(December 8, 2022 at 1:59 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(December 8, 2022 at 1:01 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: But the rule of law WAS in place. There were laws limiting how much land Irish farmers could tenant, which crops they could grow, and what happened to that product. How is that not the rule of law?

Boru

Because it was almost a textbook example of institutional racism. There was no equality before the law. Laws that applied to Catholics did not apply to Brits.

Try really, REALLY hard to understand this: if institutional racism is based on the laws of a state and those laws are enforced, that’s the rule of law (henceforth ‘ROL’). ROL means only that laws are applied equally, regardless of social status, it does not guarantee that there will be no discriminatory laws.

If a law is passed in a country (let’s say Croatia) requiring that all left-handed albinos are to have their thumbs cut off, ROL is in place as long as that law is applied to all left-handed albinos. If the President and Prime Minister of Croatia are left-handed albinos but are exempted from having their thumbs cut off, ROL hasn’t happened.

As you said earlier (but appear to have forgotten), ROL means only that no one is above the laws. It does NOT ensure that the laws themselves will be fair or just.

Boru

Quote:Because you consider everything irrelevant instead of addressing the arguments.

No, i consider what is irrelevant as irrelevant and thus requires no response as it is no argument....

Quote: I have explained how the flawed statistical system during the Great Chinese Famine had everything to do with communism. You are just hand-waving it.

You explained nothing and I treated the nothing you provided as nothing and simply repeated those facts. That's not handwaving no matter how much you wish to claim it is...

Quote:Right, the Brittish law of the time did not seek to achieve the rule of law. Which is why American Revolution happenned. The founding fathers wanted there to be rule of law.

Nope, they didn't do anything contrary to rule of law though and the founding father were leading a rebellion that was actually contrary to the law (treason is against the law)

BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:ROL means only that laws are applied equally, regardless of social status, it does not guarantee that there will be no discriminatory laws.

What does that even mean?

(December 8, 2022 at 3:21 pm)Angrboda Wrote:

(December 8, 2022 at 3:19 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: It's no secret. I shared it multiple times here and on some other Internet forums and on my website. My psychiatrist thinks it was caused by me drinking paracetamol with large amounts of caffeine regularly. I think it was caused by me going to a too difficult university.

Regardless, your candor about such speaks well of you.

What does "candor" mean?

BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:It does NOT ensure that the laws themselves will be fair or just.

Of course. If everybody in Ireland was banned from owning a lot of land, that would also be rule of law, albeit a rule of a very unjust and dangerous law (which is very unlikely to be passed). But Brits being above the law that applies only to Catholics is not a rule of law.

(December 8, 2022 at 4:02 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(December 8, 2022 at 3:21 pm)Angrboda Wrote: Regardless, your candor about such speaks well of you.

What does "candor" mean?

"the quality of being open and honest in expression; frankness."

Quote:Of course. If everybody in Ireland was banned from owning a lot of land, that would also be rule of law, albeit a rule of a very unjust and dangerous law (which is very unlikely to be passed). But Brits being above the law that applies only to Catholics is not a rule of law.

Once again there is unlawful about it....

(December 8, 2022 at 4:01 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:ROL means only that laws are applied equally, regardless of social status, it does not guarantee that there will be no discriminatory laws.

What does that even mean?

It’s pretty clear. No one - not a wealthy business owner, a legislator, a head of state - is immune from the consequences of breaking laws. It is a principle more honoured in the breach than the observance.

Boru

Look, @BrianSoddingBoru4, when you say capitalism is to be blamed for something, you usually mean that thing would have also happenned if there was no government intervention in the economy. Saying "Great Depression was caused by capitalism." means you think the same thing (or something even worse) would have happenned if there was no Federal Reserve. Saying "Irish Potato Famine was caused by capitalism." means you think the same thing would have happened even if there were no laws making it impossible for Catholics to profitably grow something other than potato (and it seems to me you do not actually think that).