^

Ba'athism is.....*preferable* I guess to whatever Libya and Iraq are now, but ultimately doesn't hold a candle to Gaddafist Socialism

but... democracy rly shouldn't be put at this high of a pedastal

I don't know enough about Ba'athism tbh

I'm for a Greater Middle East

that's pretty much it

Democracy should be understood as a vehicle facilitating human life, not as something that is good by default. Something that should be by default defended as an institution, but never uncritically so.

btw, can i ask, would you agree that Semitic is only a linguistic term? And "semitic in appearance" is not a correct way of identifying sandnignogs?

Do we have democracy today? Yeah, *I guess* strictly speaking we do. Is it a good democracy? No, it isn't. So while I still defend democracy on a principle, I must still remain critical of the flaws of the existing system of it.

i've had an argument with this pseudo smug cunt for 3 days now because he'd rather argue semantics than anything of value and it's pissing me off how hard headed he is when already 5 people (one a fucking persian) disagrees with him

Democracy is big gay

maintaining democracy just because, is gay

Persians are Indo-European so obviously not Semitic

but when we call Arabic people, semitic, it's based on linguistics

would you agree?

It’s just a cloak for the oligarchs to rule from behind the scenes while making the plebs think they’re free

North Africans are semites, since they speak a semitic language

as are Jews

I do maintain the values of democracy, republicanism and constitutionalism and see them valuable since they are *prerequisites* for a worthwhile society but you can't in actual fact have a society made out of just those three, or just from whatever form of those three. Some forms are superior to others, and further as long as capitalism and bourgeois individualism exists you'll never have meaningful forms of those implemented in society.

@FreshWholeMilk the dark side of democracy is mob rule, i'd say this is mob rule to an extent, but.... idk, this is a functioning democracy, we're just now seeing the ramifications of such a system

also yes i'm taking the plato route

lul

>I do maintain the values of democracy, republicanism and constitutionalism

this is gay

Yes, hence why you always need constitutions to go along with democracy. Otherwise you will have mob rule, and it will not come together to form a coherent system.

mkay

i just don't like democracy tbh

Many people think that, stemming from their thinking that they're jaded about democracy, until they realise they've never really had it to begin with.

When democracy is directly realised in the worker council of a worker-cooperative, it becomes inherently organic activity, vibrant and dynamic aspect of life at the productive scene. At that point it stops to be the kind of bourgeois sham that its commonly known for today.

nah fam, I just think democracy makes people hedonistic, overwhelmingly individualistic, selfish, and only concerned with superficial things and I don't think a misinformed populace that is easily swayed by a talking mouth piece on the TV is a good system to have.

this isn't to say i'm against democracy as a whole

I just don't think democracy is as efffective as other sytems

>When democracy is directly realised in the worker council of a worker-cooperative,

i am for this

such as voting in syndicates, i'm for this

....so you are literally for the truest, most direct form of democracy

😄

dude

wtfrick!?

if you are for workplace democracy, you are very pro-democracy. I can't think of a more direct setting to realise collective will than the workplace

also democratic centralism is literally the cure to the cancers of bourgeois democracy

it makes sense for democracy to be enacted in syndicates and etc, i'm pro-democracy in this regard i guess

brought to you by Soviet Gang

democratic centralism being the notion that, once a decision has been reached in the central committee or whatever organ of Soviet political life, it will be committed to and no further debate on the subject is being had

democracy exists and is valued, but will not be undermined by pointless political theatrics

i know what you're saying, but most people would call it dictatorial

except it *literally isn't* 😄

i know they do that though

hell, *I used to*

back when I was unwoke af

ilike i get it

but

i feel like it's common sense

so?

of course that is not to say that free speech is trampled on, or that there isn't heated debate *when the subject is discussed,* that will still happen, its just that once vote is cast, results are in....*you shut up and calculate* to borrow a phrase from physics

whereas in bourgeois democracies there is constant obstructionism

where basically nothing gets ever done

ohhhhh

a shining example of this is Brexit which is just a complete obstructionist mess

okay yeah

okay yeah i fully agree

i've had a great time talking to you, we'll talk later okay?

sure thing, you can either @ me here or DM me either is fine, and yeah its been good talk man

I'd much rather have corbyn dictate brexit than may

may is gay yeah

she actually survived the vote of no confidence

the eu nationals are deep within the elite

wait what

yes

wait what?!

