Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.atheism > #2170023 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-17 19:42 -0500 |
| Last post | 2016-10-02 19:33 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 39 — 9 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.atheism
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-17 19:42 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 06:50 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-09-17 23:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-18 20:14 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-18 15:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-30 06:33 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-29 23:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 02:59 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-09-30 00:43 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 07:41 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 11:39 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 23:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 14:53 +1000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-01 04:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-02 10:40 +1100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-01 20:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-10-02 13:46 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-10-02 23:14 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-03 12:15 +1100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-02 21:25 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-03 13:43 +1100
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-30 11:48 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-01 10:10 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-01 10:42 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-10-01 19:09 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 02:54 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-30 02:06 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-30 11:17 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-09-30 14:07 -0500
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-09-30 23:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-01 08:52 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-01 05:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 07:39 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-02 02:24 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 11:53 +0000
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-10-02 09:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 18:02 +0200
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-02 11:02 -0700
Re: Atheism is Witchcraft hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 19:33 -0700
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-17 19:42 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Atheism is Witchcraft |
| Message-ID | <4qlrtbtefm6jecslqd5c0maig2505eij9f@4ax.com> |
On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 16:44:38 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: >In article <e45225Ft4sjU1@mid.individual.net>, > Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > >> Am 17.09.2016 13:14, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >> >> >>> Atheism says nothing about evolution, natural selection, animals, >> >>> predators, creation of the universe or lies other than it wasn't a god >> >>> responsible as the one and only tenet of athesism is that there are no >> >>> supernatural beings. >> >> >> >> Darwin was an evil British idiot. >> > >> > How was he "evil"? >> > >> > >> >> He is among the ancestors of Naziism and a line can be drawn from him >> >> personally to various 'bad guys'. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. >> > What is this line? >> >> There was a 'Thomas Huxley', who was called 'Darwin's bulldog'. So? He defended Darwin's ideas. What they actually wore, not what liars like this one pretend. >> He was member of the so called 'X-Club', which had friendly relations to >> Count Arthur de Gobineau. It was a science club. And what was their connection with de Gobineau? >> From this guy stems the idea of the 'Aryan race'. He was quite >> influential on other Nazi-theoreticians, like e.g. Houston Steward >> Chamberlain. So? >> Chamberlain was the son in law of Richard Wagner. He wrote a lot of >> racist Nazi-pamphlet, to which a Lord Redescale wrote the forwards. So? >> This guy was the owner of a gold-mine in the Canadian town 'Swastika', >> which had as a logo the real Nazi-swastika (in 1912). So? Was it actually a Nazi swastika or one of the many sun-symbols like the traditional Hindu one? Before the Nazis adopted it, it was a good luck symbol in Western Europe, originating as the Hindu svastika which was originally a sun symbol but was also (and still is) a good luck symbol that you see at Indian weddings. The town was named for the Swastika mine. >> He was a friend of Richard Wagner. His granddaughter was Unity Midfort >> and that was Hitler's girlfriend. Another granddaughter was Lady Diana >> Guiness, who married the leader of the BuF (Sir Oswald Mosley). So what? >> Lord Redescale was assumed to be the illegitimate father of Clementine >> Hozier, which was the wife of Winston Churchill. And? >> Thomas Huxley had a grandson, who was the leader of 'Eugenics' (Julian >> Huxley). Gross distortion to the point of lying. >> Julian Huxley was also a spy Lie. > and founder of UNESCO. >> >> His brother Aldous was member of the so called apostles of Cambridge, >> (which was the British version of 'Skull and Bones'). There he met >> Ludwig Wittgenstein and Bertrand Russel. So? >> Russel was the head of the 'Fabians' and promoter of (national-) Socialism. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. The Fabians are a middle class, intellectual socialist society. They were never Marxist, and they were certainly not Nazis. >> The other brother of Julian Huxley was Noel Trevenen Huxley. And for >> some reason I assume, this was the British spy commonly known as 'Hitler'. What a fucking moron/ >And how does ANY of this indict Darwin? None of it does. He's just another asshole being a rectal orifice for the sake of being an anal sphinctre. >> > You do know that a person is not responsible for evil people >> > misinterpreting and corrupting his work? >> >> This depends a little on the circumstances. Darwin was responsible for none of the things that bigoted, lying religious loonies accuse him of. >> If you take part in a plot, than you are also responsible. What "plot" was the pathological liar pretending Darwin was part of? >> Darwin's books seem to me like being propaganda in the sense of Eugenics >> and the Fabians. And both are apparently part of something sinister >> called 'New World Order'. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. >And now you've proven yourself an irredeemable idiot. And a deliberately nasty, button-pushing liar. >> >> But Darwin was extremely wrong in various aspects of his theory. For >> >> instance he assumed competition as main principle of nature. He CONCLUDED it - tat's what the struggle for survival known as natural selection, is. >> > So what? We've moved 150 years past what Darwin could learn with the >> > technology of his day. His major value nowadays is as the urDaddy of the >> > science of evolution. >> >> >> Even if the main principle might be correct, his intention was not true >> science, but some kind of attack on religions. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. He was sufficiently religious to study for the ministry at Cambridge, even if he dropped out to go on the voyage of the Beagle. He lost his faith when he could not reconcile the benevolent, loving god of his youth, with the life or death, eat or be eaten struggle for survival that was nature in the raw. And he held off publishing Origin until 1859 to avoid upsetting the religious. >How was it that? He was a loyal member of the COE until his daughter >died. No. He was already an agnostic when he proposed to his wife - that was the last straw, >> To make his version of evolution at least somehow plausible, he had to >> make the evolution of species MUCH faster than it really is. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. >So what? Why are you having so much problem understanding how >much our knowledge has increased in the last 150 years? He's just a piggy-ignorant, lying troll. >> He had an 'error factor' of more than 10,000 , by which the evolution >> took longer than he thought. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. >> This was needed, to justify such evil agenda (as Eugenics) and what I >> assume to be intentional. What a fucking moron. A deliberately button-pushing liar as well as an idiot. >And ever loonier. Provide evidence that Darwin ever espoused eugenics. He didn't. >> >> Only this is not true, since he completely ignored cooperation between a >> >> variety of species. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. >> > Yeah, so what? >> >> Well, 'competition between the individuals/races/species' was the >> principle what he assumed top be the driving mechanism in all life. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. >So what? > >> From this idea stems actually the term 'Darwinism' or 'survival of the >> fittest'. There is no such thing as "Darwinism" - that is a deliberate canard by creationists to pretend that well understood science is merely an ideology. >Which, of course, is a distortion of what Darwin said. All "survival of the fittest" means is that those who survive to pass on whatever caused them to survive, to subsequent generations, pass it on - and those which don't, don't. >> Only: this is not true and the fittest do not always survive. So what? >Of course not. It's about the survival of species, not of individuals. >Why don't you know this? I thought the Germans had a proper educational >system. Because he's a fucking moron. >> Another powerful concept is called 'cooperation', which we find all over >> the place. And? That led to domestication and selection by Man. >> E.g. dogs just love to do something with and/or for their human >> counterpart. Because Man selected them for it. >Yeah, so? It;s just being deliberately stupid. >> >> But more questionable than scientific errors were his political goals, >> >> since in the line of succession we find 'Eugenics'. What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. >> > What were Darwin's "political goals"? And what does Darwin have to do >> > with a vile practice that was invented years after he died? >> >> >> His political goals are rather unimportant. But someone paid him and his >> voyage, who eventually had political goals. Liar, His family was wealthy enough for to pay for his part in the voyage, even though they weren't rich. He was one of the Wedgwoods - his grandfather was the founder of the famous quality pottery manufacturing company. >Provide evidence for these "political goals". It can't. >Your educational system should sue you for implying that it's >incompetent. Germany has an excellent public education system so he must have gone to some fundamentalist religious school instead.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 06:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e46kpjFacr1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170023 |
