who is more intolerant?

the choice is yours.

i'm voting for the middle ground.

perhaps, but i thought i'd have a left vs. right smackdown.

AgentWood wrote: perhaps, but i thought i'd have a left vs. right smackdown.

Its too feckin blurred over here anyway. I prefer 'stealth taxing 'its financially better to be on benefits' c___s' vs 'war mongering titled 'fuck the poor' c___s'..

Christ, even those descriptions are highly blurred..

they are both mad. sorry no vote.

Kinda like asking which is more dead, the dead horse over here or the dead cow over there. Both dead and off their rockers.

do we really have socialists in the United States anymore? maybe senior citizens, i dunno... they expect everything to be given to them, lazy old people- get a job at Walmart, c'mon!

what do you mean by intolerant? intolerant of others opinions? neo-conservatives are not even tolerant of the concept of trying to be objective and looking at issues from multiple angles... at least cliched-hippie types will make an effort at the right of having discussion even if they have decided the results beforehand

intolerant of others...? the dirty little secret which people have major denial is that religion is the main fuel and rationalization for racism and hatred, intolerance of "others" . of course most people have a tendency for being self righteous assholes... it's the universal human condition, so it's best to just say fuck to all people because cause they suck.

I don't trust hard core leftists because I don't think, on the whole, they are rational or even particularly honest people. But neo-conservatives are almost all quite nasty, with very hypocritical notions about human decency.

LIAM

Frads :)

Thanks for putting the options in langauge we can understand Mike and Mick!

Snorri xxx

I think you made a faux-pas, Agent Wood...

ME, cos my intolerance would offend a Dalek, and it's never been rooted in one place, aimed at one thing, for more than seconds. I just hate, randomly, fairly, and based on momentary parameters like, who's spokesman looks sneakiest on the news( something you learn in NI ), or precisely what is causing the noise that is preventing me sleeping.

I'm actally incapable of a genuine bigotry, cos I'd forget what it was I was meant to hate.....I require constant annoyance to spew constant bile.

As a great Scots philosopher once said.....

I don't actually hate everything! I only hate 2 things.... Living things, and objects.

(Oh and Misc in case I left anything out)

Snorrimon wrote: Thanks for putting the options in langauge we can understand Mike and Mick!

Snorri xxx

Was rather thinly veiled was'nt it?

it's an honest question. in the words of political scientist richard betts, politics is a circle, not a straight line. therefore, the far left and the far right have more in commom than they'd like to believe (such as authoritarianism and intolerance towards others beliefs). hence, why i asked the question.

AgentWood wrote: it's an honest question. in the words of political scientist richard betts, politics is a circle, not a straight line. therefore, the far left and the far right have more in commom than they'd like to believe (such as authoritarianism and intolerance towards others beliefs). hence, why i asked the question.

I would go further to say, that unfortunately we NEED both sides of extremists (as long as their numbers are tolerable). Don't get me wrong, they should NOT be in power, but on either side of the table they actually create a balance within the system. Each side has their time and place for need, but not head of the table.

EdelBrock wrote:

AgentWood wrote: it's an honest question. in the words of political scientist richard betts, politics is a circle, not a straight line. therefore, the far left and the far right have more in commom than they'd like to believe (such as authoritarianism and intolerance towards others beliefs). hence, why i asked the question.

I would go further to say, that unfortunately we NEED both sides of extremists (as long as their numbers are tolerable). Don't get me wrong, they should NOT be in power, but on either side of the table they actually create a balance within the system. Each side has their time and place for need, but not head of the table.

i doubt you'd find a right time nor place for the nazis!

AgentWood wrote:

EdelBrock wrote:

AgentWood wrote: it's an honest question. in the words of political scientist richard betts, politics is a circle, not a straight line. therefore, the far left and the far right have more in commom than they'd like to believe (such as authoritarianism and intolerance towards others beliefs). hence, why i asked the question.

I would go further to say, that unfortunately we NEED both sides of extremists (as long as their numbers are tolerable). Don't get me wrong, they should NOT be in power, but on either side of the table they actually create a balance within the system. Each side has their time and place for need, but not head of the table.

i doubt you'd find a right time nor place for the nazis!