no

no way

it happened yesterday

no no

that's not how it works 😄

or not how it should work anyway

the votes happened yesterday

then again

*bourgeois democracy gonna do bourgeois things so*

shouldn't be surprised

I watched the entire house speech

but still the blatant hypocrisy of it all continues to surprise me

and u can clearly see that the house is just giving her softball questions

Can you tell - was even Corbyn trying?

yes

he did try to get her out

his speech was good

seems like the only worthwhile U.K mainstream politician and even he's not without problems

but all may could do is point to Corbyn and say "we do a better job"

like wtf

that's not even an argument

she's just giving an excuse why she's doing badly

cuz muh labor

you're still shit may

Yeah true that, it doesn't actually address anything in the context of the hearing - that is, no confidence in her

its not labor that are facing that vote

it is her

yes

pretty atrocious to be honest, the British people *voted* for Brexit, fair and square, and were then *promised* Brexit, and now the government that failed to *deliver it* had a vote-of-no-confidence enacted against the PM who then *walks away from it unscathed*

this probably ends in Brexit failing, as much as I hate to admit it

and she's not delivering on brexit like she says she is, she's just renegotiating new terms of EU membership and calling it brexit

which is just absurd

the only Brexit imo that would fit the actual mandate would be just a complete break from EU

in all aspects

no ties

from the membership era

also I heard that Farage had done some pretty cucked antics about the whole EU thing

which was funny for me to see

Farage was alright when he pushed brexit but cucked out mid way and expected a no brexiteer to give you brexit

I mean seriously

he's making his own party

that is too late

he had momentum and now he lost it

honestly, they need something akin to yellow vests

not that tommy robinson protest u saw a few days ago

but people won't rebel right now, but they will once they feel that nothing changed and that they are losing their businesses

point is that all this political theater is for nothing, ultimately people will revolt

you know

for the British to have their own yellow vests,

they must first hit Macron levels of cancer

it is getting there though

with May and the betrayal of Brexit

but it might need that final nudge

the betrayal means nothing really, once u tax the people because u have no where to pay for the EU, you will get that nudge

but yeah

u'll get that kind of cancer real soon

That kind of anger needs to be channeled better though. It can't just be this sort of street violence, because that doesn't lead to anything in long term. There needs to be more effort to channelling it into something that might lead to actual conquest of power. Outside street violence, outside parliamentary politics. I'm not sure what that might look like, but perhaps something like a worker-cooperative syndicalist bloc or something along those lines which might be able to build up enough economic power to challenge the financial elites. A stretch, but it might be one of the better long term strategies.

nah it doesn't lead to no where, the tourism shekels dropped so much, overall economy is simply stifled by these protests. Its a huge pressure on the institutions. It's chaos and it's working. Channel it and you will get muh peaceful , non violence

non-violent protests solve nothing

well actually with regard to France, the top tourist destination of the world, that actually applies yes

u get ur typical political platitudes but nothing gets done

I'd imagine this is devastating for the industry and image

actually nvm it works well for that country

Britain might also be applicable for this strategy as well

relying on tourism as it does

in Finland it would never work because nobody ever comes here lmao

I bet certain class of people really wanted to celebrate New Year in Paris

ahaha yeah

anyway we'll see what happens there. interesting times

I hope they end him

in minecraft

I'm cautiously optimistic but on the other hand expect yet another spectacle followed by failure

my poor baby!!! 😦

just brought my cat home from the vet

castrated my habibi ❤

I'm so sad that us gamers are oppressed. We truly are the most oppressed minority to ever exist my fellow gamers. Now lets go blow up the illegitimate state of Israel and beat up women and minorities.

T

The person of the year just arrived. Hello and welcome, Bolsonaro

Good morning

Good morning
And with morning I mean afternoon

Deja vu

Hello

Hello and welcome, Notso

Are monarchists welcome here

Surely, I'm pretty sure we have some already

Awesome!

Some servers want only white male fascists and such

I’d definitely call Wilhelm II a “nationalist”

lol that wouldn't be the case here, we even have a loud minority on lefties

A monarchist?

By loud minority you mean 1 guy

2 or 3

Are you an absolute monarchist or a constitutional monarchist? I assume you mean hereditary monarchy

Hereditary?

