Page 4 of 7
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:32 am
by Seleucus
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:29 am
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:23 am
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:20 am
Another spreader of Hate and Fear.
Get outta here, you raving lunatics.
Seriously.
This thread is for the discussion of Bruce Gilley's "The case for colonialism", could you illustrate your point with reference to the article. Links to the work can be found on previous pages of the thread. Tx.
I somehow doubt that Bruce Gilley would be very pleased to know that you are promoting his article.
I emailed him this morning, hopefully he'll reply.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:33 am
by marjoram_blues
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:31 am
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:27 am
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:23 am
This thread is for the discussion of Bruce Gilley's "The case for colonialism", could you illustrate your point with reference to the article. Links to the work can be found on previous pages of the thread. Tx.
Yes, I know. You said that already. Consider me a troll. Complain to the authorities.
Sounds like you are a Christian. Why don't you share a quotation from Jesus. Like, 'if you own anything like a purse or a belt, sell it and buy a sword', Luke 22:36, what do you think that means?
Why don't you fuck off, you Nick-alike.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:34 am
by Seleucus
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:33 am
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:31 am
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:27 am
Yes, I know. You said that already. Consider me a troll. Complain to the authorities.
Sounds like you are a Christian. Why don't you share a quotation from Jesus. Like, 'if you own anything like a purse or a belt, sell it and buy a sword', Luke 22:36, what do you think that means?
Why don't you fuck off, you Nick-alike.
I don't know Nick, sorry, already mentioned in this thread as I recall though.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:36 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:32 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:29 am
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:23 am
This thread is for the discussion of Bruce Gilley's "The case for colonialism", could you illustrate your point with reference to the article. Links to the work can be found on previous pages of the thread. Tx.
I somehow doubt that Bruce Gilley would be very pleased to know that you are promoting his article.
I emailed him this morning, hopefully he'll reply.
Some 'friends' are much worse than enemies. I doubt if his article carries the malicious intent that you display.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:38 am
by marjoram_blues
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:34 am
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:33 am
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:31 am
Sounds like you are a Christian. Why don't you share a quotation from Jesus. Like, 'if you own anything like a purse or a belt, sell it and buy a sword', Luke 22:36, what do you think that means?
Why don't you fuck off, you Nick-alike.
I don't know Nick, sorry, already mentioned in this thread as I recall though.
You are alike in taking the complete piss. This place deserves better.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:38 am
by Seleucus
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:36 am
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:32 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:29 am
I somehow doubt that Bruce Gilley would be very pleased to know that you are promoting his article.
I emailed him this morning, hopefully he'll reply.
Some 'friends' are much worse than enemies. I doubt if his article carries the malicious intent that you display.
I'm just shooting the sh1t with you chums, of course when I write scholarly articles I use my finest Sunday prose.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:40 am
by Seleucus
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:38 am
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:34 am
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:33 am
Why don't you fuck off, you Nick-alike.
I don't know Nick, sorry, already mentioned in this thread as I recall though.
You are alike in taking the complete piss. This place deserves better.
Living with excellence everyday!
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:01 am
by marjoram_blues
davidm wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 2:50 am
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 2:32 am I'm sort of undecided on this point: do 3rd World people have IQs of 60 because they are corrupted societies and psychologies, or because humans are naturally daft and civilization is required to create intelligence?
Evidence that "3rd World people have IQs of 60"? Or is it that YOU have an IQ of 60?
This place is infested with dummies like this. When intelligent people come by and read the puerile oinks of an addlepated blatherskite like Seleucus, what makes you (the people who run the place) think that intelligent people will want to waste time posting here, as opposed to laughing the joint off?
The PN forum is all-inclusive. Tolerant bar owner. Might just miss your remarks. Too busy serving other superior departments. Will listen to PM. But nothing will change.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:10 am
by marjoram_blues
Yawn. Heard all this before you were kicked out last time round with the rest of your tribe.
Signing off.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:13 am
by Seleucus
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:10 am
Yawn. Heard all this before you were kicked out last time round with the rest of your tribe.
Signing off.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of going on in your resentment, I suggest instead diligence, humility, and praying to the gods of fecundity.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:14 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:10 am
Yawn. Heard all this before you were kicked out last time round with the rest of your tribe.
Signing off.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. He sets great store by 'gross income' especially when he knows he has no argument (which is all the time).
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:18 am
by Seleucus
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:14 am
marjoram_blues wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:10 am
Yawn. Heard all this before you were kicked out last time round with the rest of your tribe.
Signing off.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. He sets great store by 'gross income' especially when he knows he has no argument (which is all the time).
I knew it was someone, was it you or another resentful leftist I asked roughly those same questions to a few months ago?
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:31 am
by Seleucus
What would be really groovy to see, instead of "you're racist, you're fascist, your transphobic" would be if someone has a superior do-able proposal to Gilley's. Foreign aid to corrupt dictators has already been tried and failed, and 'do nothing' isn't working, so those answers aren't allowed.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 7:05 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
Seleucus wrote: ↑Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:31 am
What would be really groovy to see, instead of "you're racist, you're fascist, your transphobic" would be if someone has a superior do-able proposal to Gilley's. Foreign aid to corrupt dictators has already been tried and failed, and 'do nothing' isn't working, so those answers aren't allowed.
You and your country have the moral high ground so perhaps they could learn by your great and good example.
Re: In defense of colonism
Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:05 am
by Arising_uk
Seleucus wrote:Bruce Gilley's "The case for colonialism" rocked the intellectual world this last couple weeks. ...
I seriously doubt it rocked anything but hey ho.
Bruce Gilley wrote:... Western colonialism was, as a general rule, both objectively beneficial ...
I wonder what Mr Gilley would make of the research that tends to show that the British held back India from industrialization and in fact deindustrialised them, destroyed their share of world trade and reduced their per capita income during their reign?
Still, looks like that is all reversing now.