Racist Xenophobes murder newcomer upon arrival

EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Racist Xenophobes murder newcomer upon arrival

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/22/john-allen-chau-man-killed-by-tribe-north-sentinel-island-declare-jesus

Total deplorables on the island. Can't embrace diversity and inclusiveness. The natives must be they most racist people on earth.

He just came there to work. He needs to spread the gospel to the whole earth to hasten the return of Jesus. They just can't embrace his Christian culture.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Everything EXC says is a

Everything EXC says is a lie. He doesn't even know what racism is. A hint: religion is irrelevant to race. A second hint: an uncontacted or limited contact tribe has no perception of racism. It's about tribes for them, not race.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Of course I know, Racist is

Of course I know, Racist is the label the must be put on any white person that does not fully embrace their own extinction and replacement.

Did these natives even bother to find out his religion? All they knew was this person was an outsider and not one of them. How are these Islanders any better than Trump and the Deplorables or Hitler and the Nazis? How would it be different if a black person was killed when they showed up at a KKK rally?

What you have been indoctrinated to believe is evil by the religion of Social Justice, is actually a self defense mechanism necessary for survival that is common to all of humanity. But of course since they are non-white, your indoctrination allows you to say they aren't racist or xenophobic.

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Of course I know,

EXC wrote:
Of course I know, Racist is the label the must be put on any white person that does not fully embrace their own extinction and replacement.

Everything EXC says is a lie. EXC is a retard who thinks white people are being exterminated.

EXC wrote:
Did these natives even bother to find out his religion?

The fucking idiot was screaming his religion at them, so yes.

EXC wrote:
All they knew was this person was an outsider and not one of them.

Everything EXC says is a lie.

EXC wrote:
How are these Islanders any better than Trump and the Deplorables or Hitler and the Nazis?

Every one of which is better than EXC.

EXC wrote:
How would it be different if a black person was killed when they showed up at a KKK rally?

Everything EXC says is a lie.

EXC wrote:
What you have been indoctrinated to believe is evil by the religion of Social Justice, is actually a self defense mechanism necessary for survival that is common to all of humanity. But of course since they are non-white, your indoctrination allows you to say they aren't racist or xenophobic.

EXC has been indoctrinated to say nothing but lies.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: The fucking

Vastet wrote:
The fucking idiot was screaming his religion at them, so yes.

Yes. They've been isolated from the rest of humanity for thousands of years, but somehow understood the English language and knew what a bible was. Like Star Trek, everywhere they went the natives always spoke English.

Wow. This story is such a threat to your indoctrination that diverisity and inclusion are the holist of virtues.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Yes. They've been

EXC wrote:
Yes. They've been isolated from the rest of humanity for thousands of years, but somehow understood the English language and knew what a bible was.

Everything EXC says is a lie. They aren't an uncontacted tribe and religion always tries to invade the way this idiot did. They almost certainly have cultural memories of similar situations.
A stranger shows up on your island yelling at you and you're not going to be interested in trying to communicate.

EXC wrote:
Like Star Trek, everywhere they went the natives always spoke English.

Everything EXC says is a lie. There was technology in Star Trek that translated languages.

EXC wrote:
Wow. This story is such a threat to your indoctrination that diverisity and inclusion are the holist of virtues.

Everything EXC says is a lie. I am and always have been against attempts by religions to force their ridiculous beliefs on others. Every cultist who attempts it and dies instead of succeeding is a victory for humanity. But EXC's indoctrination is complete and he's incapable of saying more than a sentence without lying.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15680
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
EXC

EXC wrote:

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/22/john-allen-chau-man-killed-by-tribe-north-sentinel-island-declare-jesus

Total deplorables on the island. Can't embrace diversity and inclusiveness. The natives must be they most racist people on earth.

He just came there to work. He needs to spread the gospel to the whole earth to hasten the return of Jesus. They just can't embrace his Christian culture.

