never had someone respond negatively to my calls to duty. i've had people turn me down, but never fight against my approach. Your approach is very standoffish, harsh, and turns more people away than creates allies. You and your harsh, many times baseless comments does nothing to help your cause. It only turns people like myself and others on this site off. are there some here that don't give a damn about Africa? yes, but youre not gonna change their minds. those of us who do care though are so turned off by your rhetoric and lashings that we wouldn't join your cause if you paid us to. I'm a compassionate conservative. many if not most of us are. The difference between us and democrats wanting to help the less fortunate is that we actually care and only want people who actually care helping us out. You cannot legislate caring and to try to only polarizes people and turns them off.

By the way, judging from your comments it doesn't sound like you're an American (i don't mean this to be offensive, i'm just asking if you're from america or not). If not where are you from? just trying to get a feeling of where you're coming from.

[RightisRightLeftisWrong]

i would call ww2 a barbaric feud between clans.

So we are supposed to let Japan bomb us and let Germany rule the world. It took the liberal president Roosevelt to finaly take action after the So call "Barbaric" acts of Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

[HOKIEHUNTER]

So we are supposed to let Japan bomb us and let Germany rule the world. It took the liberal president Roosevelt to finaly take action after the So call "Barbaric" acts of Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.
i don't know RRLW, i do believe that the tendencies of hitler were extremely barbaric and on par with the rival clan wars in Africa. I agree there that there was barbarism involved, but the point that NKOS missed here is that the Jews did not provoke this attack, nor did they / were they able to fight back. the japanese wanted our resources, didn't like their dealings with us, and saw hitler as a force of change and also commited a barbaric act. NKOS didn't acknowldge whehter or not he believed the US actions were barbaric (i assume he did), but in actuality we were the voice of reason that stepped in to stop the barbaric attacks of one people group on another, and to stop the imperialism accompanied with the germans. there was nothing barbaric at all about the US intervention. In fact we didn't even want to be in the war. it took the japs to get us involved. so basically in re-cap it took a military intervention and sequential occupation to stop the barbaric acts and reunite germany with the rest of the world. a similar string of events to stop the barbaric acts in africa would be ungodly costly, and opposed by everyone in the world. africa is a different place unlike any other in the world. Africa by and large is centuries behind the rest of the world. you cannot apply modern western logic to a continent still in its dark ages. we had hundreds and hundreds of years to get where we are today, and now we're talking about getting africa caught up in a matter of years or decades. it's sheerly impossible. all the countries in modern world went through a domestic industrial revolution to get where we are today. nothing short of this will bring african into modern society. NKOS while i do agree that US and world companies would most likely own / possibly exploit a developing industry in africa, I believe these people need to get industry started in order to change their situation. it's basically the old "give a man a fish" idiom. We can continue to give them aid and supplies, and they will always rely on us and the world for it. We can teach them to provide for themselves and they can help themselves and quiet possibly the whole world. do you want them to become ultimately self-reliant, or do you want them to be the worlds welfare recipient forever? I would like to know how you would plan on bringing Africa into the forefront...

[NewKindOfSoldier]

"I was throwing it out there b/c libs love the evolution / darwinism label attached to everything."

well i hate liberals too so shut up.

"ever noticed how selfishly they cling to their mother?"

ever seen with how much love and self sacrifice a mother takes care of her children?

"you want to legislate it. "

no i dont i just want the people of those countries to take matters into their own hands!

"you want the governments of the world to completely change their ways and pass "heartfelt policies""

no i want people, as a collective, to take matters in their own hands.

"A donation and a humanitarian trip mean a whole lot more to the people of africa than just getting money"

as you so eloquently put it "no shit sherlock".

" encourage volunteer organizations such as Gleaning for the World"

im all for that.

but we have a saying "het is een druppel op een gloeiende plaat" meaning literally "its a drop on a hot plate" (it evaporates into thin air), well i propose getting the fire out from under the plate (the fire being capitalism) and throwing a truckload of water on it (the water being self determination and collectivism)

"Your approach is very standoffish, harsh, and turns more people away than creates allies"

its not standoffish, its looking at the big picture. Every single good thing we do is immediately nullified (for a large part) by the effects of a system based on greed.
i propose we smash that system.

"those of us who do care though are so turned off by your rhetoric and lashings "

its not rhetoric. and by the way, im trying to show you here a radically different viewpoint, im not a ====in liberal, i am a marxist, and i am here to show you all we are not dead. I trie to refrain from using dogmatic expressions, but sometimes they are neccessary because there is no other why to say it. I trie to open your eyes.