Am 18.09.2016 02:42, schrieb Christopher A. Lee: >>>>>> Atheism says nothing about evolution, natural selection, animals, >>>>>> predators, creation of the universe or lies other than it wasn't a god >>>>>> responsible as the one and only tenet of athesism is that there are no >>>>>> supernatural beings. >>>>> >>>>> Darwin was an evil British idiot. >>>> >>>> How was he "evil"? >>>> >>>> >>>>> He is among the ancestors of Naziism and a line can be drawn from him >>>>> personally to various 'bad guys'. > > What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. > >>>> What is this line? >>> >>> There was a 'Thomas Huxley', who was called 'Darwin's bulldog'. > > So? > > He defended Darwin's ideas. > > What they actually wore, not what liars like this one pretend. > >>> He was member of the so called 'X-Club', which had friendly relations to >>> Count Arthur de Gobineau. > > It was a science club. > > And what was their connection with de Gobineau? > >>> From this guy stems the idea of the 'Aryan race'. He was quite >>> influential on other Nazi-theoreticians, like e.g. Houston Steward >>> Chamberlain. > Maybe you should open a book about the history of the 20th century. And certainly you'll find an article or two about Germany. And certainly you will read about the WWs one and two. The 2nd of these wars was caused by a political party called 'NSDAP' in Germany. This party and their members are commonly called 'Nazis'. NSDAP means in English 'National Socialist Workers Party of Germany'. They had occult roots, which stem from theosophy of Helena Blavatski, which had led to the 'Thule society'. Another source was socialism and that to the foundations of 'DAP' (Deutsche Arbeiter Partei - German Workers Party). Than we find elitism in form of occult orders like the 'SS'. Other roots stem from the support by large corporations, like e.g. the Ford Motor Company. From the theoretical side we had roots in certain ideologies and ideas. The ideas stem from theoreticians like Arthur de Gobineau, who himself based his ideas on Darwin. And Darwin was apparently supported by (British) aristocracy, the Guilds and the bankers. Apparently this was according to plan and to something called an 'agenda'. And this agenda had not begun in the 19th century, nor had it ended in the 20th. But apparently the Nazis and their wars were just a piece in a larger puzzle. It is now essential to identify this agenda, to prevent its perpetrators from further destruction. The method is called 'reverse engineering'. This means, that unknown systems are reinvented from what is known about them. If simulation and real system behave somehow similar, the real system can be modelled with a simulation. That would make it possible to find out, who did what in these evil plans. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-17 23:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <hlwdjsd2-FAFAEE.23242217092016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #2170110 |
In article <e46kpjFacr1U1@mid.individual.net>, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > Am 18.09.2016 02:42, schrieb Christopher A. Lee: > > >>>>>> Atheism says nothing about evolution, natural selection, animals, > >>>>>> predators, creation of the universe or lies other than it wasn't a god > >>>>>> responsible as the one and only tenet of athesism is that there are no > >>>>>> supernatural beings. > >>>>> > >>>>> Darwin was an evil British idiot. > >>>> > >>>> How was he "evil"? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> He is among the ancestors of Naziism and a line can be drawn from him > >>>>> personally to various 'bad guys'. > > > > What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot. > > > >>>> What is this line? > >>> > >>> There was a 'Thomas Huxley', who was called 'Darwin's bulldog'. > > > > So? > > > > He defended Darwin's ideas. > > > > What they actually wore, not what liars like this one pretend. > > > >>> He was member of the so called 'X-Club', which had friendly relations to > >>> Count Arthur de Gobineau. > > > > It was a science club. > > > > And what was their connection with de Gobineau? > > > >>> From this guy stems the idea of the 'Aryan race'. He was quite > >>> influential on other Nazi-theoreticians, like e.g. Houston Steward > >>> Chamberlain. > > > > Maybe you should open a book about the history of the 20th century. > > And certainly you'll find an article or two about Germany. > > And certainly you will read about the WWs one and two. > > The 2nd of these wars was caused by a political party called 'NSDAP' in > Germany. > > This party and their members are commonly called 'Nazis'. > > NSDAP means in English 'National Socialist Workers Party of Germany'. > > They had occult roots, which stem from theosophy of Helena Blavatski, > which had led to the 'Thule society'. > > Another source was socialism and that to the foundations of 'DAP' > (Deutsche Arbeiter Partei - German Workers Party). > > Than we find elitism in form of occult orders like the 'SS'. > > Other roots stem from the support by large corporations, like e.g. the > Ford Motor Company. > > From the theoretical side we had roots in certain ideologies and ideas. > > The ideas stem from theoreticians like Arthur de Gobineau, who himself > based his ideas on Darwin. > > And Darwin was apparently supported by (British) aristocracy, the Guilds > and the bankers. > > Apparently this was according to plan and to something called an 'agenda'. > > And this agenda had not begun in the 19th century, nor had it ended in > the 20th. > > But apparently the Nazis and their wars were just a piece in a larger > puzzle. > > It is now essential to identify this agenda, to prevent its perpetrators > from further destruction. > > The method is called 'reverse engineering'. This means, that unknown > systems are reinvented from what is known about them. > > If simulation and real system behave somehow similar, the real system > can be modelled with a simulation. That would make it possible to find > out, who did what in these evil plans. And yet again you fail to provide even the slightest evidence that any of this had anything to do with Darwin. -- JD Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 20:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e483sgFlf63U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170133 |
Am 18.09.2016 08:24, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: >> From the theoretical side Nazis had roots in certain ideologies and ideas. >> >> The ideas stem from theoreticians like Arthur de Gobineau, who himself >> based his ideas on Darwin. >> >> And Darwin was apparently supported by (British) aristocracy, the Guilds >> and the bankers. >> >> Apparently this was according to plan and to something called an 'agenda'. >> >> And this agenda had not begun in the 19th century, nor had it ended in >> the 20th. >> >> But apparently the Nazis and their wars were just a piece in a larger >> puzzle. >> >> It is now essential to identify this agenda, to prevent its perpetrators >> from further destruction. >> >> The method is called 'reverse engineering'. This means, that unknown >> systems are reinvented from what is known about them. >> >> If simulation and real system behave somehow similar, the real system >> can be modelled with a simulation. That would make it possible to find >> out, who did what in these evil plans. > > > > And yet again you fail to provide even the slightest evidence that any > of this had anything to do with Darwin. > Ok, actually I don't know, what Darwin had in mind. But Darwin as a person is not as interesting and of such political importance as Naziism. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-18 15:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <tbpttb1onon70nfeu9v0p8ld2igju23asi@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2170365 |
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 20:14:35 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> in alt.atheism with message-id <e483sgFlf63U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >Am 18.09.2016 08:24, schrieb Jeanne Douglas: > >>> From the theoretical side Nazis had roots in certain ideologies and ideas. >>> >>> The ideas stem from theoreticians like Arthur de Gobineau, who himself >>> based his ideas on Darwin. >>> >>> And Darwin was apparently supported by (British) aristocracy, the Guilds >>> and the bankers. >>> >>> Apparently this was according to plan and to something called an 'agenda'. >>> >>> And this agenda had not begun in the 19th century, nor had it ended in >>> the 20th. >>> >>> But apparently the Nazis and their wars were just a piece in a larger >>> puzzle. >>> >>> It is now essential to identify this agenda, to prevent its perpetrators >>> from further destruction. >>> >>> The method is called 'reverse engineering'. This means, that unknown >>> systems are reinvented from what is known about them. >>> >>> If simulation and real system behave somehow similar, the real system >>> can be modelled with a simulation. That would make it possible to find >>> out, who did what in these evil plans. >> >> >> >> And yet again you fail to provide even the slightest evidence that any >> of this had anything to do with Darwin. >> > >Ok, actually I don't know, what Darwin had in mind. > >But Darwin as a person is not as interesting and of such political >importance as Naziism. > >TH Darwin is much more interesting and influential than a bunch of psychopaths. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-30 06:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e56891FsschU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2170412 |
Am 18.09.2016 21:06, schrieb Attila <:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 20:14:35 +0200, Thomas Heger<ttt_heg@web.de> in
> alt.atheism with message-id<e483sgFlf63U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>
>> Am 18.09.2016 08:24, schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
>>
>>>> From the theoretical side Nazis had roots in certain ideologies and ideas.