 

Um no asshole. While that guy didn't deseve to die, he was still stupid. That tribe has little to no contact to the outside world so they really don't know any better. Just like if you get near the nest of a crock it is going to protect it's nest. I would not have an excuse myself, because I know better. If that same guy knocked on my door, the worst he would get from me is, "I don't need your superstition, leave me alone."

 

Religious colonialism by Christian Europe has killed far more than that isolated tribe. 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre

That is one example.

What the Christian Spanish Conquistadors did to South America and Mexico was genocide, not self defense. What Columbus did to Natives was cruel. What Andrew Jackson did in the "Trail Of Tears" was evil.

Those islanders didn't know any better and from their point of view it was self defense.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: They aren't an

Vastet wrote:
They aren't an uncontacted tribe and religion always tries to invade the way this idiot did. They almost certainly have cultural memories of similar situations. 

You have zero evidence of this. Something you pull out of your ass because you can never admit I'm right. The scientists say the opposite. They would have been wiped out by disease if they had been contacted by outsiders in the past.

So if a Central American illegal says a word to any neo-Nazi in America, he can be killed because he doesn't want to be poisoned by their culture? How about killing Islamic women for how they dress because Christian Nationalist doesn't like them bringing their religion to Canada? Why can't this tribe be forced to embrace diversity and inclusion as has been indoctrinated upon you?

You've got this fucking double standard because the Canadian education system and the elites have indoctrinated you. Enjoy being homeless and having your homeland taken over so the rich can have cheap labor and high rents.

 

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:That tribe has

Brian37 wrote:
That tribe has little to no contact to the outside world so they really don't know any better. Just like if you get near the nest of a crock it is going to protect it's nest. I would not have an excuse myself, because I know better. If that same guy knocked on my door, the worst he would get from me is, "I don't need your superstition, leave me alone."

 

So exactly how were Hitler and the Nazis supposed to know better? Why isn't it an imperative that these tribes be conquered so they can be indoctrated with your great wisdom that diversity and inclusion are what everyone must aspire to achieve.

Sounds like the same story with Jews, people from different culture and religion come to a far away land and get slaughered by the natives. At least the Nazis didn't kill them right away.

Brian37 wrote:

Religious colonialism by Christian Europe has killed far more than that isolated tribe. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre That is one example. What the Christian Spanish Conquistadors did to South America and Mexico was genocide, not self defense. What Columbus did to Natives was cruel. What Andrew Jackson did in the "Trail Of Tears" was evil. Those islanders didn't know any better and from their point of view it was self defense.

No. It was a case of kill or be killed. You think when Columbus and early explorers showed up it was any different than this missionary? Your SJW indoctrination lied to you about the Native Americans being so peaceful. They were not into inclusion and diversity. The Europeans had better technology(guns) for killing and better immunity to diseases. So they survived. 

Do you fucking understand survival and survival of the fittest or are you just going to be another Social Justice idiot?

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:You have zero

EXC wrote:
You have zero evidence of this. Something you pull out of your ass because you can never admit I'm right.

Everything EXC says is a lie. There is much documented evidence that the tribe has been contacted. And you have 0 evidence against the probability of religious attempts to convert them historically. You just won't accept it because you can't admit you're a liar and I'm right.

EXC wrote:
The scientists say the opposite.

Everything EXC says is a lie.

EXC wrote:
They would have been wiped out by disease if they had been contacted by outsiders in the past.

Everything EXC says is a lie. Indigenous peoples survived worse everywhere. But EXC can't admit I'm right so he has to make shit up.

EXC wrote:
So if a Central American illegal says a word to any neo-Nazi in America, he can be killed because he doesn't want to be poisoned by their culture?

What? Stay on topic retard. Everything EXC says is a lie.

EXC wrote:
How about killing Islamic women for how they dress because Christian Nationalist doesn't like them bringing their religion to Canada?