Father to son

(I was just correcting the spelling, lol.)

Ah

Ebin

Lmao

What’s he doing, crucifying the allied scum?

<:mthink:520000393837674497>

What is this WW1?

The helmets make it seem that way

WW3

@Notso are you an absolute monarchist

Yes ww1

And no

I believe in inalienable rights of the people

So constitutional monarchist? What are those rights? @Notso

Fair trial by jury, no unwarranted search, freedom of movement, no torture, free exercise of religion in the home (though not necessarily in public)

Freedom of movement? 🤔

Is this a no borders thing

No

It'd be hard to ban a religion so sure that's reasonable

The government cannot without due process keep you to a portion of its country

No unwarranted house arrest or imprisonment

No torture is a tricky one. What if the person is guilty of a crime, like an act of terrorism, he's tried and found guilty, etc.

Firing squad or inert gas chamber works to get rid of him

Id also argue life imprisonment is illegal as torture, execution would be ordered in that case

As well as solitary confinement beyond immediate guarantee of safety to others

I'm not sure how effective torture is at actually getting people to reveal information, but let's assume it is effective. Our terrorist here most likely had some friends who supplied him with his guns/bombs and were working together. We only caught him. We want names.

If he is given a trial in accordance with the law and found guilty of bombing a shopping center, killing 20 people, and we want the names of his accomplices, I think torture should be considered

Torture hasn't been shown to be very effective from my understanding

They'll often end up with false confessions

Right, that's what I was wondering

From exhaustion

Telling you what you want to hear

Because they want it to stop

Regardless of whether it's true

Sure. I haven't done enough research, I mean there are expert interrogation people out there who know the ropes

They'd know how often they get confessions and how often they're true

I think it probably depends on the method

"You tell us or we'll make you watch the Death Note Live Action movie"

Physical torture I don't think is very effective from what I remember reading

But I haven't done extensive research on it

"After that, it's a marathon of Steven Universe"

There was a case of a terrorist making up a story about an entire compund where they were training recruits to get the interrogators to stop the torture

Another tricky part is that logically if I was being tortured, I would think that as soon as they verify that I told then the truth, they'd have no need for me anymore and would kill me

Basically what happens is you get so exhausted you'll say anything to get out

You can't think straight

There are techniques to interrogstion that have been shown to be effective

But straight torture isn't one

I suppose if you lie, they would have to investigate to find out whether you lied or not, so inevitably they'd take a break

Which reinforces that lying works

A common one if you arrest two is to lie and say the other one squealed

Making sure they don't actually have any communication in the meantime of course

If you have 2+ people you can always say whoever talks will be spared

And they'll worry that the others talked

If they think the other talked

They'll think they've nothing to lose

They want to be spared though

If they refuse to talk and their buddy does, their buddy is spared while they get shafted

This depends on circumstance, if they think talking might get them killed fir example

Yeah there's a lot of factors

They might still refuse to talk

Mind reading would make this easier

This Notso guy has a strange morality, I'd like to know where it comes from, what's the justificative for it.

I've heard of polygraphs being used not because they work but because the prisoner might think they do

I agree with most of his ideas. There should be right to a trial if you're actually of a crime, presumption of innocence, it would be very difficult to ban a religion even in private so that's probably foolish, a warrant should be obtained in order to search private property, etc.

Does it not work to a certain extent?

Not if you know how to beat them

Same with drugs, Snake.

Drugs?

"it would be very difficult to ban a religion even in private so that's probably foolish"

Drugs are physical objects. You can make it illegal to produce, sell, or use the objects

What matters is taking it away from the culture and normal sphere

It's hard to ban praying to X diety

Or ban beliefs

The polygraph is not very reliable, so it's not usually used as evidence

But it is used for the psychological effect

It's harder to find proof, just that. If you find a religion that's directly problematic to the state and its people, you should smash it with overwhelming force

Yes

I believe in not outlawing Islam in this hypothetical kaiserreich but outlawing burkas hijabs etc. and possibly mosques

Yes banning mosques is far easier than banning Islam. There are also ways to reduce the amount of Islam indirectly like no more Muslim Immigration. You interview immigrant applications and screen out Muslims. They could lie and slip through, but you'll eliminate 99% of them

Broke: outlaw hijab
Woke: ban public indecency

Yes