Would you buy soap made in Auschwitz?

something about viewing other people as irrelevant doesn't sit well with me, particularly in a thread discussing genocide.

why should anybody even be interested in your opinion if you have no interest in theirs? it's particularly disturbing to think that someone might even be in favor of killing off those people because they were technologically inferior or of another religion or something.

That's what I'm saying, people shouldn't put any relevance on my opinion because I like they are to me, am just a guy on the internet, they shouldn't let something I have to say actually effect them in real life. I am not for Genocide for any reason, no race or group of people deserves to be wiped out, all I've said is that I don't let it bother me when this stuff happens because

A. It was a long time ago
B. There's nothing I could have done to prevent it even if I were around for it

We shouldn't try to pretend these things never happened, but we shouldn't act like they JUST happened either, you've gotta move on, educate new generations about what happened so the mistakes of the past aren't repeated, but not be bitter and angry over the past.
 
there's a balance point between learning from history and obsessing on it.

the holocaust was not so long ago that people who experienced it aren't still alive. certainly at least the next five generations of their descendants will wear a certain amount of PTSD that will be handed down to them.

there is genocide going on in the world today as the OP of this thread and my thread 'look at us' are trying to point out. we are here now and we can do something about it. the question is will that only be talking shit from the comfort and safety of an internet console or are we going to walk some talk?

and if we do walk some talk, where is that walk going to take us?
 
there's a balance point between learning from history and obsessing on it.

the holocaust was not so long ago that people who experienced it aren't still alive. certainly at least the next five generations of their descendants will wear a certain amount of PTSD that will be handed down to them.

there is genocide going on in the world today as the OP of this thread and my thread 'look at us' are trying to point out. we are here now and we can do something about it. the question is will that only be talking shit from the comfort and safety of an internet console or are we going to walk some talk?

and if we do walk some talk, where is that walk going to take us?

Well that's the thing, IF there was something that I could do that would put an end to the Genocide and injustice going on in the world today I would certainly do it, but unfortunately there's nothing I can do, peaceful protests are worthless, the only way to put an end to what is going on would be to take down these oppressive governments by way of Violent force.
 
Well that's the thing, IF there was something that I could do that would put an end to the Genocide and injustice going on in the world today I would certainly do it, but unfortunately there's nothing I can do, peaceful protests are worthless, the only way to put an end to what is going on would be to take down these oppressive governments by way of Violent force.
i think that's very de-evolutionary thinking. history has repeatedly shown oppressive governments that are taken down by force only get replaced by new despots. look at cuba or myanmar.

violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. war only profits the people who finance them and manufacture the ordnance. everybody else loses. we as a species must evolve our societies so that conflicts that lead to mass murder can be resolved non-violently.

the least we can do is turn it into a spectator sport and let the leaders fight it out with small companies of mercenaries instead of exposing the entire populations and real estate of several countries at a time to mass destruction.

if nobody minds, i'd like to post this thread over at facebook. i have a lot of old activist friends there who may have a thing or two to say about the uselessness of peaceful protests as well as some remarks about the OP.
 
i think that's very de-evolutionary thinking. history has repeatedly shown oppressive governments that are taken down by force only get replaced by new despots. look at cuba or myanmar.

violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. war only profits the people who finance them and manufacture the ordnance. everybody else loses. we as a species must evolve our societies so that conflicts that lead to mass murder can be resolved non-violently.

the least we can do is turn it into a spectator sport and let the leaders fight it out with small companies of mercenaries instead of exposing the entire populations and real estate of several countries at a time to mass destruction.

if nobody minds, i'd like to post this thread over at facebook. i have a lot of old activist friends there who may have a thing or two to say about the uselessness of peaceful protests as well as some remarks about the OP.

I agree with that, When an oppressive government is taken down another one rises to take it's place, it's something that will never go away, I also agree that conflicts should be personally settled between leaders and citizens should not be sent to die in their name. LOL But if things were settled by Personal combat between leaders I think Putin would be ruling the world right now.
 
i think that's very de-evolutionary thinking. history has repeatedly shown oppressive governments that are taken down by force only get replaced by new despots. look at cuba or myanmar.

violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. war only profits the people who finance them and manufacture the ordnance. everybody else loses. we as a species must evolve our societies so that conflicts that lead to mass murder can be resolved non-violently.

the least we can do is turn it into a spectator sport and let the leaders fight it out with small companies of mercenaries instead of exposing the entire populations and real estate of several countries at a time to mass destruction.

if nobody minds, i'd like to post this thread over at facebook. i have a lot of old activist friends there who may have a thing or two to say about the uselessness of peaceful protests as well as some remarks about the OP.


there are two opinions to everything...Mao said :Revolution is no dinner party, it's all bloodshed and violence'
(not the exact words)
 
I agree with that, When an oppressive government is taken down another one rises to take it's place, it's something that will never go away, I also agree that conflicts should be personally settled between leaders and citizens should not be sent to die in their name. LOL But if things were settled by Personal combat between leaders I think Putin would be ruling the world right now.
the citizens getting killed is bad enough. do you have any idea what all that warfare does to the environment?

it's been written that so much oil has been spilled in the persian gulf because of the wars, there's no coral left living.

besides the environment, there have been incredible amounts of irreplacable antiquities blown to bits in iraq.
 
the citizens getting killed is bad enough. do you have any idea what all that warfare does to the environment?

it's been written that so much oil has been spilled in the persian gulf because of the wars, there's no coral left living.

besides the environment, there have been incredible amounts of irreplacable antiquities blown to bits in iraq.


:cheers: :24: :clap:
 
The fuck he did.

Gandhi believed in preaching one thing, and impilcitily encouraging the lower classes into doing his dirty work.
well that certainly goes against conventional wisdom on ghandhi's history. can you share some sources for that opinion?
 
On the other hand the shrewd Gandhi believed in Revolution through Peace!!:)

Gandhi was a great man, and his Peaceful methods worked for him and his people. BUT that was against the British, do you think Hitler would have thought twice about having each and every one of them gunned down in the streets? Of course he wouldn't and neither would many leaders, sometimes(usually) Violence is the only way to achieve a successful revolution, Gandhi is just an exception to the rule.
 
The fuck he did.

Gandhi believed in preaching one thing, and impilcitily encouraging the lower classes into doing his dirty work.

hahahahahahahahahha! I can't stop laughing at your simplicity!!:) You don't seem to know that at least 2 cute
blondes were his 24/7 ''attendants'' and a 'goat' whose milk he relished to drink!!:)
 
Gandhi was a great man, and his Peaceful methods worked for him and his people. BUT that was against the British, do you think Hitler would have thought twice about having each and every one of them gunned down in the streets? Of course he wouldn't and neither would many leaders, sometimes(usually) Violence is the only way to achieve a successful revolution, Gandhi is just an exception to the rule.


All is circumstantial. Gandhi's circumstances were different because both Hindus and Muslims backed him up in kicking out the British......
the real bloody revolution against the British started in 1857 which the Indo-Pak call the War of Independence
whereas the British call it the Mutiny!!
 
i hear mother teresa wasnt much of a saint either

I wouldn't know about that.

But anyone who knows about post-war India can tell you that Gandhi was solely responsible for thousands of lives, Indian lives. It was him who created the artifical Hindu/Muslim divide. It was him that preached for the peaceful annilihation of railway and telegraph lines. Pray tell, how the fuck does one peacefully destroy a countries iinfrastructure?
 
Back
Top