>>>>
>>>> The ideas stem from theoreticians like Arthur de Gobineau, who himself
>>>> based his ideas on Darwin.
>>>>
>>>> And Darwin was apparently supported by (British) aristocracy, the Guilds
>>>> and the bankers.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently this was according to plan and to something called an 'agenda'.
>>>>
>>>> And this agenda had not begun in the 19th century, nor had it ended in
>>>> the 20th.
>>>>
>>>> But apparently the Nazis and their wars were just a piece in a larger
>>>> puzzle.
>>>>
>>>> It is now essential to identify this agenda, to prevent its perpetrators
>>>> from further destruction.
>>>>
>>>> The method is called 'reverse engineering'. This means, that unknown
>>>> systems are reinvented from what is known about them.
>>>>
>>>> If simulation and real system behave somehow similar, the real system
>>>> can be modelled with a simulation. That would make it possible to find
>>>> out, who did what in these evil plans.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And yet again you fail to provide even the slightest evidence that any
>>> of this had anything to do with Darwin.
>>>
>>
>> Ok, actually I don't know, what Darwin had in mind.
>>
>> But Darwin as a person is not as interesting and of such political
>> importance as Naziism.
>>
>> TH
>
> Darwin is much more interesting and influential than a bunch of
> psychopaths.
>
Darwinism is a central part of Naziism (the other is socialism).
The English word for Naziism is 'Eugenics'.
The head of the Eugenics society was Julian Huxley.
Head of the Fabian socialists was Bertrand Russel.
Aldous Huxley and Bertrand Russel were both members of the secret
society 'The apostles' of Cambridge, together with Ludwig Wittgenstein.
This is interesting, since Wittgenstein was at the same school and of
the same age as Hitler and also gay.
Most likely they have known each other and were 'friends'.
Now Aldous Huxley and Adolf Hitler share this 'A. H.' initials.
So kind of 'joke' would be possible, if a spy needs a false identity.
The real identity of that spy was (in my eyes) Noel Trevenen Huxley. He
got a false beard and the hair painted.
He started his training in Bavaria in the house of Isolde Beidler, who
was the daughter of Richard Wagner. (Hitler actually lived officially at
Prinzregentenplatz 16 in Munich.)
The connection to Darwin was Thomas Huxley ('Darwins Bulldog'),
grandfather of the Huxley brothers.
The connection to the Wagner family was Lord Redescale. This was the
real father of Clementine Hozier (Churchill's wife) and the grandfather
of Unity Midfort (Hitler's girlfriend).
Son in Law of Richard Wagner was Houston Steward Chamberlain. He was the
'hub' of Bavarian Naziism and allegedly the real author of 'My
Struggle'. Forewords to his pamphlet wrote said Lord Redescale, who also
paid for printing. He also translated the books into English.
Then we have Marjorie Winifried Williams (aka Winifried Wagner), who was
a close friend of Adolf Hitler. Her husband was the gay son of Richard
Wagner. So we would need to search for a candidate for the fatherhood of
her kids.
And we don't need to search very far, since e.g. Friedelind looks quite
similar to Winifried's friend.
Lord Redescale was the owner of a gold-mine in Swastika, Canada. This
had as logo the real Nazi swastika (the inverted Hindu wheel of life),
what is actually a death symbol.
Other hints to British involvement in the creation of Naziism are e.g.
the similarity between British uniforms in 2nd Boer War to those of the SA.
There they have invented 'concentration camps'. The German word
'Konzentrationslager' is now a (bad) literal translation of this word.
In German you would say 'Sammellager'.
'To concentrate' means 'sammeln' in German. The German word
'konzentrieren' is inappropriate, since it means something like 'think
hard about a certain subject' or ' make a chemical solution thicker'.
To call 'herding people together' 'konzentrieren' comes from the
linguistic picture, which is used in the English language for the
activity of collecting (puling together). German uses a picture similar
to 'picking things up' (sammeln).
In this circumstances I have found, that the book 'Mein Kampf' seems to
be a translation of an English script, created somewhere inside the
British Intelligence (possibly Chamberlain or the 'Tavistock Institute
for Human Relations').
Also the so called Hitler diaries seem to be scripts, created by the
Tavistock Institute ('Scriptwriters of the Brave New World Order'),
since the books carry the sign. 'F.H.' (in Old English Gothic), which
could stand for 'Freud Hilton' and that for this institute.
The other stream of support for Naziism stems from the collectivism
side, called 'socialism'. This had as main roots other British
aristocrats, especially Sir Bertrand Russel.
It is certainly just coincidence, that the Lords of Tavistock have been
Russels and that Swastika in Canada is located in the county Tavistock.
(Maybe it is also just coincidence that one of the 7/7 bombs went of at
Tavistock Square.)
But socialism in total seems to originate in Britain and especially in
British aristocracy.
So why in the world would British Lords promote socialism?
Well, it's all about money and how to extract money from the people. And
that's what aristocrats are supposed to do. And it's about an 'elite',
who had to defend privileges against competition by non-appointed
'capitalists'.
Turning Europe upside down for this purpose was not their concern, as
long as Briton stays a monarchy.
TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-29 23:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <57EE05BC.22C2@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #2175237 |
Thomas Heger wrote:
>
> Am 18.09.2016 21:06, schrieb Attila <:
> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 20:14:35 +0200, Thomas Heger<ttt_heg@web.de> in
> > alt.atheism with message-id<e483sgFlf63U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Am 18.09.2016 08:24, schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
> >>
> >>>> From the theoretical side Nazis had roots in certain ideologies and ideas.
