Trump as Jesus

[Gary Childress]

Considering Trump's threats to make Canada the 51st state, I don't know why IC doesn't bash Trump as much as he does "socialists" or Democrats. It's really weird.

A minority of Canadians want to join the US.

In several provinces, there are minorities that want the province to separate and become an independent state.

Some Canadians want Trump style policies implemented within Canada.

I expect IC falls into one of those groups.

That's possible. Either that or he's completely bonkers. Of course, there's nothing I can really say about someone being bonkers, I guess. It's just my opinion, and I'm 100% certified bonkers.

[Impenitent]

"There's nothing diabolical or sinister about listening to experts. Experts are not out to take advantage of people and screw them over for their own gain."

experts must be saints... wait, saints sounds too christian or religious or something icky like that

if only government experts were perfect non humans...

-Imp

True. But what can we expect from the shithole God created? Is anything in life fair? Is anything in the world God created fair? If I'm not fair to Christians, then are you being fair to society's best educated and most studious intellectuals? There's not a lot of difference between the two of us, judging from our posts on this forum. But maybe you have a fair point about intellectuals. In the end, they're human like we are and subject to the same failures of character that we are.

Anyway, I don't like this world. It's mostly shit. I'm just waiting around to die at this point. Probably, the same as you, I would guess.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEgkDuJyI0U

-Imp

[Gary Childress]

"There's nothing diabolical or sinister about listening to experts. Experts are not out to take advantage of people and screw them over for their own gain."

experts must be saints... wait, saints sounds too christian or religious or something icky like that

if only government experts were perfect non humans...

-Imp

True. But what can we expect from the shithole God created? Is anything in life fair? Is anything in the world God created fair? If I'm not fair to Christians, then are you being fair to society's best educated and most studious intellectuals? There's not a lot of difference between the two of us, judging from our posts on this forum. But maybe you have a fair point about intellectuals. In the end, they're human like we are and subject to the same failures of character that we are.

Anyway, I don't like this world. It's mostly shit. I'm just waiting around to die at this point. Probably, the same as you, I would guess.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEgkDuJyI0U

-Imp

[Immanuel Can]

Considering Trump's threats to make Canada the 51st state, I don't know why IC doesn't bash Trump as much as he does "socialists" or Democrats. It's really weird.

A minority of Canadians want to join the US.

In several provinces, there are minorities that want the province to separate and become an independent state.

Some Canadians want Trump style policies implemented within Canada.

I expect IC falls into one of those groups.

That's possible. Either that or he's completely bonkers. Of course, there's nothing I can really say about someone being bonkers, I guess. It's just my opinion, and I'm 100% certified bonkers.

Actually, I don't believe in politicians. I expect them to be rogues, for the most part, with few exceptions. There are a few sincere men among them, I'm sure: but they're always hard to tell from the wretches, because the wretches are such posers, virtue-signallers, false-promisers and dissemblers. And even those few good exceptions are, at best, mere men, and as such, are corruptible potentially.

Politics are not the answer to anything. The best one can expect from them is that the damage they do will be minimized, and the limited goods they offer will be maximized. But ranting against any one politican achieves nothing, because the entire system is corrupt.

This is what strikes me as so silly about Trump-hate, or TDS, as it is called: does the Left actually think that all evil resides conveniently in one man? Have they no moral perspective on the fact of more general fallibility and corruption? Do they think that if they kill one guy, the world will turn to gumdrops and candyfloss for everybody? Do they not see that even worse men may well be waiting in the wings, waiting to take over? For if the world can produce one evil man (let us say, Trump), can it not produce another? And cannot it produce a thousand even more evil ones? Is Trump literally the worst politician the world has ever known?

They're nowhere near reality. And they're not grappling with the profound truth of human nature; that it is not automatically good, and that evil is not segregated into individuals. That evil is spread across the race, and infects even the best of us. And that is the problem that really has to be addressed...though they have absolutely no plan for addressing it, so maybe that's why they play peekaboo with it all the time.

[Gary Childress]

A minority of Canadians want to join the US.

In several provinces, there are minorities that want the province to separate and become an independent state.

Some Canadians want Trump style policies implemented within Canada.

I expect IC falls into one of those groups.