"I've never had someone respond negatively to my calls to duty."

ofcourse not because they are not substantial.

"compassionate conservative"

oxymoron.

"The difference between us and democrats wanting to help the less fortunate is that we actually care and only want people who actually care helping us out"

yea right i can see you guys helping out all around the world and within the US as well...bullshit, and the same goes for democrats

one party is republican
one is democratic
and their feud is dramatic
but except for the name
they are identically the same

-US poem from the 30's.

"You cannot legislate caring and to try to only polarizes people and turns them off."

I agree and thats why im anti-reformist; you cannot have caring people in a world where you have to be as greedy as possible if you want to succeed.

"By the way, judging from your comments it doesn't sound like you're an American (i don't mean this to be offensive, i'm just asking if you're from america or not). If not where are you from? just trying to get a feeling of where you're coming from."

Dutch.
my country sucks too.

"So we are supposed to let Japan bomb us and let Germany rule the world. It took the liberal president Roosevelt to finaly take action after the So call "Barbaric" acts of Japan bombed Pearl Harbor"

NO. did i say that? NO.
the point was calling something a barbaric feud between clans is subjective and can be said, i believe, about most wars to date.

"NKOS didn't acknowldge whehter or not he believed the US actions were barbaric "

yes. however its for the best the US won and not germany. But the methods were the same, both bombed cities mercilessly. Not only Birmingham was reduced to rubble, Dresden as well, it is important to remember that.

"we were the voice of reason that stepped in to stop the barbaric attacks of one people group on another"

this only happened after pearl harbor and the declaration of war BY germany. The US did not step in, it was dragged in. And reason? i think not.

"there was nothing barbaric at all about the US intervention"

the methods were. Especially the A-Bomb...that was completely unnecessary.



The reasons why things are ====ed up in africa:

1: due to european drawn borders all sorts of ethnic groups/tribes which have been at war for hundreds if not thousands of years have been thrown together, which in a system which is based on the control of as much wealth as possible, leads to civil strife.

2: civil strife is flamed by corporations who actually sometimes hire one tribe to murder the other to get acces to certain resources

3: poverty (increases civil strife and instability)

4: corrupt governments

5: enormous gap between rich and poor

6: foreign meddling in the affairs of african states

7: religious maddness

"The world holds two classes of men -- intelligent men without religion, and religious men without intelligence." (Abu'l-Ala-Al-Ma'arri (973-1057; Syrian poet))



"I believe these people need to get industry started in order to change their situation."

true, but not through capitalism.

""give a man a fish" "

Catch a man a fish, and you can sell it to him. Teach a man to fish, and you ruin a wonderful business opportunity. (Karl Marx)


as i probably said before in this post;
the people of africa need to rise up, take power, distribute wealth, and work together.

[HOKIEHUNTER]

ever seen with how much love and self sacrifice a mother takes care of her children?
QUOTE]
exactly my point. the mother has learned not to be selfish through life. learned that her actions will directly affect the life she has created. LEARNED how to be a mother if not directly then through the morality that society has taught her. babies, however, remain selfish until they are taught otherwise. here in america you are barraged with "share your toys" in grammer school. those who don't are punished. caring and sharing is more learned than inherent.

[QUOTE]"compassionate conservative"

oxymoron.

"The difference between us and democrats wanting to help the less fortunate is that we actually care and only want people who actually care helping us out"

yea right i can see you guys helping out all around the world and within the US as well...bullshit, and the same goes for democrats

i personally (as a college student) donated $1000 to a group of students who went to indonesia after the tsunami (i had to work to pay for school or else i would have joined them). i know of over 3000 compassionate conservatives who went there for thier entire spring break / summer break to rebuild schools, churches, and to give out aid. you "think" the term compassionate conservative is an oxymoron b/c all you see are politicians. you don't know us on a personal level. ever heard of picking the lesser of 2 evils?


the point was calling something a barbaric feud between clans is subjective and can be said, i believe, about most wars to date.
marxist revolutions have been violent


"we were the voice of reason that stepped in to stop the barbaric attacks of one people group on another"

this only happened after pearl harbor and the declaration of war BY germany. The US did not step in, it was dragged in. And reason? i think not.
alright, we were dragged in. i guess we didn't save a people group from being anhilated or anything.


"there was nothing barbaric at all about the US intervention"

the methods were. Especially the A-Bomb...that was completely unnecessary.
it was barbaric, but much less so than the tremendous loss of life in the pacific theater. we lost more men in the pacfic than we did in europe i believe. also it's effects are the primary reason one has never been used since.