> >>>>
> >>>> The ideas stem from theoreticians like Arthur de Gobineau, who himself
> >>>> based his ideas on Darwin.
> >>>>
> >>>> And Darwin was apparently supported by (British) aristocracy, the Guilds
> >>>> and the bankers.
> >>>>
> >>>> Apparently this was according to plan and to something called an 'agenda'.
> >>>>
> >>>> And this agenda had not begun in the 19th century, nor had it ended in
> >>>> the 20th.
> >>>>
> >>>> But apparently the Nazis and their wars were just a piece in a larger
> >>>> puzzle.
> >>>>
> >>>> It is now essential to identify this agenda, to prevent its perpetrators
> >>>> from further destruction.
> >>>>
> >>>> The method is called 'reverse engineering'. This means, that unknown
> >>>> systems are reinvented from what is known about them.
> >>>>
> >>>> If simulation and real system behave somehow similar, the real system
> >>>> can be modelled with a simulation. That would make it possible to find
> >>>> out, who did what in these evil plans.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> And yet again you fail to provide even the slightest evidence that any
> >>> of this had anything to do with Darwin.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Ok, actually I don't know, what Darwin had in mind.
> >>
> >> But Darwin as a person is not as interesting and of such political
> >> importance as Naziism.
> >>
> >> TH
> >
> > Darwin is much more interesting and influential than a bunch of
> > psychopaths.
> >
>
> Darwinism is a central part of Naziism (the other is socialism).
>
> The English word for Naziism is 'Eugenics'.
>
> The head of the Eugenics society was Julian Huxley.
>
> Head of the Fabian socialists was Bertrand Russel.
>
> Aldous Huxley and Bertrand Russel were both members of the secret
> society 'The apostles' of Cambridge, together with Ludwig Wittgenstein.
>
> This is interesting, since Wittgenstein was at the same school and of
> the same age as Hitler and also gay.
>
> Most likely they have known each other and were 'friends'.
>
> Now Aldous Huxley and Adolf Hitler share this 'A. H.' initials.
>
> So kind of 'joke' would be possible, if a spy needs a false identity.
>
> The real identity of that spy was (in my eyes) Noel Trevenen Huxley. He
> got a false beard and the hair painted.
>
> He started his training in Bavaria in the house of Isolde Beidler, who
> was the daughter of Richard Wagner. (Hitler actually lived officially at
> Prinzregentenplatz 16 in Munich.)
>
> The connection to Darwin was Thomas Huxley ('Darwins Bulldog'),
> grandfather of the Huxley brothers.
>
> The connection to the Wagner family was Lord Redescale. This was the
> real father of Clementine Hozier (Churchill's wife) and the grandfather
> of Unity Midfort (Hitler's girlfriend).
>
> Son in Law of Richard Wagner was Houston Steward Chamberlain. He was the
> 'hub' of Bavarian Naziism and allegedly the real author of 'My
> Struggle'. Forewords to his pamphlet wrote said Lord Redescale, who also
> paid for printing. He also translated the books into English.
>
> Then we have Marjorie Winifried Williams (aka Winifried Wagner), who was
> a close friend of Adolf Hitler. Her husband was the gay son of Richard
> Wagner. So we would need to search for a candidate for the fatherhood of
> her kids.
>
> And we don't need to search very far, since e.g. Friedelind looks quite
> similar to Winifried's friend.
>
> Lord Redescale was the owner of a gold-mine in Swastika, Canada. This
> had as logo the real Nazi swastika (the inverted Hindu wheel of life),
> what is actually a death symbol.
>
> Other hints to British involvement in the creation of Naziism are e.g.
> the similarity between British uniforms in 2nd Boer War to those of the SA.
>
> There they have invented 'concentration camps'. The German word
> 'Konzentrationslager' is now a (bad) literal translation of this word.
>
> In German you would say 'Sammellager'.
>
> 'To concentrate' means 'sammeln' in German. The German word
> 'konzentrieren' is inappropriate, since it means something like 'think
> hard about a certain subject' or ' make a chemical solution thicker'.
>
> To call 'herding people together' 'konzentrieren' comes from the
> linguistic picture, which is used in the English language for the
> activity of collecting (puling together). German uses a picture similar
> to 'picking things up' (sammeln).
>
> In this circumstances I have found, that the book 'Mein Kampf' seems to
> be a translation of an English script, created somewhere inside the
> British Intelligence (possibly Chamberlain or the 'Tavistock Institute
> for Human Relations').
>
> Also the so called Hitler diaries seem to be scripts, created by the
> Tavistock Institute ('Scriptwriters of the Brave New World Order'),
> since the books carry the sign. 'F.H.' (in Old English Gothic), which
> could stand for 'Freud Hilton' and that for this institute.
>
> The other stream of support for Naziism stems from the collectivism
> side, called 'socialism'. This had as main roots other British
> aristocrats, especially Sir Bertrand Russel.
>
> It is certainly just coincidence, that the Lords of Tavistock have been
> Russels and that Swastika in Canada is located in the county Tavistock.
>
> (Maybe it is also just coincidence that one of the 7/7 bombs went of at
> Tavistock Square.)
>
> But socialism in total seems to originate in Britain and especially in
> British aristocracy.
>
> So why in the world would British Lords promote socialism?
>
> Well, it's all about money and how to extract money from the people. And
> that's what aristocrats are supposed to do. And it's about an 'elite',
> who had to defend privileges against competition by non-appointed
> 'capitalists'.
>
> Turning Europe upside down for this purpose was not their concern, as
> long as Briton stays a monarchy.
>
> TH
i don't know too much about Germany history..
i'm an American...
they don't talk too much about that period..
but i do remember
there was a east Berlin and
west Berlin.
i think the east might have something to do with commies...
the people of Germany fought the commies because:
"A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of communism." karl marx
So, anybody who is on the commie side had to be killed.
Aldolf Hitler dies and you got the Wall.
He was just tryin to keep the commies away..
'the spectre of communism'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-30 02:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <s83subtlqsgbpl1stt5lvhauoev7vpj0dv@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2175266 |
On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 23:27:08 -0700, The Starmaker
<starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
<57EE05BC.22C2@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Thomas Heger wrote:
>>
>> Am 18.09.2016 21:06, schrieb Attila <:
>> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 20:14:35 +0200, Thomas Heger<ttt_heg@web.de> in
>> > alt.atheism with message-id<e483sgFlf63U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Am 18.09.2016 08:24, schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
>> >>
>> >>>> From the theoretical side Nazis had roots in certain ideologies and ideas.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The ideas stem from theoreticians like Arthur de Gobineau, who himself
>> >>>> based his ideas on Darwin.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> And Darwin was apparently supported by (British) aristocracy, the Guilds
>> >>>> and the bankers.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Apparently this was according to plan and to something called an 'agenda'.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> And this agenda had not begun in the 19th century, nor had it ended in
>> >>>> the 20th.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> But apparently the Nazis and their wars were just a piece in a larger
>> >>>> puzzle.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It is now essential to identify this agenda, to prevent its perpetrators
>> >>>> from further destruction.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The method is called 'reverse engineering'. This means, that unknown
>> >>>> systems are reinvented from what is known about them.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If simulation and real system behave somehow similar, the real system
>> >>>> can be modelled with a simulation. That would make it possible to find
>> >>>> out, who did what in these evil plans.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> And yet again you fail to provide even the slightest evidence that any
>> >>> of this had anything to do with Darwin.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Ok, actually I don't know, what Darwin had in mind.
