Comments by "bakters" (@bakters) on "RE: NS is Socialism | Responding to your counterarguments and Further Explanation" video.
-
2
-
@Gvjrapiro "a right wing philosophy that called itself socialists"
That's false. Nazi 25 points program is easily searchable. Do it. There is a lot of socialism there (majority!), nothing is libertarian, some parts are nationalistic. Definitely not a "right wing philosophy". Not by a mile.
"I agree, there is no such thing as a right wing socialist... which means"
...That you are experiencing a cognitive dissonance. You have two, maybe three options here. Follow the reason and change your views, forgo the reason and keep your views, or simply leave it all alone for a while. But it will come back.
"It seems a hell of a lot more common for righties to be racist"
So, who founded KKK?
"why would they take down some random history channel?"
Because of censorship. Hate speech laws is censorship and YT plays according to those. Partly because they have to, partly because they want to. It's their "religion". Many people have been blocked, their channels deleted, just because they didn't conform to what Silicon Valley culture considers acceptable. It happens all the time. TIK is scared, and rightfully so. He does not share YT approved views, so he can be deleted, like so many people before him.
"Mate, that's capitalism."
I agree, I'm a centrist actually. My belief is that we have anti-trust laws for a reason so we should simply enforce them. YT has absolutely dominant position on the market right now, they should be held accountable for that. And it's a public forum, where free speech should be protected.
That's not what they do, though.
2
-
2
-
@Gvjrapiro I responded already once, but the post was blocked. Didn't know why? Too direct, though no insults, so it shouldn't be that. Then i got it.
I explained why Hitler was against comintern, and it had something to do with his racial views and the nation which at the time dominated those circles. Unfortunately I named them, which is not something you can allow on a YT channel.
Apart from that your "self-admitted righty" argument is pointless, because nazis were self-admitted socialists. Whether you believe them or not, you just can't use this line of argumentation. It's pointless.
Regarding "social views", I mentioned "Women who flew for Hitler." There were at least two high-profile female test pilots. Nazis used films produced by female director. Those king of things simply didn't happen in less progressive societies of Western Democracies.
But they did happen in Nazi Germany. So nazis were socialists not only on economy, but also with respect to gender roles.
Sorry for my post being long winded and boring, but a more direct one was blocked. Just what nazis would force people to do. Censorship and propaganda, very lefty thing, and it's the world we are living in.
2
-
@Gvjrapiro "the contents of a lie don't really matter if we agree that it's a lie"
We didn't agree. Assuming you bring back your "self-admitted righty and fake socialist" argument, I think it's totally false. So far I didn't bother calling you on "self-admitted right" part, because I considered this argument to be moot from the get go, but if you insist, go ahead. Provide me with a quote and context. I'll gladly tear it apart. And obviously, they were not "fake socialists" either. It's a long story, so I urged TIK to make it into a full video if he is so inclined, but the actual practice of Nazi Germany was socialistic. They were true socialists, not a fake ones. (Not Marxists, though. I don't claim that!)
"enjoyed by the citizen of the state alone "
Voting rights are restricted, not granted. You aren't German? No say! You are a "degenerate" German? No say either. No contradiction between declarations and practice detected.
"disproves your "no libertarian" line"
Total nonsense. "abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land." - That's exactly against libertarian positions. They want ad valorem tax and free trade of land. Man, you have ways with arguments...
[Lots of hand-waving skipped]
"tell me how it was socialist"
No problemo.
11. Abolition of unearned incomes. Breaking of rent-slavery.
12. [...] personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
13. We demand the nationalization of all associated industries
14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
16. We demand [...] immediate communalization of the great warehouses [...].
17. We demand [...] provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land.
20. The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program,
21. The State is to care for the elevating national health
Minor points:
7. We demand that the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens.
9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.
10. [...]The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all
And I still feel like I'm missing something!
I don't understand your arguments about KKK. (Oh, BTW, I'm not American. I'm Polish.) One link does not open, the other shows KKKs are afraid of communism. Well, you don't have to be far-leftist to be a lefty, do you? Then it's something about pro-2a and so on. Are you trying to twist it all around again and claim that Democrats who founded KKK were righties, while the Republicans they used to hang were actually lefties? I can't imagine you'd go there, so please clarify. Or let's just forget about it.
"Profit, and profit alone."
That's not true. Sure, that's how market works, but that isn't how people work. YT, Google, Apple, Patreon and all that jazz is ran by people. For example, how would you explain Star Wars wreck if profit was the only motive of people who are behind it? Or The Last of Us 2, for a recent example. Markets don't care for your motives, but people do.
"Nike can say black lives matter all it wants"
How about Gillette fiasco with their "boys will be boys" ad? They lost loyal customers, they almost buried the brand. Why would they risk it, if all they cared for were profits? And even with Nike, why do they assume that their main customers aren't fed up with riots, whining, robbing, shootings and so on? Why do they even risk picking a side here? Because they believe it's the "right thing to do". People can't just work, and work, sleep, eat, work, get old and die. They want to work for something!