Germany 1933

AgentWood wrote:

EdelBrock wrote:

AgentWood wrote: it's an honest question. in the words of political scientist richard betts, politics is a circle, not a straight line. therefore, the far left and the far right have more in commom than they'd like to believe (such as authoritarianism and intolerance towards others beliefs). hence, why i asked the question.

I would go further to say, that unfortunately we NEED both sides of extremists (as long as their numbers are tolerable). Don't get me wrong, they should NOT be in power, but on either side of the table they actually create a balance within the system. Each side has their time and place for need, but not head of the table.

i doubt you'd find a right time nor place for the nazis!

Well, in all fairness, Nazis was not on the list.
Although the extreme leftists and rightists in the US hate each other, there isn't about to be a bloody war over it.....whereas the Nazi party would require this. Also, the both sides agree, in theory, on the basics of our government.....whereas the Nazis would want a complete revamping of it; making them incapable of working within our system.

We need OUR extremeists,but only at balancing levels.

Boatraceface wrote:

Snorrimon wrote: Thanks for putting the options in langauge we can understand Mike and Mick!

Snorri xxx

Was rather thinly veiled was'nt it?

It was: the lass don't do subtle. Or humility.

As with most things round here, the answer to the question is Liam.

If it's a choice between giving up the rights of wearing a cross...well let the them wear a fucking veil over their face.Doesn't bother me in the slightest. But when a teacher is trying to command respect and attention from a classrooom full of pupils who are not as politically correct as most adults.....errm."HERE SHE IS .......IT'S THE DARK LORD OF THE SITH!!" Reality check!

DJ MONTY and His Wheels Of Steel wrote: If it's a choice between giving up the rights of wearing a cross...well let the them wear a fucking veil over their face.Doesn't bother me in the slightest. But when a teacher is trying to command respect and attention from a classrooom full of pupils who are not as politically correct as most adults.....errm."HERE SHE IS .......IT'S THE DARK LORD OF THE SITH!!" Reality check!

lol.. wrong thread Monty.

AHH THANK YOU!!

Fucking good points though!

DJ MONTY and His Wheels Of Steel wrote: If it's a choice between giving up the rights of wearing a cross...well let the them wear a fucking veil over their face.Doesn't bother me in the slightest. But when a teacher is trying to command respect and attention from a classrooom full of pupils who are not as politically correct as most adults.....errm."HERE SHE IS .......IT'S THE DARK LORD OF THE SITH!!" Reality check!

Aye, they are all the same thing to me. Crosses( with or without a little dead tin messiah on them), skull caps, veils. All just symbols of a lack of education, and all as good or bad as each other. All should be treated the same, all allowed, or all banned.

Doctor? wrote:

DJ MONTY and His Wheels Of Steel wrote: If it's a choice between giving up the rights of wearing a cross...well let the them wear a fucking veil over their face.Doesn't bother me in the slightest. But when a teacher is trying to command respect and attention from a classrooom full of pupils who are not as politically correct as most adults.....errm."HERE SHE IS .......IT'S THE DARK LORD OF THE SITH!!" Reality check!

Aye, they are all the same thing to me. Crosses( with or without a little dead tin messiah on them), skull caps, veils. All just symbols of a lack of education, and all as good or bad as each other. All should be treated the same, all allowed, or all banned.

Hey, just because someone is religious, doesn't make them a fanatic....or show a lack of education.

I don't think that was your message, but just making sure.

Doctor? wrote:

DJ MONTY and His Wheels Of Steel wrote: If it's a choice between giving up the rights of wearing a cross...well let the them wear a fucking veil over their face.Doesn't bother me in the slightest. But when a teacher is trying to command respect and attention from a classrooom full of pupils who are not as politically correct as most adults.....errm."HERE SHE IS .......IT'S THE DARK LORD OF THE SITH!!" Reality check!

Aye, they are all the same thing to me. Crosses( with or without a little dead tin messiah on them), skull caps, veils. All just symbols of a lack of education, and all as good or bad as each other. All should be treated the same, all allowed, or all banned.

oi! don't diss the skullcap (kippah, yarmukle), matey! ;)

OK not a lack of education....a lack of....hmm, hard to define.