>> >>
>> >> But Darwin as a person is not as interesting and of such political
>> >> importance as Naziism.
>> >>
>> >> TH
>> >
>> > Darwin is much more interesting and influential than a bunch of
>> > psychopaths.
>> >
>>
>> Darwinism is a central part of Naziism (the other is socialism).
>>
>> The English word for Naziism is 'Eugenics'.
>>
>> The head of the Eugenics society was Julian Huxley.
>>
>> Head of the Fabian socialists was Bertrand Russel.
>>
>> Aldous Huxley and Bertrand Russel were both members of the secret
>> society 'The apostles' of Cambridge, together with Ludwig Wittgenstein.
>>
>> This is interesting, since Wittgenstein was at the same school and of
>> the same age as Hitler and also gay.
>>
>> Most likely they have known each other and were 'friends'.
>>
>> Now Aldous Huxley and Adolf Hitler share this 'A. H.' initials.
>>
>> So kind of 'joke' would be possible, if a spy needs a false identity.
>>
>> The real identity of that spy was (in my eyes) Noel Trevenen Huxley. He
>> got a false beard and the hair painted.
>>
>> He started his training in Bavaria in the house of Isolde Beidler, who
>> was the daughter of Richard Wagner. (Hitler actually lived officially at
>> Prinzregentenplatz 16 in Munich.)
>>
>> The connection to Darwin was Thomas Huxley ('Darwins Bulldog'),
>> grandfather of the Huxley brothers.
>>
>> The connection to the Wagner family was Lord Redescale. This was the
>> real father of Clementine Hozier (Churchill's wife) and the grandfather
>> of Unity Midfort (Hitler's girlfriend).
>>
>> Son in Law of Richard Wagner was Houston Steward Chamberlain. He was the
>> 'hub' of Bavarian Naziism and allegedly the real author of 'My
>> Struggle'. Forewords to his pamphlet wrote said Lord Redescale, who also
>> paid for printing. He also translated the books into English.
>>
>> Then we have Marjorie Winifried Williams (aka Winifried Wagner), who was
>> a close friend of Adolf Hitler. Her husband was the gay son of Richard
>> Wagner. So we would need to search for a candidate for the fatherhood of
>> her kids.
>>
>> And we don't need to search very far, since e.g. Friedelind looks quite
>> similar to Winifried's friend.
>>
>> Lord Redescale was the owner of a gold-mine in Swastika, Canada. This
>> had as logo the real Nazi swastika (the inverted Hindu wheel of life),
>> what is actually a death symbol.
>>
>> Other hints to British involvement in the creation of Naziism are e.g.
>> the similarity between British uniforms in 2nd Boer War to those of the SA.
>>
>> There they have invented 'concentration camps'. The German word
>> 'Konzentrationslager' is now a (bad) literal translation of this word.
>>
>> In German you would say 'Sammellager'.
>>
>> 'To concentrate' means 'sammeln' in German. The German word
>> 'konzentrieren' is inappropriate, since it means something like 'think
>> hard about a certain subject' or ' make a chemical solution thicker'.
>>
>> To call 'herding people together' 'konzentrieren' comes from the
>> linguistic picture, which is used in the English language for the
>> activity of collecting (puling together). German uses a picture similar
>> to 'picking things up' (sammeln).
>>
>> In this circumstances I have found, that the book 'Mein Kampf' seems to
>> be a translation of an English script, created somewhere inside the
>> British Intelligence (possibly Chamberlain or the 'Tavistock Institute
>> for Human Relations').
>>
>> Also the so called Hitler diaries seem to be scripts, created by the
>> Tavistock Institute ('Scriptwriters of the Brave New World Order'),
>> since the books carry the sign. 'F.H.' (in Old English Gothic), which
>> could stand for 'Freud Hilton' and that for this institute.
>>
>> The other stream of support for Naziism stems from the collectivism
>> side, called 'socialism'. This had as main roots other British
>> aristocrats, especially Sir Bertrand Russel.
>>
>> It is certainly just coincidence, that the Lords of Tavistock have been
>> Russels and that Swastika in Canada is located in the county Tavistock.
>>
>> (Maybe it is also just coincidence that one of the 7/7 bombs went of at
>> Tavistock Square.)
>>
>> But socialism in total seems to originate in Britain and especially in
>> British aristocracy.
>>
>> So why in the world would British Lords promote socialism?
>>
>> Well, it's all about money and how to extract money from the people. And
>> that's what aristocrats are supposed to do. And it's about an 'elite',
>> who had to defend privileges against competition by non-appointed
>> 'capitalists'.
>>
>> Turning Europe upside down for this purpose was not their concern, as
>> long as Briton stays a monarchy.
>>
>> TH
>
>
>
>
>i don't know too much about Germany history..
>i'm an American...
>they don't talk too much about that period..
>
>but i do remember
>there was a east Berlin and
>west Berlin.
>
>i think the east might have something to do with commies...
>
>the people of Germany fought the commies because:
>
>"A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of communism." karl marx
>
>
>So, anybody who is on the commie side had to be killed.
>
>Aldolf Hitler dies and you got the Wall.
>
>He was just tryin to keep the commies away..
>
>
>'the spectre of communism'
I see you are off your meds too.
--
Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent.
Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially
those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard.
Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government
guaranteed above average income for every person.
Every illegal alien is a criminal.
No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason.
Deportation upon identification as the only option.
If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly
before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hhyapster@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-30 00:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2175266 |
On Friday, September 30, 2016 at 2:26:22 PM UTC+8, The Starmaker wrote:
> Thomas Heger wrote:
> >
> > Am 18.09.2016 21:06, schrieb Attila <:
> > > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 20:14:35 +0200, Thomas Heger<ttt_heg@web.de> in
> > > alt.atheism with message-id<e483sgFlf63U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Am 18.09.2016 08:24, schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
> > >>
> > >>>> From the theoretical side Nazis had roots in certain ideologies and ideas.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The ideas stem from theoreticians like Arthur de Gobineau, who himself
> > >>>> based his ideas on Darwin.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> And Darwin was apparently supported by (British) aristocracy, the Guilds
> > >>>> and the bankers.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Apparently this was according to plan and to something called an 'agenda'.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> And this agenda had not begun in the 19th century, nor had it ended in
> > >>>> the 20th.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> But apparently the Nazis and their wars were just a piece in a larger
> > >>>> puzzle.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It is now essential to identify this agenda, to prevent its perpetrators
> > >>>> from further destruction.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The method is called 'reverse engineering'. This means, that unknown
> > >>>> systems are reinvented from what is known about them.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If simulation and real system behave somehow similar, the real system
> > >>>> can be modelled with a simulation. That would make it possible to find
> > >>>> out, who did what in these evil plans.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> And yet again you fail to provide even the slightest evidence that any
> > >>> of this had anything to do with Darwin.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Ok, actually I don't know, what Darwin had in mind.
> > >>
> > >> But Darwin as a person is not as interesting and of such political
> > >> importance as Naziism.