Ideas matter and they have consequences. That's why I discuss ideas. Because the consequences can be truly disastrous.
Man, it's not as long as I feared. Success!
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "a form of socialism that was right wing"
Whoa! That's so absurd, that it literally melts my brain.
Oh, wait! I get it! Since Nazis were racist, it's simply impossible for them to be lefties? Well, how about current lefties who are willing to forgive everybody everything, but for the white man, who is always hated and always blamed for all the calamities, imagined or real?
Those are our current lefties, and they are very racist.
"what is socialist about giving women planes?"
Never heard about liberation of women?
Regarding Youtube, they block mostly right wing and centrist views. They let some token weirdos off the hook, because they have no clicks anyway, and YT can always point toward those to show how "fair" they are. But they are not fair.
With that said, I believe it was TIK who blocked my post. I don't blame him, whether he skipped through it in person or it's just some script which does most of the heavy lifting for him. He's in a tough spot, simply waiting for the moment when the YT gods strike his channel down. Being cautious is just prudent.
And that's how censorship works. I was raised under it, so it really annoys me when I see this POS coming back in force. YT tries to appease the rage-crowds, TIK tries to appease the YT and I'm trying to appease TIK. Nobody says what they think anymore and free exchange of ideas is broken.
Which is exactly what they want.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro So the Nazi program was just a rouse? Fine, let's pretend it's true, but even then it was a socialistic rouse, not a right-wing one. Definitely not a "right-wing philosophy" in any sense or form.
"Voter reform?"
Can't find it. What do you mean?
"no mention of actual socialistic policies like redistributing land directly to the people"
That's false. "17. We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land."
"I gave my reasoning, the actions and worldview of Hitler was decidedly right wing,"
That's false. So far you voiced your opinion, but provided very weak arguments in its support. All of them you had to concede when confronted with verifiable historical facts. Those arguments were:
1. Nazi "self-admitted" to be righties - No worky, since they claimed to be Socialists.
2. It was just economy - No, it wasn't. They allowed women to reach high profile positions in roles previously reserved to men only.
3. They followed a "right-wing philosophy" - Proven incorrect. Their philosophy is clearly outlined and it's definitely a socialistic one.
"conservatives founded the kkk"
That's a blatant lie, because I can't imagine it would be an honest mistake. It's so easily searchable.... Even people who try to deny it, do not say that the conservatives founded it, they only say that it was a "grass-roots" movement and that plenty of Democrats simply happened to join it. But it's obviously false. "Setting the Record Straight: American History in Black & White" - "Although it is relatively unreported today, historical documents are unequivocal that the Klan was established by Democrats and that the Klan played a prominent role in the Democratic Party, [...] In fact, a 13-volume set of congressional investigations from 1872 conclusively and irrefutably documents that fact."
"Of course that isn't what they do, they want to be profitable."
That's not the problem (righty channels obliterate the left for clicks). The problem is that YT and many other Internet giants have very clear and very lefty agenda. People are not motivated by profit only, ideologies do matter. And it so happened, that every Internet giant is located in the same cultural background of Bay Area Shit-Francisco. Their ideology obviously does not work and they managed to achieve so much progress at home, that it's literally the shittiest city in the USA, with Boubonic Plague making a comeback.
Still, that's what all of them believe in, so that's what they do.
So we can hope that a more politically-agnostic site will rise up and overtake YT or we can demand free-speech protection from dominant Internet giants. I believe the second option is both more practical and actually makes more sense. A public forum should be treated as public space, not a private space.
1
-
@TheImperatorKnight I recently exchanged a few posts with those haters. They have no arguments.
Yet they tend to repeat that names don't matter and that even if someone actually meant something at one point, later they could change.
That's pathetic, I know, but it's there. So in case you plan a follow-up, please consider including the actual Nazi practices. Of state-controlled wages, prices, profit margins, factories, shortages that followed, large scale corruption etc. and that it was pretty much exactly the same in the Soviet Union.
Actually, do what you want. You tend to know best anyway.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro Sorry man, all of it is very long and it's simply impractical to discuss any of it in detail. Anyway, I'll try to address a few points.
1. "framed it as a lie"
I just follow your arguments to their logical conclusions. If they are liars, you can't take their word for anything, so "self-admittance" means nothing. Anyway, I don't think they were liars.
2. You really do claim that the Democrats were righties and Reps were lefties... My, oh my. I refuse to discuss this issue any further.
3. Since we can't agree on very basic definitions, I also skip all your twisting and turning regarding Nazi 25 points program, but I'm glad you (seem to?) admit that it was socialist at least in letter.
4. The talk with Hitler.
Hitler is not lying to this Strasser guy. He followed in practice what he declared in this discussion. It's also in perfect agreement with the Nazi program, because they were not strictly against private property, as long as people did what they were told . So he can keep Krupp as a de iure owner and de facto director of "his own" factory. That's what they have done all the time. As long as the "owners" were obedient they could keep their stuff, thought the interest rates and prices were fixed. There was no free market in Nazi Germany, apart from black market. Black marketeers were equally viciously and ineffectively persecuted. I was raised in such economy. It's socialism.