The reasons why things are ====ed up in africa:

1: due to european drawn borders all sorts of ethnic groups/tribes which have been at war for hundreds if not thousands of years have been thrown together, which in a system which is based on the control of as much wealth as possible, leads to civil strife.

2: civil strife is flamed by corporations who actually sometimes hire one tribe to murder the other to get acces to certain resources

3: poverty (increases civil strife and instability)

4: corrupt governments

5: enormous gap between rich and poor

6: foreign meddling in the affairs of african states

7: religious maddness


as i probably said before in this post;
the people of africa need to rise up, take power, distribute wealth, and work together.
I agree whole-heartedly with your reasons for why africa is messed up. you keep saying the people need to rise up. how? how are they magically gonna unite? how are you gonna convince the South Africans and the Rawandans, etc. to drop all their differences, accept marxist doctrine, rise up over the ruling class (which is war and you already said was corrupt and barbaric), and create a successful nation? give me a plan, a timeline, a leader, a way... it's nice idealistically but it's not practical and is not gonna head that way. in a perfect world, goods would be free, people would care about their neighbor, the boss would be your best bud, the lion would lay down next to the lamb, etc., but this is not a perfect world and will never be. until you turn people into mindless robots, they aren't gonna change their ways. the biggest bastian of communism (China) is turning more and more capitalist everday.


Catch a man a fish, and you can sell it to him. Teach a man to fish, and you ruin a wonderful business opportunity. (Karl Marx)
so now you're talking in parables about holding natural resources hostage to extract profit from an impovershed nation... sounds like capitalist evil to me...

[HOKIEHUNTER]

IHL, i apologize for my last post being so long and if you want me to edit out the qoutes or do it yourself i'll be more than happy. just added them for emphasis...

[Wadi66]

i am a marxist, and i am here to show you all we are not dead. a Marxist huh? Well that pretty much explains why you think the way you do. Apparently their brain washing tactics haven't changed. Grab them while they're young and plyable, fill their heads with hatred and bull*hit, then unleash them into the world to spew their nonsense.

[NewKindOfSoldier]

"exactly my point. the mother has learned not to be selfish through life. learned that her actions will directly affect the life she has created. LEARNED how to be a mother if not directly then through the morality that society has taught her. babies, however, remain selfish until they are taught otherwise. here in america you are barraged with "share your toys" in grammer school. those who don't are punished. caring and sharing is more learned than inherent."


loving is a feeling, not something which can be learnt.

as for the share your toys argument, this does not prove people are inherently selfish, because people develope, physically as well. Its a proven fact babies cant relate to other people becuase their brain is not yet fully developed, once people can relate to others they become less selfish.


"ever heard of picking the lesser of 2 evils?"

yes and it disgusts me. It would've meant i would've supported the dutch counterpart of that moron Kerry.
My solution is, create a third option.

"marxist revolutions have been violent"

violence does not equal barbarism. A revolution does not have to be a prolonged war. Marxist revolutions are based on the overthrowal of a working class and continuing to safeguard against any new ruling class (which is what went wrong in the USSR, CPR etc)

"also it's effects are the primary reason one has never been used since."

the reason why it has never been used is because of "Mutually Assured Destruction" (MAD)

"how are they magically gonna unite?"

like all things it needs time and effort

"accept marxist doctrine"

not completely necessary. Point is any alternative to capitalism leads to collectivism which is inherent to marxism (and also its main point).

"give me a plan, a timeline, a leader, a way"

plan: overthrowal of the ruling classes through either:
-strictly run political vanguard aka party which instigates the revolt (leninism...not really comfortable with that since there are risks of this vanguard becoming the next ruling class...just look at the USSR)
-horizontal organisation (anarchocommunism)
-combination of the two
-creation of autonomic areas from which to build further (zapatismo + anarchocommunism + autonomism)
-combination of all three

timeline:
-Revolution-->
-Socialism* -->
-Communism**

starting date: anytime, anywhere.

leader: none, the people.

way: violent insurrection.

"the boss would be your best bud"

no, YOU would be YOUR boss.

"the biggest bastian of communism "

1: a country cannot be communist, it can be socialist*
2: china never was, never will be socialist, it is state capitalist or degenerate workersstate (the first indicates the need for a new revolution, the second indicates that through reforms communism** can be achieved)


*socialism as explained in original marxist theory, not the modern connotation
**communism as in the end goal, the stateless and classless world.

"fill their heads with hatred and bull*hit"

there is nothing more further from marxism than hatred.
stop believing the governments propaganda, open your eyes, emancipate yourself.

have you ever even read a marxist article?