Stay on topic retard. Everything EXC says is a lie.

EXC wrote:
Why can't this tribe be forced to embrace diversity and inclusion as has been indoctrinated upon you?

Why don't you go there and teach them yourself? The world will be better off without your indoctrinated lies.

EXC wrote:
You've got this fucking double standard because the Canadian education system and the elites have indoctrinated you.

Everything EXC says is a lie because he must defend the elitist capitalists due to his indoctrination by them.

EXC wrote:
Enjoy being homeless and having your homeland taken over so the rich can have cheap labor and high rents.

Enjoy being murdered by a mob of the poor who got sick of the lies of the rich and their indoctrinated puppets and decided to wipe you scum out.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Brian37 wrote:That

EXC wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
That tribe has little to no contact to the outside world so they really don't know any better. Just like if you get near the nest of a crock it is going to protect it's nest. I would not have an excuse myself, because I know better. If that same guy knocked on my door, the worst he would get from me is, "I don't need your superstition, leave me alone."

 

So exactly how were Hitler and the Nazis supposed to know better? Why isn't it an imperative that these tribes be conquered so they can be indoctrated with your great wisdom that diversity and inclusion are what everyone must aspire to achieve.

Sounds like the same story with Jews, people from different culture and religion come to a far away land and get slaughered by the natives. At least the Nazis didn't kill them right away.

Brian37 wrote:

Religious colonialism by Christian Europe has killed far more than that isolated tribe. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre That is one example. What the Christian Spanish Conquistadors did to South America and Mexico was genocide, not self defense. What Columbus did to Natives was cruel. What Andrew Jackson did in the "Trail Of Tears" was evil. Those islanders didn't know any better and from their point of view it was self defense.

No. It was a case of kill or be killed. You think when Columbus and early explorers showed up it was any different than this missionary? Your SJW indoctrination lied to you about the Native Americans being so peaceful. They were not into inclusion and diversity. The Europeans had better technology(guns) for killing and better immunity to diseases. So they survived. 

Do you fucking understand survival and survival of the fittest or are you just going to be another Social Justice idiot?

Everything EXC says is a lie.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:There is much

Vastet wrote:
There is much documented evidence that the tribe has been contacted. And you have 0 evidence against the probability of religious attempts to convert them historically.

Show us the evidence of your claim. And why are the scientists that say they are uncontacted  and likely to be kill by disease if they were not to be believe?

You and your indoctrinators have a double standard. It is so wrong for and American Christian to bring his ways to island. But it so right for middle eastern Muslims to come to Canada. That is on topic. It just shows the rich and powerful have indoctrinated you with an irrational belief system. 'Elitist Capitalist' want cheap labor, that have all the workers make going for rent and survival. Boy did they get you to go along with their agenda.

 

Vastet wrote:

Enjoy being murdered by a mob of the poor who got sick of the lies of the rich and their indoctrinated puppets and decided to wipe you scum out.

The poor don't have money to buy weapons after they pay the rent. When you are pushed into living in a tent during winter(thanks to overpopulation), I don't think you'll be able to pull off this revolution against the wealthy. The poor get killed the rich get richer by selling weapons to the government.

 

I'm curious, why are you so fucking angry if Canada is so wonderful? The expats from Canada that I meet tell me high cost of living, taxes, political correctness, SJWs and feminists have turned it into a hellhole for normal working class men. Your extreme anger only proves them right.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5441
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
EXC

EXC wrote:

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/22/john-allen-chau-man-killed-by-tribe-north-sentinel-island-declare-jesus

Total deplorables on the island. Can't embrace diversity and inclusiveness. The natives must be they most racist people on earth.

He just came there to work. He needs to spread the gospel to the whole earth to hasten the return of Jesus. They just can't embrace his Christian culture.

 

Maybe they are just worried about overpopulation. One extra person on a small island drains a lot of resources. How is that working out for them?