5. "Self-admittance" quotes.
Man, it's a lot of them, and all of them that I've studied are totally irrelevant. Yes, Nazis and Fascists were to the right of bolsheviks . They were not communists, they were not Marxists. Every quote which emphasizes how they are to the right of Lenin is totally irrelevant. Find me something where they say they are to the right of center! Or don't, cause you won't. Because they weren't. Giovanni Gentile was a socialist and he was the main fascist ideologue.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "3. Yet I am using the basic definition, and parts [of the Nazi program] were [socialistic], but some parts certainly were not."
That's good. I started losing hope we'll ever agree on anything. Anyway, now we see that framing Hitler as "far-right" is simply a lie. Not a misunderstanding, not an oversight, it's a lie. He was center-left at worst.
"objectively true claim that they were not socialist"
Depending on the definition used, it can be true. But there is no sane definition of far-right which would fit Nazis with respect to their program, their philosophy and actual practices. So it's a lie. Because people who pushed for this classification definitely knew and understood all of this.
" state control is not socialism."
State control is the only practically viable option. You let people do what they want, they will act according to the market forces and ruin all of your utopia. I mean, some people won't do it, but others will and market will select for those "bastards". Sooner or later every socialist regime figures it out and it all ends in tyranny. It's been tried so many times already. How you people manage to still believe in this nonsense? Actual religions are so much more sane in comparison.
"In this quote, he clearly references "the right""
Yeah, but it's not about the Germans, but about those people we are not allowed to even mention. (They) acted both on the right and left, and (they) profited from politics.
"Carl Schmitt"
That's an easy one. I've known a bunch of people who were not communists, yet they were members of the communist party. The answer is simple. Power. You wanna do anything, you have to get into the power circles. In a way it's similar to monarchists starting in an election, and we have a bunch of those in the parliament. Besides, Schmitt was an anti-bracket guy, which obviously helped him to fit in. I didn't bother searching for the other one. Do I have to? Is he somehow important?
"support from foreign capitalists like Ford"
Ford built Soviet Union. Nothing new or unusual here. Or maybe bolsheviks weren't Socialists either? ;-)
"Why did he purge the aryan socialists"
Infighting. In Poland we had Piłsudski, a leader of Polish Socialist Party, who also purged most of the left (and right). BTW - Hitler admired him. He spent an hour honoring his death in front of a symbolic coffin in Polish Embassy in Berlin. Anyway, Stalin killed off Trotskists, Lenin killed off mensheviks. That's normal socialism. They kill. A lot.
"but not the aryan upper class?"
They did what they were told. Anyway, are you trying to argue, that Hitler wasn't a socialist, because he didn't murder enough rich people? That'd be funny. Please, do! (Yeah, I'm a bit tipsy by now. ;-))
And tired. But at least I'll look at the rest of your post.
Why a bunch of people preferred fascism to communism? Because communism is actually worse. Fascists weren't nazis, they didn't murder the (). They actually hardly murdered anyone.
"Jesus was j(censored). So what? [...] those who formulate new ideas"
You don't know much about Jesus, do you? He was an apocalyptic J(censored), just a minor sect in Palestine. Most (practically all) of the new ideas of Christianity were formulated by the Greeks, who wrote the Bible, and later by the Romans.
Seems like I'm done finally? Good. I'm tired, hungry and tipsy. Good night to you, mate.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro Let's just summarize, shall we? What we agree on and what we'll never agree on. Actually, let's start with disagreements.
Nazi program was not realized in practice - I'll never agree with that. I believe they did almost exactly what they promised to do. ""What Marxism, Leninism and Stalinism failed to accomplish, we shall be in a position to achieve." - said Hitler to Otto Wagener, his economic adviser, and he really meant it.
75% of Nazi program is right wing - I'll never agree with that. Neither you do, I think. You wouldn't constantly try to devalue this evidence by claiming "it's just a pamphlet, just a propaganda piece" if you did. Because it would mean that they were fake-righties, not fake-lefties, as you constantly argue.
"the nazis were absolutely socially far right" - Definitely not. They were centrist, at worst. Everybody seems to forget, that traditional gender roles were universally accepted. Nazis were no different. Even Soviets didn't differ much (I mean they tried, bu the experiment totally failed).
"far right in nearly all policies that did not impact economics" - Total nonsense. I'll never agree with that. They implemented censorship, state owned press, total control over education. Eguenics was an idea supported by plenty of leftist, including Wells or George Bernard Shaw, who wrote: "Extermination must be put on a scientific basis if it is ever to be carried out humanely and apologetically as well as thoroughly... If we desire a certain type of civilisation and culture we must exterminate the sort of people who do not fit into it." Again, Hitler simply put those ideas into practice.
Stateless society idea - I'll never agree with that. It's a pure utopia, which leads to dystopia. All utopias do.
NEP wasn't socialism - C'mon man. I don't even.