It amuses me that Christians (for instance) believe the Earth is 6000 years old, yet burn oil in their cars that can be proven to be hundreds of thousandds of times older than that. Or that there are Christian and Muslim WEBSITES...all using a device that was the product of an "evil" homosexual. It pisses me off that these folks take all the benefits of modern scientific life and love them while doing their utmost to decry all science at every turn[1]. In terms of damage done, Islam is a new player, it was always Christianity that fucked the human race over (it wasn't Muslims who torched all the great libraries, and set us back 500-1000 years).

Let me be clear, if that is possible for me.

I have no problem with folks who have a faith, or a belief in something greater than themselves.FFS, even I have my ideas in that direction But what boils my blood is those who let the letter and detail of a religion, come between them and the actual core values of that religion. They're fuckin everywhere. "kill a queer for jesus" says it all. It's why I have special extra bitter bile on tap for Christians, I was raised as one, by some fairly good people (and a few not)....I know what JC talked about, I know what he was trying to say (son of God or not), yet everywhere I look, I see his followers behaving contrary to his every word, judging, hating, killing, hording wealth. And ALWAYS with some twisted justification (they aren't real people....or....it's a just cause..or....they are agaisnt god..or such tripe) For all my rantings, I always approach persons of faith with respect on a personal level, on the off chance that they are genuine, usually only to end up dissappointed. If they happen to BE genuine, I will never be rude to them about their silly notions. If they aren't ....like for example...30secs into a conversation they say "well actually I'm a Christian so,,,," or worse "have you found God yet friend?"...well, then it's fucking game on!

A fave question of mine, nicked from Richard Dawkings, that always gets them hopping (takes a bit of "Paxmanship")....ask yourself it..

What makes you so sure that your religion is the True Faith, did you try lots of others first and see which had the nicest stained glass windows or domes, which had the prettiest hyms, and maybe even which one most closely matched how you inwardly FEEL about reality? Or did you just pick up the first religion your parents left lying around?

Spirituality, faith, whatever, good. Religion, blind adherence,hypocracy,bad.

To be a bit more ON topic, intolerence is an inbuilt human problem, each of us has it within them to some extent. What marks it out in some folks but, what makes it dangerous, is when it is fanned, fueled and re-enforced by extreme views. Looney lefties, Evil Right wingers, Jesus nuts, spasticide bombers, flat earther's, moon conspiracists, and bloody saucer nuts. All the same. Anyone with whacky, out there views, is WIDE open to letting the flames of intolerence rip through their human nature. Look at me for instance

Oh, Agent, I just dind't want to be accused of being an anit-semite for leaving you out ;) I have a soft spot for The Jews for 2 main reasons....

1. Everyone else has, historically, been cunts to them, rather unfairly if you ask me.
2. They tell, by far, the best Jewish jokes.

[1]remember that if the "evolution is on a theory" line of reasoning, based on the fundy's definition of theory, as opposed to the actual scientific definition, becomes accepted, then virtually all science is reduced to "unsopported nice ideas"....instead of "less than perfect but bloody useful explanations" for instance, quantum physics is a largely theoretical science, yet we have semiconductor products all around us.

cambo cack on his hobby horse again. lol note to cambo. only a tiny propotion of christans these days take the biblical creation stories as literal.

Doctor? wrote:

Oh, Agent, I just dind't want to be accused of being an anit-semite for leaving you out ;) I have a soft spot for The Jews for 2 main reasons....

1. Everyone else has, historically, been cunts to them, rather unfairly if you ask me.
2. They tell, by far, the best Jewish jokes.

friday was a holiday called simchat torah, which celebrates the reading of the end of deuteronomy and the beginning of the reading of genesis once again (all jews around the world read the same portions on the same day). after dancing around the torah and doing the hora we lined up in two rows and the rabbi unrolled the whole torah scroll as we held on to it (with gloves on our hands to prevent the oils from ruining the torah). i was standing somewhere near the end of genesis. after the portions were read, the rabbi began rolling the torah back up. as he got to our section, a man standing across from me said, 'rabbi, i never knew you were a holy roller.'