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15680
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:EXC

Beyond Saving wrote:

EXC wrote:

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/22/john-allen-chau-man-killed-by-tribe-north-sentinel-island-declare-jesus

Total deplorables on the island. Can't embrace diversity and inclusiveness. The natives must be they most racist people on earth.

He just came there to work. He needs to spread the gospel to the whole earth to hasten the return of Jesus. They just can't embrace his Christian culture.

 

Maybe they are just worried about overpopulation. One extra person on a small island drains a lot of resources. How is that working out for them?

 

Yea, that's it. Cant be the isolation. 

 

Globally speaking our speices is no different than any other in our history. 

 

Pets can be a perfect example of the difference of early exposer vs pets running into each other on the streets that are not raised together.

 

A cat and dog raised together as a puppy and kitten are on average going to get along better over their lives than the odds of a cat and dog whom are of separate households whom aren't raised together.

 

There is more cooperation in ubran cities and suburbs worldwide vs more isolated rural parts of the world. 

 

But regardless, this moron needlessly got himself killed not listening to the experts. The worst part is he was selling old mythology to people with their own mythology.

 

As I stated in a prior post, I would have no excuse for killing this same guy, if he knocked on my door. I am far more aware and connected to the world around me and have more knowledge of it. I might hate religous logic, but I also know I am the same species as those whom make bad claims. 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15680
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:EXC

Beyond Saving wrote:

EXC wrote:

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/22/john-allen-chau-man-killed-by-tribe-north-sentinel-island-declare-jesus

Total deplorables on the island. Can't embrace diversity and inclusiveness. The natives must be they most racist people on earth.

He just came there to work. He needs to spread the gospel to the whole earth to hasten the return of Jesus. They just can't embrace his Christian culture.

 

Maybe they are just worried about overpopulation. One extra person on a small island drains a lot of resources. How is that working out for them?

 

Yea, that's it. Cant be the isolation. 

 

Globally speaking our speices is no different than any other in our history. 

 

Pets can be a perfect example of the difference of early exposer vs pets running into each other on the streets that are not raised together.

 

A cat and dog raised together as a puppy and kitten are on average going to get along better over their lives than the odds of a cat and dog whom are of separate households whom aren't raised together.

 

There is more cooperation in ubran cities and suburbs worldwide vs more isolated rural parts of the world. 

 

But regardless, this moron needlessly got himself killed not listening to the experts. The worst part is he was selling old mythology to people with their own mythology.

 

As I stated in a prior post, I would have no excuse for killing this same guy, if he knocked on my door. I am far more aware and connected to the world around me and have more knowledge of it. I might hate religous logic, but I also know I am the same species as those whom make bad claims. 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Show us the

EXC wrote:
Show us the evidence of your claim.

Show me evidence against my claim. Every time I've provided evidence you ignore it and repeat the same lies I proved were lies. I'm not doing squat for you.

EXC wrote:
And why are the scientists that say they are uncontacted

Everything EXC says is a lie. Scientists are claiming no such thing.

EXC wrote:
and likely to be kill by disease if they were not to be believe?

Everything EXC says is a lie. No credible scientist has ever claimed belief alone dictates vulnerability to disease. It is nice of EXC to prove he's a theist though.

EXC wrote:
You and your indoctrinators have a double standard.

Says the indoctrinated sociopath.

EXC wrote:
It is so wrong for and American Christian to bring his ways to island. But it so right for middle eastern Muslims to come to Canada.

Everything EXC says is a lie. The christian wasn't invited, that makes him an invader. There is no comparison.

EXC wrote:
That is on topic.

No, it isn't. Everything EXC says is a lie.

EXC wrote:
It just shows the rich and powerful have indoctrinated you with an irrational belief system.

Says the sociopath indoctrinated by the rich and powerful.

EXC wrote:
'Elitist Capitalist' want cheap labor, that have all the workers make going for rent and survival. Boy did they get you to go along with their agenda.