Which countries do I consider fascist - Spain, Italy, Hungary, just to narrow it down. J()ews had it fine there, until Germans took over.
Where do we agree?
1. Nazi program had some aspects which were socialistic.
2. While you can argue that Nazis were right wing, far-right claim is badly supported.
3. Nazi economy was a Centrally Administered Economy, which is what you typically find among socialist states.
4. In NSDAP there were socialists, at least initially.
Anything else?
1
-
@Gvjrapiro 1. Unification of Germans - Realized in practice.
2. Denouncing of treaty of Versailles - Done in practice.
3. Colonies for lebensraum - Poland, big parts of USSR taken. Realized in practice.
4. Restricting the civic rights to ethnic Germans. - Done.
5. Restricting the rights of foreigners. - Done.
6. Purging foreigners off any public offices. - Done.
7. Purging foreigners off the Reich. - Some left, some were murdered. Mostly done.
8. No immigration. - Realized.
9. Equal rights for citizens. - Aristocracy (hated by Hitler) was not privileged, so it was true.
10. Do as you are told, or else. - Of course realized.
11. Abolition of unearned incomes (rent-slavery). - Sure. By printing money, so they become meaningless, but they did it.
12. "War profits" a crime. - They did it. Selling pigs at market value was a crime, people were convicted for it.
13. Nationalization of war industries. - Of course. They never specify the means and there was no need for "literal" nationalization, as Hitler clearly outlined over and over. He must have thought people to be really stupid for insisting on minutia and I agree with him on that.
14. Division of profits of heavy industry. - Of course happened. Fixed prices and profit margins made sure of that.
15. Welfare expansion. - I'm not sure about the scale of that. They surely state-funded cruise ship vacation for at least some workers, so I think we can count that one.
16. Support for small retailers. - From what I've heard, it happened.
17. Expropriation of land as needed. - Of course.
18. War against "degenerates", regardless of race. - Sure.
19. Abolition of Roman law tradition. - Of course.
20. State controlled education. - Obviously.
21. National health improvement program, exercises and such. - Hitlerjugend alone should count.
22. National army. - Did they ever...
23. State controlled media. - As above.
24. Free religion, the opposition to J()ewish-materialistic world view. - Very successful at that. Fanatics were not uncommon at all.
25. Strong central government with unlimited authority. - Well, I don't believe in unlimited anything, but they came close... ;-)
You see, people who think the way you are used to, simply play with words, like they have no real meaning. Like there is no reality which those words are suppose to (possibly precisely) reflect. But the reality is out there. It's waiting. So you can twist and turn, reinterpret this, redefine that and find a corner where your cherished ideas are perfectly protected from any possible attack.
But there are people who take those ideas very seriously. If Antifa ever takes over, you'll be forced to know them intimately. When comrades Cleetus and Jazzira smash your door in, Jazzira following up with a swift kick to the balls, just because you are a disgusting white male, only then you will realize the truth of it.
But it will pass. Apparently, even deep in "re-education centers" of this world, people find a way of sheltering their most dearly beloved ideas from the infringements of harsh reality.
So, good luck with that. You will need it.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "You're accusing me of saying words with no meaning?"
No, that's not what I wrote. I wrote that you play with words, like if they have no real meaning. Which is dangerous, because words do have a meaning.
"Mate, you literally said that overinflation is the same as abolishing rent."
Literally? If you are in debt, inflation will erase it. I've seen it. It really has this effect. Is it "the same", especially "literally the same"? Of course not. Close enough, though.
The difference between you and me? You write that the first several points of the program are nationalistic. I agree with that! Why? Because it's true. I vote nationalist right, I don't like the association, but I agree with you, because it's simply true.
Now, I could argue that nationalists back then were not far-right and not always even right of center. There were monarchists, theocrats, capitalists and libertarians to the right of all of them, and some nationalists were obvious lefties. To distinguish themselves from nationalistic right, they called themselves appropriately, yes, National Socialists.
Which is a concept you simply can't accept. Too painful, isn't it? Wait for comrade Jazzira to know what a real pain is.
"And mate, not sure if you could tell, but I am an organizer for my local antifa chapter."
You think it makes you somehow immune to what is going to happen? Nope. If you guys ever win, your fate will be the worst. Why? Because guys like me will be defeated by the enemy, which is easy to swallow. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, such is life. You guys? You will be defeated by your own. By the people you dedicated your life to. By your own children.
Stay strong. You will need it.
1
-
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "Mate, you think we like obama? Or Hillary? Come on now."
That's whom you gonna get, though. And once they come to power, through subversion of democratic processes, who is going to be the most dangerous people to them? Guys like me? We are joke to them. They know us, every single one, there are spies in every place, they got hooks, and we are branded as enemy already. So not us. It's you guys! You know way too much. And you are idealists, which is a synonym for "people hard to control". You gotta go. Sorry. Them's the rules.
"Nah, it's conservative monotheistic religion vs the other conservative monotheistic religion."