> > >>
> > >> TH
> > >
> > > Darwin is much more interesting and influential than a bunch of
> > > psychopaths.
> > >
> >
> > Darwinism is a central part of Naziism (the other is socialism).
> >
> > The English word for Naziism is 'Eugenics'.
> >
> > The head of the Eugenics society was Julian Huxley.
> >
> > Head of the Fabian socialists was Bertrand Russel.
> >
> > Aldous Huxley and Bertrand Russel were both members of the secret
> > society 'The apostles' of Cambridge, together with Ludwig Wittgenstein.
> >
> > This is interesting, since Wittgenstein was at the same school and of
> > the same age as Hitler and also gay.
> >
> > Most likely they have known each other and were 'friends'.
> >
> > Now Aldous Huxley and Adolf Hitler share this 'A. H.' initials.
> >
> > So kind of 'joke' would be possible, if a spy needs a false identity.
> >
> > The real identity of that spy was (in my eyes) Noel Trevenen Huxley. He
> > got a false beard and the hair painted.
> >
> > He started his training in Bavaria in the house of Isolde Beidler, who
> > was the daughter of Richard Wagner. (Hitler actually lived officially at
> > Prinzregentenplatz 16 in Munich.)
> >
> > The connection to Darwin was Thomas Huxley ('Darwins Bulldog'),
> > grandfather of the Huxley brothers.
> >
> > The connection to the Wagner family was Lord Redescale. This was the
> > real father of Clementine Hozier (Churchill's wife) and the grandfather
> > of Unity Midfort (Hitler's girlfriend).
> >
> > Son in Law of Richard Wagner was Houston Steward Chamberlain. He was the
> > 'hub' of Bavarian Naziism and allegedly the real author of 'My
> > Struggle'. Forewords to his pamphlet wrote said Lord Redescale, who also
> > paid for printing. He also translated the books into English.
> >
> > Then we have Marjorie Winifried Williams (aka Winifried Wagner), who was
> > a close friend of Adolf Hitler. Her husband was the gay son of Richard
> > Wagner. So we would need to search for a candidate for the fatherhood of
> > her kids.
> >
> > And we don't need to search very far, since e.g. Friedelind looks quite
> > similar to Winifried's friend.
> >
> > Lord Redescale was the owner of a gold-mine in Swastika, Canada. This
> > had as logo the real Nazi swastika (the inverted Hindu wheel of life),
> > what is actually a death symbol.
> >
> > Other hints to British involvement in the creation of Naziism are e.g.
> > the similarity between British uniforms in 2nd Boer War to those of the SA.
> >
> > There they have invented 'concentration camps'. The German word
> > 'Konzentrationslager' is now a (bad) literal translation of this word.
> >
> > In German you would say 'Sammellager'.
> >
> > 'To concentrate' means 'sammeln' in German. The German word
> > 'konzentrieren' is inappropriate, since it means something like 'think
> > hard about a certain subject' or ' make a chemical solution thicker'.
> >
> > To call 'herding people together' 'konzentrieren' comes from the
> > linguistic picture, which is used in the English language for the
> > activity of collecting (puling together). German uses a picture similar
> > to 'picking things up' (sammeln).
> >
> > In this circumstances I have found, that the book 'Mein Kampf' seems to
> > be a translation of an English script, created somewhere inside the
> > British Intelligence (possibly Chamberlain or the 'Tavistock Institute
> > for Human Relations').
> >
> > Also the so called Hitler diaries seem to be scripts, created by the
> > Tavistock Institute ('Scriptwriters of the Brave New World Order'),
> > since the books carry the sign. 'F.H.' (in Old English Gothic), which
> > could stand for 'Freud Hilton' and that for this institute.
> >
> > The other stream of support for Naziism stems from the collectivism
> > side, called 'socialism'. This had as main roots other British
> > aristocrats, especially Sir Bertrand Russel.
> >
> > It is certainly just coincidence, that the Lords of Tavistock have been
> > Russels and that Swastika in Canada is located in the county Tavistock.
> >
> > (Maybe it is also just coincidence that one of the 7/7 bombs went of at
> > Tavistock Square.)
> >
> > But socialism in total seems to originate in Britain and especially in
> > British aristocracy.
> >
> > So why in the world would British Lords promote socialism?
> >
> > Well, it's all about money and how to extract money from the people. And
> > that's what aristocrats are supposed to do. And it's about an 'elite',
> > who had to defend privileges against competition by non-appointed
> > 'capitalists'.
> >
> > Turning Europe upside down for this purpose was not their concern, as
> > long as Briton stays a monarchy.
> >
> > TH
>
>
>
>
> i don't know too much about Germany history..
But you know much more about the culture of the Jews?
> i'm an American...
Mostly loony people..
> they don't talk too much about that period..
>
> but i do remember
> there was a east Berlin and
> west Berlin.
Now, Berlin is one and is the central power of EU.
>
> i think the east might have something to do with commies...
>
> the people of Germany fought the commies because:
>
> "A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of communism." karl marx
Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people.
The flaw is just the political system/.
>
>
> So, anybody who is on the commie side had to be killed.
Why don't you try to do that with the Russian?
You can't even touch North Korea...talking big does not cost you money, ya.
>
> Aldolf Hitler dies and you got the Wall.
>
> He was just tryin to keep the commies away..
He was not....it was the East German/Soviet.