Ally wrote: A mate told me the other week where the insult "shmuck" is derived from.

how's your schmuck today, ally? ;)

AgentWood wrote: it's an honest question. in the words of political scientist richard betts, politics is a circle, not a straight line. therefore, the far left and the far right have more in commom than they'd like to believe (such as authoritarianism and intolerance towards others beliefs). hence, why i asked the question.

far lefties don't realise they're intolerant because their intolerance is in the name of tolerance...and so they think what they are doing is in the name of all that is good an holy and anyone wrong just hasn't been liberated or empowered yet.

so maybe they are worse... but no more intolerant than neo-cons who at least know they're evil but don't give a fuck

EdelBrock wrote:

Doctor? wrote:

DJ MONTY and His Wheels Of Steel wrote: If it's a choice between giving up the rights of wearing a cross...well let the them wear a fucking veil over their face.Doesn't bother me in the slightest. But when a teacher is trying to command respect and attention from a classrooom full of pupils who are not as politically correct as most adults.....errm."HERE SHE IS .......IT'S THE DARK LORD OF THE SITH!!" Reality check!

Aye, they are all the same thing to me. Crosses( with or without a little dead tin messiah on them), skull caps, veils. All just symbols of a lack of education, and all as good or bad as each other. All should be treated the same, all allowed, or all banned.

Hey, just because someone is religious, doesn't make them a fanatic....or show a lack of education.

I don't think that was your message, but just making sure.

No, that was his message...

AgentWood wrote:

Doctor? wrote:

Oh, Agent, I just dind't want to be accused of being an anit-semite for leaving you out ;) I have a soft spot for The Jews for 2 main reasons....

1. Everyone else has, historically, been cunts to them, rather unfairly if you ask me.
2. They tell, by far, the best Jewish jokes.

friday was a holiday called simchat torah, which celebrates the reading of the end of deuteronomy and the beginning of the reading of genesis once again (all jews around the world read the same portions on the same day). after dancing around the torah and doing the hora we lined up in two rows and the rabbi unrolled the whole torah scroll as we held on to it (with gloves on our hands to prevent the oils from ruining the torah). i was standing somewhere near the end of genesis. after the portions were read, the rabbi began rolling the torah back up. as he got to our section, a man standing across from me said, 'rabbi, i never knew you were a holy roller.'

OK OK, so not all religious types are psycho's.....

And not all Jews tell good Jewish jokes

sigh

no amount of ** and transposing letters was letting me post that answer without receiving the following disturbing message

I guess it's potentially dangerous to refer to someone as a cousin fornicating xtian

meanwhile some of the crap that gets posted here is much much worse insofar as offending the sensibilities of the oversentive is concerned

Impressive. it's the flippin Jesus Police.

Oh and I'm fairly sure you don't reach the level of Psycho, until you're stoning kids or advocating mass exterminations in the name of the "God of Love". (Or if yer a Muslim, thinking that strapping a bomb to yourself to wipe out women and children is gonna get you eternal blowjobs).

PS...can't be dadngerous...no matter how upset a Christian is with you, they HAVE to forgive you, or deny their faith, it's a win win situation for reason.

Doctor? wrote: Impressive. it's the flippin Jesus Police.

Stopping people from flipping Jesuses?

Snorri xxx

Snorrimon wrote:

Doctor? wrote: Impressive. it's the flippin Jesus Police.

Stopping people from flipping Jesuses?

Snorri xxx

that's the ones, yup.

If you’re blindfolded, you’re likely to be intolerant in some way, to someone.

Not all neo-cons are blindfolded, ditto for liberals or socialists too. I don’t think that “having a left vs right smackdown” is going to do any good to anyone. It just ends up in idiotic comments like that of JV (its nice and short, so I read it 4 times & still couldn’t make head nor tail of it).

To AW, I’d say, “politics isn’t a circle”. Maybe if Mr Betts were around for the Spanish civil war, he would have seen libertarian communists and left-social democrats fighting clerical fascism and drawn a different conclusion. As a Marxist, I dislike being referred to as “a believer”. To me, Karl Marx was an inspirational figure and has left us with a fantastic mechanism through which to evaluate and change the world. I don’t hold all the cognitive content that he left us with as being absolutely true. Socialism is not a belief system in the same sense as Christianity, etc.