No. Crusades weren't a thing, until Islam tried to take over France. They took all of Africa and Middle East? Nothing. They took Sicily? Nothing. They took Spain? Still nothing. But once they crossed over Pyrenees, people became scared. Rightfully so.
Nowadays they took Lebanon. You think if people of Lebanon were not Christians, they would be treated differently? Sure! You are correct. They would be treated even worse , because that's what is written in their holy book.
BTW - I'm an atheist. I'm not defending Christianity because I've so much invested into it. Still, I like Christianity. It's the basis of our common culture, yours and mine. BTW - What cultures Islam has created? Well... Let me think... They inherited some astronomers at some point, but after that? Zero.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "all of the elections that I don't actually give two shits about"
I'm not blaming you, I'm warning you. But I agree, I should've figured out you don't care about democracy. That's even worse, actually. I was somehow deluded, that you guys at least hoped to win without destroying everything in the process. Not? Well, I pity you guys less now. Still, you are humans, so... Yeah.
"No, not really. History helps."
What? The Battle of Tours 732 A.D., the First Crusade 1095 A.D. (A few years between the two, don't you think?) I'm not going to watch an hour long video and try to figure out what you might have meant. What's your point?
"just a re-written bible"
You never read either, so why do you try to pose as some sort of an intellectual? Please do. They differ. A lot!
"europeans were still trying to carve huts out of solid shit to live in"
Well, there was this thing called Rome and Greece before that. Not very well known fact, but it really happened.
"biggest [Greek] libraries" - I fixed that one.
"longest lists of inventions" - From a very short period in history. It basically lasted since they took over actually advanced civilizations, until they managed to bring them down. They were good at it, so it didn't last too long...
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "US elections, which are not democratic"
Do something about it! Our guys did. pilnojwyborow dot pl, which means "watch/supervise the elections" was a marvel which was professionally assured to be impossible to achieve within the available timeframe, even if we'd had any money. But someone did it anyway. Pretty much for food. It worked, we can prove it. (Then it didn't, because of corona, but not much loss. We "won" anyway.)
"The crusades were not retaliatory by any measure."
People were genuinely fed up. I know what Italians went through, because my people went through it too. The biggest slaver raids had reached up to where I live right now. The people were rounded up, marched to Crimea and sold in Bakchisaray. You know where the word "slave" comes from? From Slavs.
With that said, I don't really disagree with you. It was a complex issue. Saying it's that one thing is simplifying way too much. Though that one thing was there. We still remember, so how could you expect they'd forget so soon?
"Yes, empires that stretched into muslim territories and partially collapsed because of the attacks of those reigons, and left europe in shambles for literal centuries."
You've absolutely no idea about history... That's just rubbish what you wrote. Sorry, man. That's pitiful.
"I'd like to see some, really any, citation on this."
I've found something on your level. NY Times, I'm afraid... ;-))
"how-islam-won-and-lost-the-lead-in-science.html"
"The Golden Age
When Muhammad's armies swept out from the Arabian peninsula in the seventh and eighth centuries, annexing territory from Spain to Persia, they also annexed the works of Plato, Aristotle, Democritus, Pythagoras, Archimedes, Hippocrates and other Greek thinkers.
Hellenistic culture had been spread eastward by the armies of Alexander the Great and by religious minorities, including various Christian sects, according to Dr. David Lindberg, a medieval science historian at the University of Wisconsin.
The largely illiterate Muslim conquerors turned to the local intelligentsia to help them govern, Dr. Lindberg said. In the process, he said, they absorbed Greek learning that had yet to be transmitted to the West in a serious way, or even translated into Latin. "
[...]
"Why didn't Eastern science go forward as well? ''Nobody has answered that question satisfactorily,'' [That's a lie, BTW. At some point their Theologians figured out, that if Allah decided that 2+2=3*11, that's what it really is, so logic was useless. Which reminds me, that the intellectual fathers of your movement not so long ago decided, that establishing truth is impossible, and our science goes the same way Islamic science went.]
Okay, the rest is total bollocks. Read at your own risk.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro Stop the press. Pinker is being cancelled. Over some tweets. So, he's the enemy of the people now? What chances do you have?
Anyway, let's read your post.
Democracy is hard and very imperfect! - I feel you, man. I really do... ;-)
Muslim countries did relatively well. - Sure. The climate, as recorded in high resolution Greenland ice cores, was more favorable over there at this time. However, it doesn't mean that a slave industry operating successfully and preying on your own people will be considered a minor issue all of a sudden, does it?
"the romans and greeks had many troubles [...] but one of them certainly was muslims"
Lol. I'm not sure, but it's possible I wrote this acronym for the first time in my life. Anyway, just drop it. Whatever. It's not important.
"a large amount of time was spent reexamining and recovering literature and science from the greeks and romans"
True. It went off for reals, once we captured Cordova, with all the Arabic translations.
"the inspiration of the inventions of those empires did come from the islamic world."