>
>
> 'the spectre of communism'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-30 07:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <2rjsubhh6rjsdcgprb70fafo93ligqt0mu@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2175291 |
On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in alt.atheism with message-id <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: >Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-01 11:39 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e58ifgFfe6uU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2175344 |
On 30/09/2016 21:41, Attila wrote: > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in > alt.atheism with message-id > <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: > >> Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. > > It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. The communities do not have to be primitive, but yes, they have to be small. There is a practical size limit, dictated by Dunbar's Number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number and by external pressures. The more isolated and marginal a community, the more important cooperation and sharing of resources becomes. There is also the issue of how to define "communism": of resources only, or of total egalitarianism in authority and hierarchical structures as well? It is one thing to share the working and harvest of pastures and fields, it is quite another to sit down and have communal discussion and agreement on every aspect of life....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-30 23:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <acauub118fk85dj9n55r6a15b21n3dvuhi@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2175587 |
On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 11:39:57 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e58ifgFfe6uU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 30/09/2016 21:41, Attila wrote: >> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >> alt.atheism with message-id >> <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: >> >>> Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. >> >> It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. > >The communities do not have to be primitive, but yes, they have to be >small. There is a practical size limit, dictated by Dunbar's Number > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number > >and by external pressures. The more isolated and marginal a community, >the more important cooperation and sharing of resources becomes. > >There is also the issue of how to define "communism": of resources only, >or of total egalitarianism in authority and hierarchical structures as >well? It is one thing to share the working and harvest of pastures and >fields, it is quite another to sit down and have communal discussion and >agreement on every aspect of life.... The community must be small enough so that the members all know each other and can use social pressure to insure it works. Since it is contrary to human nature it is unworkable in any extended society, as demonstrated wherever it has been tried. Most of the so called 'communist' societies were anything but true communism. "To each according to his needs" usually means "get whatever you can". There is no need to address the "From each according to his abilities" portion. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-01 14:53 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e58tq0FhoquU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2175629 |
On 01/10/2016 13:16, Attila wrote: > On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 11:39:57 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e58ifgFfe6uU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 30/09/2016 21:41, Attila wrote: >>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>> alt.atheism with message-id >>> <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. >>> >>> It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. >> >> The communities do not have to be primitive, but yes, they have to be >> small. There is a practical size limit, dictated by Dunbar's Number >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number >> >> and by external pressures. The more isolated and marginal a community, >> the more important cooperation and sharing of resources becomes. >> >> There is also the issue of how to define "communism": of resources only, >> or of total egalitarianism in authority and hierarchical structures as >> well? It is one thing to share the working and harvest of pastures and >> fields, it is quite another to sit down and have communal discussion and >> agreement on every aspect of life.... > > The community must be small enough so that the members all know each > other and can use social pressure to insure it works. Since it is > contrary to human nature it is unworkable in any extended society, as > demonstrated wherever it has been tried. A theoretical exception might be nomadic cultures: by the nature of their lifestyle, it is not just difficult but actively problematic to amass personal property. But in general, yes, the size limitations definitely hold true. I suppose one could posit a society composed entirely of small communities ordered along practical communist (or at least socialist) lines, but I rather doubt that without isolation from other cultures such a setup could survive for any length of time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-01 04:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <tstuubh8ihh18gol8mrpbqhntrpmi2e547@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2175649 |
On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 14:53:17 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e58tq0FhoquU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 01/10/2016 13:16, Attila wrote: >> On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 11:39:57 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e58ifgFfe6uU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 30/09/2016 21:41, Attila wrote: >>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>> <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. >>>> >>>> It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. >>> >>> The communities do not have to be primitive, but yes, they have to be >>> small. There is a practical size limit, dictated by Dunbar's Number >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number >>> >>> and by external pressures. The more isolated and marginal a community, >>> the more important cooperation and sharing of resources becomes. >>> >>> There is also the issue of how to define "communism": of resources only, >>> or of total egalitarianism in authority and hierarchical structures as >>> well? It is one thing to share the working and harvest of pastures and >>> fields, it is quite another to sit down and have communal discussion and >>> agreement on every aspect of life.... >> >> The community must be small enough so that the members all know each >> other and can use social pressure to insure it works. Since it is >> contrary to human nature it is unworkable in any extended society, as >> demonstrated wherever it has been tried. > >A theoretical exception might be nomadic cultures: by the nature of >their lifestyle, it is not just difficult but actively problematic to >amass personal property. But in general, yes, the size limitations >definitely hold true. > >I suppose one could posit a society composed entirely of small >communities ordered along practical communist (or at least socialist) >lines, but I rather doubt that without isolation from other cultures >such a setup could survive for any length of time. > It has been tried in history and has always failed once the society reached a certain size or a certain level of interaction with other societies. Marx sounds great on the surface but it has proven to be unworkable on many levels. The most famous problem of course was the one of transportation. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-02 10:40 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <e5avr1F2monU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2175702 |
On 01/10/2016 18:48, Attila wrote: > On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 14:53:17 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e58tq0FhoquU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 01/10/2016 13:16, Attila wrote: >>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 11:39:57 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <e58ifgFfe6uU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 30/09/2016 21:41, Attila wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>>> <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. >>>>> >>>>> It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. >>>> >>>> The communities do not have to be primitive, but yes, they have to be >>>> small. There is a practical size limit, dictated by Dunbar's Number >>>> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number >>>> >>>> and by external pressures. The more isolated and marginal a community, >>>> the more important cooperation and sharing of resources becomes. >>>> >>>> There is also the issue of how to define "communism": of resources only, >>>> or of total egalitarianism in authority and hierarchical structures as >>>> well? It is one thing to share the working and harvest of pastures and >>>> fields, it is quite another to sit down and have communal discussion and >>>> agreement on every aspect of life.... >>> >>> The community must be small enough so that the members all know each >>> other and can use social pressure to insure it works. Since it is >>> contrary to human nature it is unworkable in any extended society, as >>> demonstrated wherever it has been tried. >> >> A theoretical exception might be nomadic cultures: by the nature of >> their lifestyle, it is not just difficult but actively problematic to >> amass personal property. But in general, yes, the size limitations >> definitely hold true. >> >> I suppose one could posit a society composed entirely of small >> communities ordered along practical communist (or at least socialist) >> lines, but I rather doubt that without isolation from other cultures >> such a setup could survive for any length of time. >> > > It has been tried in history and has always failed once the society > reached a certain size or a certain level of interaction with other > societies. Marx sounds great on the surface but it has proven to be > unworkable on many levels. The most famous problem of course was the > one of transportation. Quite so. Which is not to say that there is no value or usefulness at all in such a lifestyle. Small communities may well benefit from applying such an organisational model at least to a degree, as may groups of farmers or other independent craftsmen, tradesmen or small businesses. Ditto students, retired people or others groups with small incomes: sharing resources equally within a small group may benefit all of them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-01 20:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <iam0vbtls7k2pkiacr72lavh1130kg197u@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2175944 |