That's possible. Either that or he's completely bonkers. Of course, there's nothing I can really say about someone being bonkers, I guess. It's just my opinion, and I'm 100% certified bonkers.

Actually, I don't believe in politicians. I expect them to be rogues, for the most part, with few exceptions. There are a few sincere men among them, I'm sure: but they're always hard to tell from the wretches, because the wretches are such posers, virtue-signallers, false-promisers and dissemblers. And even those few good exceptions are, at best, mere men, and as such, are corruptible potentially.

Politics are not the answer to anything. The best one can expect from them is that the damage they do will be minimized, and the limited goods they offer will be maximized. But ranting against any one politican achieves nothing, because the entire system is corrupt.

This is what strikes me as so silly about Trump-hate, or TDS, as it is called: does the Left actually think that all evil resides conveniently in one man? Have they no moral perspective on the fact of more general fallibility and corruption? Do they think that if they kill one guy, the world will turn to gumdrops and candyfloss for everybody? Do they not see that even worse men may well be waiting in the wings, waiting to take over? For if the world can produce one evil man (let us say, Trump), can it not produce another? And cannot it produce a thousand even more evil ones? Is Trump literally the worst politician the world has ever known?

They're nowhere near reality. And they're not grappling with the profound truth of human nature; that it is not automatically good, and that evil is not segregated into individuals. That evil is spread across the race, and infects even the best of us. And that is the problem that really has to be addressed...though they have absolutely no plan for addressing it, so maybe that's why they play peekaboo with it all the time.

Well, IC. Unfortunately, society isn't going to be profitable for your wealthy friends without the government to organize industry and stop it from self-destructing from time to time. And the wealthy, of course, we can't get in their way, they make the shiny things for us. Government is like God; it tells us what we can and can't do.

[Immanuel Can]

That's possible. Either that or he's completely bonkers. Of course, there's nothing I can really say about someone being bonkers, I guess. It's just my opinion, and I'm 100% certified bonkers.

Actually, I don't believe in politicians. I expect them to be rogues, for the most part, with few exceptions. There are a few sincere men among them, I'm sure: but they're always hard to tell from the wretches, because the wretches are such posers, virtue-signallers, false-promisers and dissemblers. And even those few good exceptions are, at best, mere men, and as such, are corruptible potentially.

Politics are not the answer to anything. The best one can expect from them is that the damage they do will be minimized, and the limited goods they offer will be maximized. But ranting against any one politican achieves nothing, because the entire system is corrupt.

This is what strikes me as so silly about Trump-hate, or TDS, as it is called: does the Left actually think that all evil resides conveniently in one man? Have they no moral perspective on the fact of more general fallibility and corruption? Do they think that if they kill one guy, the world will turn to gumdrops and candyfloss for everybody? Do they not see that even worse men may well be waiting in the wings, waiting to take over? For if the world can produce one evil man (let us say, Trump), can it not produce another? And cannot it produce a thousand even more evil ones? Is Trump literally the worst politician the world has ever known?

They're nowhere near reality. And they're not grappling with the profound truth of human nature; that it is not automatically good, and that evil is not segregated into individuals. That evil is spread across the race, and infects even the best of us. And that is the problem that really has to be addressed...though they have absolutely no plan for addressing it, so maybe that's why they play peekaboo with it all the time.

Well, IC. Unfortunately, society isn't going to be profitable for your wealthy friends without the government to organize industry and stop it from self-destructing from time to time.

The government does have a regulatory function, Gary. And I'm not against all government, anymore than the rich are my "friends." We need regulations of basic kinds, no question. I'll grant you that.

But answer me this, Gary: if, as you say, government is the evil entity colluding with industry to twit the little man, why are you campaigning for Socialism, which requires the most expansive and invasive kind of government possible? Isn't that like throwing the sheep to the wolves?

[Gary Childress]

But answer me this, Gary: if, as you say, government is the evil entity colluding with industry to twit the little man, why are you campaigning for Socialism, which requires the most expansive and invasive kind of government possible? Isn't that like throwing the sheep to the wolves?

Because, as you have pointed out, "socialism" limits how much wealth and property a person can own. If you don't do that, then those who own everything will always get their way, and they will exclude ordinary people from the political process if things go sour. But your hypothesis seems to be that the wealthy are indeed the people who should run society.

