Even atheists can be deulsional/ OP ED

[Lemonvariable72]

I see, thanks. So does that make communism (generally) a dictatorship though? It seems like no one can challenge the authority of that mental guy.

Yes communism is usually a dictorship, but it is usually very oligarchic with party ruling and one man as the front man, like krusnechov and the Politburo. And usually anyone can join the ruling communist party in a communist state, for example Gorbachev was from a working class background. You see communist regimes at least on the surface are about equality. While fascist states tend to enforce traditional values and while they still have a one party system, it is hopeless for most people to advance within it.

[Brian37]

This is the problem I don't have at this website. I still love the other, just not some on it. I love that other website because I can be myself, this one is great too. But I don't have a problem here when someone points out errors I make. Some people when you are slightly off will treat you like you murdered their entire family.

But I do have to disagree with looking down on simplifying things. We wouldn't have complicated computer programs if someone didn't learn how to manipulate simple on and off, or 0s and 1s. "It's complicated" isn't my argument at all, I agree there are things that are complicated. But it is like saying neurosurgery is a method when it is not, but is a field that uses the method of testing and observation.

It is not an "oversimplification" to say that Hitler and Stalin and Un were all monsters. Just like saying malware and lagit programs still stem from patterns.

I think humanity DOES get so over complicated dreaming up different systems which still all amount to setting up groups, which is ultimately evolutionary. It allows our tribalism to divide us and the fact is we are all made up of DNA and regardless if a open state or closed state wins out in any given point of time, it still does not change there was life before our species and our species will go extinct. See Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech.

I can say open systems while no system is perfect, lean more to the empathetic side of our species, where as authoritarian states that silence dissent lack our species empathy.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Thanks for the answers guys

I see what you mean, trying to label things can lead to oversimplification.

It seems to me that pretty much no one can stop the crazy guy doing what he wants, short of a coup or assassination. I'd call that bullshit, whatever else you might call it.

At the end of the day Rob all political philosophies are utopian. All of them *work* given ideal (and more often than not unrealistic) variables that play out in their favour. 

None of them, in this regard, can be thought of as 'wrong'.

Of course, the world isn't perfect, and neither are people or their ideas, and so often even the best political machinations will reflect this. That's why, in the agent/structure debate, I'm somewhere in the middle. ^_^

[Edwardo Piet]

Brian, Fascism is just one kind of dictatorship, and fascist dictatorships and communist dictatorships are not the same because fascism and communism are different.

I understand that this guy you are falling out with might be a complete asshole but I'd hardly call that being picky, I'd just call it being correct. I don't know the guy or whether he's an asshole: All I have to go by is that he is saying not all dictatorships are fascist. That's just correct it's hardly pedantic and I know absolutely fuck all about Politics.

If you think that's picky or pedantic then I guess you don't really know me yet!

EDIT: Oh but as a side note: Do I find it annoying when someone doesn't just correct you but when they do so they completely miss your whole point? YES that annoys me so much! Like I used to debate all the time here with theists on AF and I would answer all their points and make a bunch of points myself and then a theist would just answer one unimportant part of my post and ignore he rest. Yes that pisses me the fuck off.

[robvalue]

Panda: Yeah... I know what you mean.

I was shocked when I found out we have a load of unelected goobers running things in the House of Lords. That makes us like a semi dictatorship. Why the fuck do we have them again?

[Brian37]

Thanks for the answers guys

I see what you mean, trying to label things can lead to oversimplification.

It seems to me that pretty much no one can stop the crazy guy doing what he wants, short of a coup or assassination. I'd call that bullshit, whatever else you might call it.

At the end of the day Rob all political philosophies are utopian. All of them *work* given ideal (and more often than not unrealistic) variables that play out in their favour. 

None of them, in this regard, can be thought of as 'wrong'.

Of course, the world isn't perfect, and neither are people or their ideas, and so often even the best political machinations will reflect this. That's why, in the agent/structure debate, I'm somewhere in the middle. ^_^

Context....... In the grand scope, evolution does not care if cruelty or compassion get an individual or a group to the point of reproduction.

But, if you are not part of the party line in a closed state that squashes dissent, life is going to be a mental prison at best and worse if you dare open your mouth. 

Lionesses work to protect even cubs that are not theirs, but unfortunately evolution includes the male lions murdering the cubs that are not theirs. I see closed states more like the male lion and open states more like the lionesses.

I would never set evolution up like reality has played it out if I had the power to set it up. Reality is neither good or bad but both. "Good" unfortunately when it comes to politics, religion or business models are all POV that allow humans to forget we are the same species.

[Brian37]

Brian, Fascism is just one kind of dictatorship, and fascist dictatorships and communist dictatorships are not the same because fascism and communism are different.

I understand that this guy you are falling out with might be a complete asshole but I'd hardly call that being picky, I'd just call it being correct. I don't know the guy or whether he's an asshole: All I have to go by is that he is saying not all dictatorships are fascist. That's just correct it's hardly pedantic and I know absolutely fuck all about Politics.

If you think that's picky or pedantic then I guess you don't really know me yet!

EDIT: Oh but as a side note: Do I find it annoying when someone doesn't just correct you but when they do so they completely miss your whole point? YES that annoys me so much! Like I used to debate all the time here with theists on AF and I would answer all their points and make a bunch of points myself and then a theist would just answer one unimportant part of my post and ignore he rest. Yes that pisses me the fuck off.

Yes I admit they are different, in the same way Ted Bundy murdered girls and women and John Wayne Gacey murdered boys. The overlap is the word "dictatorship" just like both Ted and John were murderers.

Just like murder with a knife and murder with a gun doesn't change that the person still died and it is still called a homicide. Oppression is still oppression.  

The only thing I am conceding here is that the ME still hast to list the mode of death and weapon but it is still a homicide.

[Brian37]

Yes it is picky and it is not picky. Context, and you said it, it becomes picky when you don't simply correct someone and miss the entire message.

It is like pointing out the difference between two different programmers of malware, one for Microsoft and one for Apple, and my point is that they are both malware on top of being part of the same "method" of creating patterns that leads us to lagit software. Again, see Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech.

[Brian37]

Panda: Yeah... I know what you mean.

I was shocked when I found out we have a load of unelected goobers running things in the House of Lords. That makes us like a semi dictatorship. Why the fuck do we have them again?

You can have Ted Cruz, Trump, and Ben Carson. Are you saying your government is just as full of or as bad as our goobers?

[Lemonvariable72]

Panda: Yeah... I know what you mean.

I was shocked when I found out we have a load of unelected goobers running things in the House of Lords. That makes us like a semi dictatorship. Why the fuck do we have them again?

That's why here in Canada were working to abolish the senate. The senate here is the same idea as the house of lords, but I don't think its ever weilded as much real power as the house of lords. That's what I hate about the British style of Parliament, its not a style that was designed from the ground up like the American system, but rather it sort of evolved over time and as such it carries a lot of baggage and unstated or unclear rules, or traditions that straight up contradict the written rules.
E.g the queen is technically the head of state, but has no real power.