On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 10:40:15 +1100, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <e5avr1F2monU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 01/10/2016 18:48, Attila wrote: >> On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 14:53:17 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e58tq0FhoquU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 01/10/2016 13:16, Attila wrote: >>>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 11:39:57 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e58ifgFfe6uU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 30/09/2016 21:41, Attila wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>>>> <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. >>>>> >>>>> The communities do not have to be primitive, but yes, they have to be >>>>> small. There is a practical size limit, dictated by Dunbar's Number >>>>> >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number >>>>> >>>>> and by external pressures. The more isolated and marginal a community, >>>>> the more important cooperation and sharing of resources becomes. >>>>> >>>>> There is also the issue of how to define "communism": of resources only, >>>>> or of total egalitarianism in authority and hierarchical structures as >>>>> well? It is one thing to share the working and harvest of pastures and >>>>> fields, it is quite another to sit down and have communal discussion and >>>>> agreement on every aspect of life.... >>>> >>>> The community must be small enough so that the members all know each >>>> other and can use social pressure to insure it works. Since it is >>>> contrary to human nature it is unworkable in any extended society, as >>>> demonstrated wherever it has been tried. >>> >>> A theoretical exception might be nomadic cultures: by the nature of >>> their lifestyle, it is not just difficult but actively problematic to >>> amass personal property. But in general, yes, the size limitations >>> definitely hold true. >>> >>> I suppose one could posit a society composed entirely of small >>> communities ordered along practical communist (or at least socialist) >>> lines, but I rather doubt that without isolation from other cultures >>> such a setup could survive for any length of time. >>> >> >> It has been tried in history and has always failed once the society >> reached a certain size or a certain level of interaction with other >> societies. Marx sounds great on the surface but it has proven to be >> unworkable on many levels. The most famous problem of course was the >> one of transportation. > >Quite so. > >Which is not to say that there is no value or usefulness at all in such >a lifestyle. Small communities may well benefit from applying such an >organisational model at least to a degree, as may groups of farmers or >other independent craftsmen, tradesmen or small businesses. Ditto >students, retired people or others groups with small incomes: sharing >resources equally within a small group may benefit all of them. The benefits are limited, of short duration, and few such societies can exist today. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-02 13:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nsr338$h36$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #2175969 |
On Sat, 01 Oct 2016 20:49:12 -0400, Attila < wrote: > On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 10:40:15 +1100, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <e5avr1F2monU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >>On 01/10/2016 18:48, Attila wrote: >>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 14:53:17 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <e58tq0FhoquU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 01/10/2016 13:16, Attila wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 11:39:57 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e58ifgFfe6uU1@mid.individual.net> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 30/09/2016 21:41, Attila wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>>>>> <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. >>>>>> >>>>>> The communities do not have to be primitive, but yes, they have to >>>>>> be small. There is a practical size limit, dictated by Dunbar's >>>>>> Number >>>>>> >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number >>>>>> >>>>>> and by external pressures. The more isolated and marginal a >>>>>> community, the more important cooperation and sharing of resources >>>>>> becomes. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is also the issue of how to define "communism": of resources >>>>>> only, >>>>>> or of total egalitarianism in authority and hierarchical structures >>>>>> as well? It is one thing to share the working and harvest of >>>>>> pastures and fields, it is quite another to sit down and have >>>>>> communal discussion and agreement on every aspect of life.... >>>>> >>>>> The community must be small enough so that the members all know each >>>>> other and can use social pressure to insure it works. Since it is >>>>> contrary to human nature it is unworkable in any extended society, >>>>> as demonstrated wherever it has been tried. >>>> >>>> A theoretical exception might be nomadic cultures: by the nature of >>>> their lifestyle, it is not just difficult but actively problematic to >>>> amass personal property. But in general, yes, the size limitations >>>> definitely hold true. >>>> >>>> I suppose one could posit a society composed entirely of small >>>> communities ordered along practical communist (or at least socialist) >>>> lines, but I rather doubt that without isolation from other cultures >>>> such a setup could survive for any length of time. >>>> >>>> >>> It has been tried in history and has always failed once the society >>> reached a certain size or a certain level of interaction with other >>> societies. Marx sounds great on the surface but it has proven to be >>> unworkable on many levels. The most famous problem of course was the >>> one of transportation. >> >>Quite so. >> >>Which is not to say that there is no value or usefulness at all in such >>a lifestyle. Small communities may well benefit from applying such an >>organisational model at least to a degree, as may groups of farmers or >>other independent craftsmen, tradesmen or small businesses. Ditto >>students, retired people or others groups with small incomes: sharing >>resources equally within a small group may benefit all of them. > > The benefits are limited, The benefits to whom? The 'communists' or the wider society? > of short duration, The kibbutzim in Israel have lasted nearly 70 years. Hardly a short duration. >and few such societies can exist today. Yet many do. -- Smiler, The godless one. aa #2279 Gods are all tailored to order. They are made to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Smiler <smiler@jo.king> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-02 23:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nss4cb$8cf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #2176177 |
On Sun, 02 Oct 2016 13:46:16 +0000, Smiler wrote: > On Sat, 01 Oct 2016 20:49:12 -0400, Attila < wrote: <snip> >> The benefits are limited, > > The benefits to whom? The 'communists' or the wider society? > >> of short duration, > > The kibbutzim in Israel have lasted nearly 70 years. Hardly a short > duration. Correction: The kibbutzim have lasted _over_ 70 years. They were there before the State of Israel existed. >>and few such societies can exist today. > > Yet many do. -- Smiler, The godless one. aa #2279 Gods are all tailored to order. They are made to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 12:15 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <e5dppnFmtr2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2176327 |
On 03/10/2016 10:14, Smiler wrote: > On Sun, 02 Oct 2016 13:46:16 +0000, Smiler wrote: > >> On Sat, 01 Oct 2016 20:49:12 -0400, Attila < wrote: > > <snip> > >>> The benefits are limited, >> >> The benefits to whom? The 'communists' or the wider society? >> >>> of short duration, >> >> The kibbutzim in Israel have lasted nearly 70 years. Hardly a short >> duration. > > Correction: The kibbutzim have lasted _over_ 70 years. They were there > before the State of Israel existed. Which is true-ish: yes, they did last, but they were an adjunct to wider society and did not (could not) exist without the support from and integration into Israel proper.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-02 21:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1rc3vb5tf3qevd3kvq04kdh4bnmfp88pnt@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2176177 |
On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 13:46:16 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smiler@jo.king> in alt.atheism with message-id <nsr338$h36$1@gioia.aioe.org> wrote: >On Sat, 01 Oct 2016 20:49:12 -0400, Attila < wrote: > >> On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 10:40:15 +1100, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <e5avr1F2monU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>>On 01/10/2016 18:48, Attila wrote: >>>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 14:53:17 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e58tq0FhoquU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 01/10/2016 13:16, Attila wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 11:39:57 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <e58ifgFfe6uU1@mid.individual.net> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 30/09/2016 21:41, Attila wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:43:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>>>>>> <1a078491-d220-4cbb-a5c4-ed35d4d921b7@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Communism is actually a just system, equality among all people. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is unworkable outside of a small primitive community. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The communities do not have to be primitive, but yes, they have to >>>>>>> be small. There is a practical size limit, dictated by Dunbar's >>>>>>> Number >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and by external pressures. The more isolated and marginal a >>>>>>> community, the more important cooperation and sharing of resources >>>>>>> becomes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is also the issue of how to define "communism": of resources >>>>>>> only, >>>>>>> or of total egalitarianism in authority and hierarchical structures >>>>>>> as well? It is one thing to share the working and harvest of >>>>>>> pastures and fields, it is quite another to sit down and have >>>>>>> communal discussion and agreement on every aspect of life.... >>>>>> >>>>>> The community must be small enough so that the members all know each >>>>>> other and can use social pressure to insure it works. Since it is >>>>>> contrary to human nature it is unworkable in any extended society, >>>>>> as demonstrated wherever it has been tried. >>>>> >>>>> A theoretical exception might be nomadic cultures: by the nature of >>>>> their lifestyle, it is not just difficult but actively problematic to >>>>> amass personal property. But in general, yes, the size limitations >>>>> definitely hold true. >>>>> >>>>> I suppose one could posit a society composed entirely of small >>>>> communities ordered along practical communist (or at least socialist) >>>>> lines, but I rather doubt that without isolation from other cultures >>>>> such a setup could survive for any length of time. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> It has been tried in history and has always failed once the society >>>> reached a certain size or a certain level of interaction with other >>>> societies. Marx sounds great on the surface but it has proven to be >>>> unworkable on many levels. The most famous problem of course was the >>>> one of transportation. >>> >>>Quite so. >>> >>>Which is not to say that there is no value or usefulness at all in such >>>a lifestyle. Small communities may well benefit from applying such an >>>organisational model at least to a degree, as may groups of farmers or >>>other independent craftsmen, tradesmen or small businesses. Ditto >>>students, retired people or others groups with small incomes: sharing >>>resources equally within a small group may benefit all of them. >> >> The benefits are limited, > >The benefits to whom? The 'communists' or the wider society? Both. > >> of short duration, > >The kibbutzim in Israel have lasted nearly 70 years. Hardly a short >duration. Nor are they pure communism. > >>and few such societies can exist today. > >Yet many do. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor OBastard. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.atheism
csiph-web