As a socialist, I am absolutely opposed to all forms of authoritarianism. Parliamentary democracy – like all forms of representation – is a social gain that was hard fought for, not one that was dished out by any ruling class by a sense of philanthropy. For that reason, it is defended by anyone who does more than just call themselves a socialist. However, us revolutionary socialists see parliamentary democracy as not being nearly representative enough of the vast majority of people. A choice between candidates a/b/c every 3/5/7 years to operate as a parlementarian/president/primeminister within the more powerful, and even less democratic mechanisms of various bourgeois institutions (i.e. courts on a national level, the WorldBank on an international one) is not nearly democratic enough a system for us. On the other hand, a fascist government characteristically snatches the paltry representation offered by national parliaments. Thus, to say “commies and fascists are all the same” is lazy, and wrong. Such a position usually derives from equating the authoritarian actions of degenerated socialist states (i.e. former Soviet Russia) or outright anti-socialist governments (i.e. Albanian SSR) with the fundamental principals of the socialist movement – principals often cited, but rarely used by the privileged elite in centralised, undemocratic CP central committees.

An interesting point is made by PFD when he wonders if anyone in the USA could be classified as being Socialist? I happen to know a couple of very principled US Socialists, but I’d doubt many people in the US are anywhere near the left. Although I am *not* by any means a Maoist (unlike Richard Nixon C:D ), I think that the chairman made a good point when he said that even the working class in an imperialist country benefit from that countries exploitation of others. The US is by no means the only imperialist power today, but it is the by far the most brutal and most powerful, and thus it is only natural that only a small percentage of (exceptional) US citizens are socialists.

I don’t really want to spend another 500 words discussing religion. I’m not a religious person, but I tolerate and respect anyone’s private beliefs. Certain aspects of every organised religion that I’ve encountered have appalled me, but I do know that religion cannot be banned, and cannot be forced out of people. Of course, as a socialist, I think that there should be a public space free of religion, but everyone is entitled to a private space free of religious persecution*.

It’s been a long time since I’ve harked around here and hit on a political one. One thing I remember is that there isn’t much point responding & responding & responding & responding & responding to mud slinging. This post is my tuppence, I’ll be off for another while.

[*I know this, because I need my own private time to kneel at my Enever Hoxha shrine and pray to Karl Marx while refusing to acknowledge anything that doesn’t conform to my narrow socialist *beliefs* which in themselves amount to no more than a political programme somewhere in the cigarette paper that separates Stalins Soviet famine, Churchills Indian famine, and Hitlers early gulag. If only I were smart enough to deal with the complexities of a postmodern politic that really says “its all the same, whatever”. This is my secret, filthy truth – everybody tell me yours!!! ]

Over & Out.

Clockwork,

You have stated how your beliefs don't coincide under certian socialist governments that have existed, and stated how current parlimentary is falling short; you have yet to state a proper solution.

I find that most Marxists talk of how wonderfull socialism is, but have yet found a REAL way to impliment it. I agree true/full socialism sounds nice on the surface, but there are so many levels in which it fails in REAL life.

I mark it up as "great on paper, not so great in action"

How is a socialist opposed to all forms of authoritarianism?

There's yet to be a successful implementation of communism in the world. Communism is interesting as theory, but is by nature, impossible. As humans it is not in our nature to be selfless.

However, if you're one of the poor uneducated masses in a country ruled by a greedy ruling class, it sure sounds good.

As a result Communism's only usefulness has come as a tool to get the masses to support some political change... the "Revolution" if you will. Problem with this, is the resultant political system is completely unrelated to, and often is completely at odds with, leftist ideals.

Look at China for example. Economically, the country is more capitalist than the United States. There's far fewer regulations (environmental and labor policies for example) governing businesses, and the few that do exist can be bribed away. Yet they still have Mao on their money reminding everyone that the the country belongs to the people. It's complete bullshit... a total farce of Communist ideals.

In fact, I can't think of a single communist revolution that hasn't resulted in a totalitarian one-party government ruled by a party head with a puppet legislative body, if that. Power to the workers, my ass.

Good luck with your revolution. I'll keep earning my bread by being better than the next guy, thanks.