Sure. And nothing good came out of there ever since. ;-)
So, that's the "mystery" of Arabic Golden Age. A bunch of ruffians attacking barely functional civilizations, taking them over, subduing them, but a few remnants of what was already lost still managed to do something impressive. Truly great people, those. The optics was discovered in a prison cell, apparently. But once they ran out of remnants, that was it.
"And what "movement" would that be?"
Postmodersnism. Watch Stephen Hicks. He's brilliant and not boring. A rare combination.
"Please, enlighten me."
Discover the savior of mankind, the lord Jesus. You will be happier, and you will have purpose in life, which will very unlikely kill yourself and others. He was a good man. Recommended. And the Greeks who wrote about him were effing brilliant.
It's only a half joking comment.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro No comments on Pinker being cancelled? Just as we speak? That s*t apparently happened today...
"And I could be mistaken, but didn't similar discoveries like that help to kick start europe back into an enlightenment? "
Absolutely true. But they got it first and got nowhere with it, so I wouldn't fall head over heels with praise. Could we do without those early sources? I think we could. It would be harder, but I think we could do it. Aristotle would be hard to replace, though. His logic was kinda crucial... Oh, I don't know if it was in Arabic sources. I just don't know, period.
Anyway, It's good we got the library in Cordova before some fanatic Muslim idiot decided to burn it down, like they did in Alexandria.
"Again, they [the great people of Islam] were conquerers"
No, not really. They were the conquered.
"postodernism isn't really like... compatible with my "movement?"
Well, you may be a true old-schooler then. Kropotkin and all that. Yeah, that's more likely. Back then we used to have science! But your "pupils" are postmodern, so you should still know how they "think".
"but the whole "unquestioning obedience and faith for a purpose you will never understand" kinda turns me off"
On the other hand, Jesus was a true communist... ;-)
1
-
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "They wouldn't do it if it wasn't legal, dude."
Legal shmegal. Do you understand the consequences? Half of the territory of various states can stop belonging to them now. Federal territory is being vastly expanded, though. With no proper legal or fiscal systems in place. That could be truly disastrous.
"correct legal procedures to get it, and not just decided it was theirs."
What a bureaucratic way of thinking. Anyway, all of that missing paperwork was neglected nearly 200 years ago, but it somehow still counts. That's so crazy, I can't even.
"Islamic empires absolutely existed"
Sure. We've been battling one of those for several hundred years. But it doesn't mean that "they had a relatively stable empire going until WWI", or however exactly you've put it. They never had any single empire, which unified even the majority of Islam. They still keep on fighting among themselves. Nothing new here. It was always like that.
"they wouldn't have been able to pose such a threat to the romans"
I thought you'd google it up eventually, but Rome fell before Muhammad was born. Like 200 years before, or thereabouts. The level of education in the States is truly atrocious. You guys are below the World average right now, according to the research I've seen. Poland is right below NE Asia, who actually rule.
Oh, my. You are falling apart so fast... Turn it around, or something. We kinda need you to stay up for just a little bit longer. You can't expect a broken country to be able to stand up to Russia after only one generation of independence.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "Debt, which is a different thing entirely from rent."
It was probably badly translated. Hitler meant interests on debts.
“Our financial principle: Finance shall exist for the benefit of the state; the financial magnates shall not form a state within the state. Hence our aim to break the thralldom of interest. Relief of the state, and hence of the nation, from its indebtedness to the great financial houses, which lend on interest. Nationalization of the Reichsbank and the issuing houses, which lend on interest.”
But I don't even need to defend this position. Rents in a regulated market can't catch up to even moderate inflation. I lived under hyperinflation and I paid rent, so I kinda know what I'm talking about here. We were all poor, but paying rent was peanuts.
"actually cared about the nation above race"
Current left keeps on dividing the nation into so many subgroups, that I genuinely lost count. I'd call them racist, but the PC term is racialism. Moot argument anyway.
"LEft wing nationalism tends to be isolationist"
So guys I vote for (and we are Winning!), are actually lefties? Damn, they fooled me so well... ;-)
"i'd love for my old buddy Jazzira here to fucking shatter my nuts, because that would be more entertaining than this."
You think: "What can she do to me, she's just a frail lady?", but she was 250 before fat shaming became a thing, and you also forgot that gender is just a social construct, so she's sporting a significantly bigger package then you do and knows from personal experience how much it hurts to be kicked there... ;-)
"Thanks for your fun little fantasy"
Fantasy? So whom you guys managed to get elected so far? Gay Obama for starters, but he's not your harmless gay. He kept on murdering his former partners until one of them became so scared, that he decided to testify. He was very convincing. Not a harmless gay, this Obama guy... Then it was the turn for Killary. Nuff said. The elites of your movement had to make sure that Epstein killed himself, which was such a blunder.
So, who are the people you vote for? Nice guys, aren't they? Let's wait until they don't have to pretend to be so nice, then you'll see how my "fantasy" plays out.
"right wing infighting isn't as much of a thing"
No, it really isn't. Nowadays it's like "Nationalists of the World, unite!" , which is really funny, but I like it. Re: Christians vs. Muslims? You were mislead there, I believe. It's Muslims vs. Infidels. You are an Infidel.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "Not really [not the taxes], nor would they want them most likely."