But at the same time, you seem to want democracy. I don't see how you can have both of those things, IC. You'll have to pick one or the other, just as socialists must pick between economic prosperity and social equality. There cannot be social equality if some people own everything and others don't. But maybe you are right. Maybe economic prosperity should be the priority and not democracy.

[Immanuel Can]

But answer me this, Gary: if, as you say, government is the evil entity colluding with industry to twit the little man, why are you campaigning for Socialism, which requires the most expansive and invasive kind of government possible? Isn't that like throwing the sheep to the wolves?

Because, as you have pointed out, "socialism" limits how much wealth and property a person can own.

That never applies to the Socialist elites. It just applies to you. And they have no means of producing more wealth, so when they run out of other people's money, Socialist regimes inevitably go broke. So expect to become much poorer than you are now.

your hypothesis seems to be that the wealthy are indeed the people who should run society.

Show me where I said any such thing.

[Gary Childress]

Show me where I said any such thing.

Well, if you don't want to limit property, then that seems to me what you are de facto voting for.

[Immanuel Can]

Show me where I said any such thing.

Well, if you don't want to limit property, then that seems to me what you are de facto voting for.

No, no dodging. Please respond to my request: show me where you got the idea I believed any such thing.

And if you can't, then why are you jumping to illogical conclusions?

[Gary Childress]

Show me where I said any such thing.

Well, if you don't want to limit property, then that seems to me what you are de facto voting for.

No, no dodging. Please respond to my request: show me where you got the idea I believed any such thing.

And if you can't, then why are you jumping to illogical conclusions?

Fair enough, you don't want the wealthy to rule society, you're just stupid enough to believe that if you let people accumulate uber-wealth, they won't control society. I had thought you were intelligent. Maybe not.

[Immanuel Can]

Well, if you don't want to limit property, then that seems to me what you are de facto voting for.

No, no dodging. Please respond to my request: show me where you got the idea I believed any such thing.

And if you can't, then why are you jumping to illogical conclusions?

Fair enough, you don't want the wealthy to rule society, you're just stupid enough to believe that if you let people accumulate uber-wealth, they won't control society. I had thought you were intelligent. Maybe not.

I see. Out of truth, so must throw mud pies.

Kind of childish, Gary.

[Gary Childress]

No, no dodging. Please respond to my request: show me where you got the idea I believed any such thing.

And if you can't, then why are you jumping to illogical conclusions?

Fair enough, you don't want the wealthy to rule society, you're just stupid enough to believe that if you let people accumulate uber-wealth, they won't control society. I had thought you were intelligent. Maybe not.

I see. Out of truth, so must throw mud pies.

Kind of childish, Gary.

Well, it gets frustrating dealing with stupid people. The wealthy are not going to rule society if you don't put limits on property accumulation?

[Immanuel Can]

Fair enough, you don't want the wealthy to rule society, you're just stupid enough to believe that if you let people accumulate uber-wealth, they won't control society. I had thought you were intelligent. Maybe not.

I see. Out of truth, so must throw mud pies.

Kind of childish, Gary.

Well, it gets frustrating dealing with stupid people. The wealthy are not going to rule society if you don't put limits on property accumulation?

Think, Gary. The government is corruptible...you say, only by the wealthy. I say it's corruptible lots of ways. But okay, let's go with just the wealthy.

Why would you advocate big government, since you know government is corruptible? Explain that.

[Gary Childress]

I see. Out of truth, so must throw mud pies.

Kind of childish, Gary.

Well, it gets frustrating dealing with stupid people. The wealthy are not going to rule society if you don't put limits on property accumulation?

Think, Gary. The government is corruptible...you say, only by the wealthy. I say it's corruptible lots of ways. But okay, let's go with just the wealthy.

Why would you advocate big government, since you know government is corruptible? Explain that.

Because only a democratic government can legitimately place a restriction on citizens if such needs to be the case. Private individuals pulling strings is unfair coercion and manipulation of others. That means that citizens must have the freedom to vote to restrict property accumulation by the few. You don't want citizens to vote that way. That is clear. How is it democratic if you won't allow citizens to vote to restrict property accumulation by the few?