Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
Why don't you just donate a years worth of hair gel to Onar's state? I reckon you might be able to fund an army.
Drama queen - sez the guy who selectively quoted so he could have a nice little shriek.
the neoliberal vision of the future
- Thread starter Dillinger4
- Start date
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I recognise the above claim. It was last made in a history text by a scholar called David Irving. Like you, he was fond of decontextualising evidence, then recontextualising it to mean what he wished it to mean, rather than what it originally signified.
The death camps (Majdenek, Sobibor, Treblinka, Auschwitz-Birkenau, Chelmno, Belzec) did not become death camps, as your formulation "were not death camps until the war progressed" implies. They were constructed as sites for the industrial-scale extermination of those deemed racially-inferior under the Nazi racial hygiene laws, not converted from existing camps with different functions.
Many, but you're hardly amenable to taking in such information, given that you've already made up your mind that Nazis and social democrats are 95% the same (even though, in spite of many long paragraphs that you've written, you haven't been able to quantify your claim with any substantive evidence).
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It's not the vaguest sniff. It is a fucking stench. But Onar knows what he can do to get rid of it.
What exactly is the point of you on this thread?
(And yes, I know I'm breaking my own advice by responding to you. )
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
In any case - I think Onarch is too far down the rabbit hole to be able to discuss things based on any agreed premises (or even terms that mean the same thing). For instance, the idea that taxes are a form of theft has some traction insofar as you have no choice over whether you pay it. Some libertarians would think it not a problem if your access to various services was contingent on certain payments, but it is the demand to unconditionally pay, backed up by the use of force, that they have a problem with.
A common view expressed on this thread is that the element of compulsion is a non-issue and that the services that the taxes pay for is highly valued by them. Whethr you agree or not, it is possible to highly value the services and see the extraction of taxes with menaces as an issue at the same time. Or at least to entertain the idea of a tension there. We can't talk on that level with Onarch, though, because the appeal of being a lone persecuted voice in the wilderness is so great and the common ground has been long since abandoned in favour of the high ground.
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
As VP says, this is recognisably David Irving style holocaust denial. Not as blatant as Zundel or one of those guys, but still recognisably an attempt to let the Nazis off the hook for intentional mass murder.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I can certainly entertain the idea of tension between the individual and the state, 8ball. There is great tension where the state is the only entity legitimately allowed to exercise the use of violence to get its way.
That's a different conversation, though. Onar is stuck at the level of asking why the suffering fuck he should be forced to pay for his neighbour's cancer treatment. Such a morally bankrupt position has to be challenged first before you can go on to consider the best way to resolve the tension between the collective and the individual.
(In fact, I would say that you cannot resolve this tension – it is something that ought to always be subject to constant re-evaluation – I don't believe in some kind of endpoint for society or politics: the process is ongoing and dynamic.)
That's a different conversation, though. Onar is stuck at the level of asking why the suffering fuck he should be forced to pay for his neighbour's cancer treatment. Such a morally bankrupt position has to be challenged first before you can go on to consider the best way to resolve the tension between the collective and the individual.
(In fact, I would say that you cannot resolve this tension – it is something that ought to always be subject to constant re-evaluation – I don't believe in some kind of endpoint for society or politics: the process is ongoing and dynamic.)
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
Ok, devil's advocate hat on here. Why should someone be forced to pay for another person's cancer treatment?
There are plenty of reasons why you might want to pay into a common pot for when such eventualities happen to a member of the group, but there's still a legitimate question there.
Looks just like me. You should change the c in comment to a k. Then it would be more reflective of your need to subscribe to internet memes.
And it would be properly alliterative.
Suppose a woman accuses someone of rape. There is no physical evidence, only the testimony of the victim and the prosecutor acknowledges as much. Is this rape denial?
fredfelt
Mostly unknown member
So when you pick the more limited labour productivity rather than multi factor productivity the US is still behind many European social democratic economies. You mention the welfare state of Norway - so while having such high productivity in terms of labour it still manages to have social safety nets.
Regardless your mitigating factors don't add up.
In regard to welfare. Your selected measure of productivity was labour against GDP. So despite having a social safety net Norway still has better productivity than the US.
In terms of GDP litigation adds to this. So your reference to crazy litigation costs is not valid - in fact it makes the US look worse than the measure you used.
In regards to redistribution wealth the riches of Norway are shared far more equitably through the population. Take any measure and you'll find Norway has a far bigger middle class, and far smaller difference between the poor and the rich. Wealth in the US is hugely sued towards the mega rich, while leaving a huge economic underclass.
I will not even bother to enquire why social engineering is such a bad thing for a sovereign state undertake.
In regard to outsourcing. Your chosen measure of productivity is GDP. If you picked GNP you have have a point. If a US company outsources the income is still counted as GDP.
You really need to get a better grasp of the fundamentals of economics. I'm just a beginner but it's clear you have made very some basic errors.
TruXta
tired
That would've been an apt comparison hadn't it been for the fact that there is unequivocally positive physical evidence for industral planned extermination of undesirables under the Nazi regime.
I'd rather see Onar have the rope to hang himself then watch a village of idiots hang him by consensus.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
About those "mainstream holocaust researchers". Got any references yet?
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
Onar - you ass - there is actually physical evidence of the holocaust, including evidence of Zyklon B residues on the site of the Auschwitz gas chambers. As others have cited above the claim that there isn't such evidence is a favoured trick of the deniers.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
@ 8ball
Because individual freedom can only exist in the context of a society in which people help each other where they need to. We cannot run our own private health services, so the decision is taken collectively to run one collectively, and yes, the individual is forced to pay into it. Within a properly democratic set-up the individual can protest about this, but they cannot opt out.