You mean, they are allergic to money? That would explain it all right.
"the US getting most of its land back with either added reparations, protections, or more land for native americans."
Oh, I get it! You pay them more money so they don't take less money, and give them more land so they won't take less land! That's brilliant in its simplicity.
I have a better idea, though. You pay a little bit to the biggest twat, because you accidentally killed his dog. You know, he deserves a bit of reparation for an accident, doesn't he? He shuts up, understandably, so it's just this unfortunate ruling to deal with now. I'd have a few ideas there too. High treason is out, unfortunately, so we'd have to get creative... ;-)
The question is, why didn't they do it like that? They don't like killing dogs? Well, kill the twat then. It's not like they've never killed for much more minor issues, is it? So why?
Because they want chaos. They really do. They hired you to sow it, just for an off the cuff example. So, how do you like being a tool? Still useful...
"Well in practice yes [settlement laws, I hope I use the correct term]"
No, not just in practice. It's the law. After some time passes and especially with a lot of effort put into the "thing", you get to keep it, even if you kinda stole it back then. Time and effort counts. It's the law, not just practice.
Anyway, I live in crowded Europe. Every piece of land I pass when I want to take a piss into the nettles is claimed by five countries. Indian claims don't impress me much. What are they going to do? Hire a shaman to charm my chickens? Well, that would be disastrous.
"i'm pretty sure I didn't say anything about stealing muslim lands"
What did you mean by that: "empires that stretched into muslim territories"? The Greeks trying to steal their deserts? I agree the Greeks were super smart, but figuring out those sands will make you rich a millennium later was beyond even their eggheads.
"I've taken to some home baking, and it's actually quite fun."
Want some tips? I believe I have it figured out reasonably well. Easy, quick(ish), really, I mean it, really tasty (but it's my flour mostly, sorry) and even looks good.
"Also gardening"
I totally hate it, but I do it too. You just can't beat the taste. You get used to good stuff, it's like an addiction.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "Well I'd hope that you could cite some US law saying that then."
It's hard to google it in English, because "settlement" refers also to settling a case out of court, which results in plenty of false positives. I've no time right now, but literally a few seconds search in Polish, where we use a unique term, was immediately successful.
I won't cite it, but the property is legally yours after 20 years, if you didn't try to steal it (purchased in "bad faith" is the term they use). After 30 years it's yours even if you tried to steal it.
It's a very common concept, so I'm positive USA has similar laws. It's a very practical thing. It cuts down on people trying to dig through archives in order to reopen a very old case, where nothing is clear any more, laws have changed, witnesses non-existent or hard to find and so on.
"land that were never legally yours"
I didn't know you guys were such legal fundamentalists. How do you explain "Just Act 447" then, where United States declares it will break the international law in order to appease bogus claims of some powerful people vigorously waving their victim card?
"Anything to do with cutting down on or finding alternative ingredients would be really helpful, since our stores are all out of stuff."
For bread you need flour, water and salt. That's all. No yeast.
So first you create a sourdough starter. Mix a table spoon of flour with equal weight of water and leave it be for a day. Then double the weight (two spoons of flour this time and that much water), leave it for a day, double again (three spoons this time). The lid on the jar you use must be loose. It will grenade on you if you seal it shut!
Depending on the temperature and the quality of flour (whole grain, rye, "organic" is the best) after a few days of that you will have a sourdough starter. It will bubble up and smell sour. At worst it's going to take a week, so starting small can be beneficial.
Then you can bake a sourdough bread. First feed your starter for the last time and wait 6-12 hours so it expands fully.
The recipe is silly easy. 1-2-3 2%. 1 weight of starter, 2 weights of water, 3 weights of flour (whichever kind you like), 2% salt content. It will seem like a lot of salt, but it's just fine, don't worry.
Mix it all together, leave it for 15min or so, then kneed the dough for at least 10 min. Leave it in a bowl for practical reasons. It's so sticky, it's a mess. That's fine. After that stretch-and-fold the dough every half and hour, so the gluten will properly develop. You grab the edge, pull it up and fold it on top. Go around once, that's enough.
Then transfer the dough into a baking tray or simply a metal pot. Cover the bottom and walls with a bit of oil, transfer the dough, cover it with wet towel or simply a lid and let it raise. 4 hours is the minimum, 12 might happen occasionally, but basically you wait until it raises enough. How much is enough? It should at least double in volume.
Then you just bake it inside the baking tray or a pot. High temperature, and bake until it's baked. There is no rule to it for how long, but somewhere around 45 min should do. The first 20min you can bake with the lid on (if you use a pot). That helps with "oven spring".
Whatever starter was left, feed him and store in the fridge. Take him out the day before you plan on baking again, feed him and it will be ready tomorrow.
It's a simplified recipe. It doesn't require too much handling skills, refrigeration and all that jazz. It works. I do it all the time.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro Regarding the treaties and annexation laws, I really don't care about the legalese. The spirit of the law is obvious. You keep it for long enough, it's really yours, regardless of what some tambourine thumper might find profitable to abuse.
I mean, stop being such wussies. I suspect you might not be aware of it, but Poland was shifted west after WWII. Germans still didn't sign a peace treaty with us, because they've lost quite a bit of land to us. Do we care? No! They can have it back only by force!
And that's it. Do you threaten us with war? Bad idea... It's going to be long, bloody and you'll most probably get your arse handed to you once more. No war? Get lost, then. I'm washing my dog today, so I've more important business to attend to.
Though actually, I allegedly distilled some stuff today. I can give you a lot of hints on that too. I don't drink it myself (family does, though...), gotta keep the habit in check, but it's good stuff nonetheless. Season it for half a year in oaken barrels... Beautiful. Approaching the level of single malt, which is achievable at home, but since it's not for me, I don't bother with that much hassle. Others aren't such connoisseurs to care for the top shelf quality. But it can be done.
Regarding bread, I've a bit more time now, so I'll systematize the process a bit.
Three stages:
1. Get the starter going.
2. Mix the ingredients and develop the gluten matrix (kneeding, folding, stretching).
3. Transfer the dough into the baking container and let it rise.
4. Bake it. (So it's actually four stages, after all.)
This process is a combination I developed from English, Russian and Polish videos. English sources usually make it way too complicated. A lot of what they do is necessary only if you want to bake a free-standing loaf, but why bother? You use an oven pan, a pot of any sort, whatever, and the loaf does not need to be able to support itself. It's so much easier that way!
Then, the local, traditional ways of making bread resulted in fairly sour taste. You may like it that way and still use my approach. It still works. But neither me, nor my family enjoys the sour taste all that much. A little bit is cool, though. A matter of personal taste, obviously.
And it's quick. I start in the morning and I have the bread in the afternoon. Most of the time is simply waiting, so I can do whatever I need to do in the meantime.
We rarely buy bread anymore. Only if my started goes too sour and I need to start over. Otherwise, it's home baked bread. And nobody bothers me with pizza anymore, which is actually harder to do at home, so that is a plus too. ;-)
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "no longer exists, they can't really settle a deal"
Nonsense. Of course they can, they just don't want to. You could maybe argue that when they were divided it was a bit more complex, but even back then the West Germany was settling deals regarding war reparations. Soviets stole all of ours, but Germans don't care, obviously. And rightfully so, I believe.
"so we can't just pretend that we can take land as we please"
What do you mean by "pretending"? You can take whatever you want, by force or other means. There is no pretending there.
"especially when that land is so substantial and goes directly into the nations"
Especially then. If it was all peanuts, I could imagine giving them that, just to feel better about yourself. But better half of Oklahoma? And possibly way more than that? That's madness.
On another note: Today is the day of remembrance of Volyn Massacre. It went on for a long time, but the corresponding Sunday of 1943 was especially bloody. Ukrainian nationalists attacked a bunch of churches and murdered about 8k of Polish women, children and elders (very few men). With hand tools. Extreme cruelty. Truly extreme cruelty. For no good reason (Poles never murdered Ukrainians). About 100k dead overall. Still within living memory.
What our media said about it? Nothing. Actually worse than that. Some Muslims some time ago had a bad day in Srebrenitsa, so that's what they mentioned...
I find it truly offensive.
1
-
@Gvjrapiro "new deal is formed"
So Oklahoma is about to go bankrupt and the Indians can rightfully expect all the taxes from Tulsa. What kind of deal would be profitable enough to them, so the'd agree? "We don't kill you, if you agree..." kind of a deal?
I think it's a political plot. They'll force Trump's hand, then impeach him, or something? Maybe just steal his votes? I don't know, it's so silly. But it's also a treason in my book. Only the enemy of the state would rule such a thing.
"You don't get to keep something just because you stole it 200 years ago"
Actually, you do get to keep it, if it was a long time ago and you made it all your own, with investments and improvements. Such a silly ruling, that. You guys go total bonkers.
"The eastern roman empire"
There were more of those. Carolingians, Germans and Russians had empires, which claimed to be the direct descendants of Rome. Even our Rzeczpospolita was based around the Roman Republic model and all the nobles spoke Latin. Sure, Byzantines had more of a claim than others, but they spoke Greek and were actually Greeks. Anyway, they never "stole" any Muslim lands. The original Muslim lands were deep in the desert, everything else they conquered, then forced their religion onto the local population. That's how you got all those "deep Muslim thinkers". The locals still remembered how to do science, and as long as it wasn't forbidden, they did some of it.
"How we're keeping up in quarantine?"
Splendid, actually. I live in a countryside, so lockdown didn't affect me in the slightest. I learned how to bake my own bread and do it all the time. Many people have told me they've never ate a better bread in their life, and those are Polish standards, which aren't half bad at all. I don't miss much, but I worry about the coming recession. With that said, I'm equipped to survive for quite a long time.
1