The crucial point here is this: The alternative to this limited freedom is no freedom at all. Whether we wanted to be or not, we were born, and it is only due to the actions of others that we were able to survive our childhoods. So, for instance, you should pay out of your taxes for the education of other people's children because your education was paid for by other people, and without that education, you wouldn't be earning the money you're being taxed on! Societies do involve payback. It is childish to think that they could be any other way. The nature of that payback is, of course, open to discussion, argument and disagreement, but the fact that any such payback ought to exist should not be cause for debate: the likes of Onar who do debate it really are acting like small children. Individually, humans simply cannot survive – and any form of coming together collectively has to involve compromises. There is no way that it cannot.
Because individual freedom can only exist in the context of a society in which people help each other where they need to. We cannot run our own private health services, so the decision is taken collectively to run one collectively, and yes, the individual is forced to pay into it. Within a properly democratic set-up the individual can protest about this, but they cannot opt out.
The crucial point here is this: The alternative to this limited freedom is no freedom at all. Whether we wanted to be or not, we were born, and it is only due to the actions of others that we were able to survive our childhoods. So, for instance, you should pay out of your taxes for the education of other people's children because your education was paid for by other people, and without that education, you wouldn't be earning the money you're being taxed on! Societies do involve payback. It is childish to think that they could be any other way. The nature of that payback is, of course, open to discussion, argument and disagreement, but the fact that any such payback ought to exist should not be cause for debate: the likes of Onar who do debate it really are acting like small children. Individually, humans simply cannot survive – and any form of coming together collectively has to involve compromises. There is no way that it cannot.
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Leuchter, Rudolf and maybe Berg would be my guess.
Is that socialist America or free market America? They seem to be one and the same thing in the eyes of your ilk.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
Your post proves the point I was making. I asked a simple, albeit contentious question and you made a lot of points and assertions there, with more than sufficient holes, gaps and fallacies helpfully provided to allow any libertarian, whether of the left or right wing variety, plenty of ways in to make some points.
But Onarch doesn't want to play like that because this is a site full of the benighted heathen who see good as evil and evil as good. To argue on agreed terms and deal with such ambiguities would place him down here in the mud with the rest of us.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Could you point out a fallacy in my post, please?
I don't doubt that there are holes and gaps...
I don't doubt that there are holes and gaps...
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Yes, please. We'd like to see the evidence for your claims onarchy. It might not be controversial to say that stuff in far-right shithead circles, but we'd like to see some proof before even entertaining such ideas as a premise for discussion.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
You imply "the Nazis" were keen for this. History actually records that the Madagascar plan, like the various plans that preceded and were contemporaneous to it, were predicated on achievement at arms and the taking of territory, and that the primary plan was always going to be extermination. Even back in the days of Aktion T4 it had been acknowledged (reinforced later by events at Katyn) that mass shooting or poisoning, followed by mass burial were inefficient and insufficient. Madagascar's planning process didn't start until late 1940. Aktion Reinhardt, the liquidation of occupied Poland's Jews, started in the first part of 1941, with mass killings by shooting and exhaust gases starting then, with the first of the death camps coming on-stream in early 1942.
Ah, the old "lack of concrete physical evidence" schtick beloved of modern day neo-Nazis. We have paperwork, thanks to German bureaucratic efficiency. We have samples of mortar and brick that contain concentrations of Zyklon B that could not have accumulated in a century of clothes and bedlinen de-lousing. We have aerial photographs of rail networks and railheads, of the off-loading of tens of thousands of people per day at the death-camps, but no corresponding pictures of people being loaded back on to trains, or leaving the camps by road.
I won't mention the near countless recorded accounts of various Nazis and Soviets, as well as Jews, because you'll disregard them as being anecdotal.
And yet the testimony of those of his contemporaries that survived the war don't point that way at all.
Perhaps you're mistaking the fact that Hitler did not expect Great Britain and France to stand by their promised support of Poland, with him not having intentions of starting a war? if that is the case, it's another proof of your poor scholarship.
He had a history of depression, his having been depressed is not therefore necessarily indicative of what you claim.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
You're making an assumption.
Your assumption is that he's speaking from knowledge.
My assumption would be that he did not, and that he's now scrabbling around the internet, attempting to find a source of "fact" that isn't so rancid that it will cause projectile vomiting from anyone who isn't and idiot.
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
I'd say you have a false dichotomy at the beginning of second paragraph (at least without a lot of unstated qualifying premises), and an apparent fallacy of necessity just toward the end (dependent on whether the second clause is intended to carry a degree of inference from the first).
These are more a matter of rhetorical style than fallacious attempts at tricking with broken reasoning though - I was just really meaning to say there are plenty of places to stick a screwdriver in (most obviously the assertions). I could argue the neoliberal stance insofar as I'm familiar with it but it would be a bit disingenuous since I don't actually believe it myself.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I have to take issue with the idea that what I wrote has holes, gaps and fallacies.
You are only alive because of the actions of others, not just your parents but wider society too. That's it at its most basic.
I'm sure we've all had moments when we've looked around us and wondered whether we'd been born into the wrong world by mistake. When we look, perhaps, at the military, at the gross inequalities, at some narrow-minded idiocy or other.
But to have such moments when looking around at a sick neighbour, or at a child and her mother coming out of a day centre? If you wonder at the injustice of having to pay for such things out of your taxes, there is something seriously wrong with you.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
That's me out, then. Mine were part of the quarter of a million Jews who were shot when the SS Einsatzgruppen (supported by the Wehrmacht) pushed through Ukraine at the opening of Barbarossa.
Similar threads