Says the indoctrinated sociopath approving their agenda to a socialist who couldn't do more to prove his opposition to said agenda. Everything EXC says is a lie.

EXC wrote:
The poor don't have money to buy weapons after they pay the rent.

Hasn't stopped them before, won't stop them this time either. In fact it makes it far more likely.

EXC wrote:
When you are pushed into living in a tent during winter(thanks to overpopulation), I don't think you'll be able to pull off this revolution against the wealthy.

Everything EXC says is a lie. Being hungry and homeless is the perfect breeding ground for revolution. No one stages revolutions when they are happy and comfortable.

EXC wrote:
The poor get killed the rich get richer by selling weapons to the government.

Until the poor get hungry enough and kill the rich.

EXC wrote:
I'm curious, why are you so fucking angry if Canada is so wonderful?

I don't want to need a revolution to fix everything. There is plenty of opportunity to avoid a revolution if you and the capitalist scum who indoctrinated you are sufficiently marginalized. But if revolution it must be, I won't shed a tear for the capitalists who committed suicide.

EXC wrote:
The expats from Canada that I meet tell me high cost of living, taxes, political correctness,

Everything EXC says is a lie. Canada's cost of living is roughly equal to the US. I do agree political correctness is a problem and Canada needs to do more to protect free speech. But as things are, Canada is vastly superior to 95% of all nations, the US included.

EXC wrote:
SJWs and feminists have turned it into a hellhole for normal working class men. Your extreme anger only proves them right.

Everything EXC says is a lie. Things aren't remotely that bad. In fact the US is in worse shape on this front despite your constitution.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:The christian

Vastet wrote:
The christian wasn't invited, that makes him an invader. There is no comparison.

Everyone is invited to Canada. There is never a punishment for illegal border crossing, same as USA. The worst that would happen is they feed and house you for while, then put you on an airplane back to where you came from. If the rich and powerful think they can exploit the immigrant's labor, he gets to stay. It is all for the rich and powerful. Your job is just to go along with their agenda. How is it possible to ever be an invader of Canada?

Vastet wrote:

 Hasn't stopped them before, won't stop them this time either. In fact it makes it far more likely.

When you have these socialist revolution of the people, it is a small group of militant ambitious men that take down a government weakened by corruption. And it is men because sexual status from power drives this behavior. Then these socialist leaders become just as bad as who they replace at ripping off the workers and making themselves filthy rich.

Why do you think these poor Central American men are coming here? They don't want to fight. It is only men with high ambition that would do a revolution. Men are not going to risk it all going to war and then give the spoils of victory to others. You are incapable of understanding human nature.

Vastet wrote:

Being hungry and homeless is the perfect breeding ground for revolution. No one stages revolutions when they are happy and comfortable.

It is a breeding ground for men of ambition to exploit political instability to make themselves rich. How is someone that is hungry and cold able to do anything? Do you think if you looking in the homeless encampments around Canada you find military weapons and highly trained soldiers?

Vastet wrote:

the capitalist scum who indoctrinated you

If I was indoctrinated by them, wouldn't I still be a corporate slave in some high priced US city, paying high rent/mortgage, buying crappy consumer goods and eating processed industrial food.

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5441
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Being hungry

Vastet wrote:

Being hungry and homeless is the perfect breeding ground for revolution. No one stages revolutions when they are happy and comfortable.

Those who staged the English, French and American revolutions were quite comfortable. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any revolution that was NOT staged by people who were extremely wealthy. Arguably, the Haitian revolution was strongly driven by slaves, but Toussaint Louverture, while initially a slave had been freed and actually had become a slave owner by the time the revolution started. The revolution had significant support among men who had already gained their freedom. Without it, it is unlikely the revolts would have succeeded even though slaves outnumbered whites 10 to 1. Successful revolutions are usually started by popular politicians or military leaders who are able to gain significant support but are not quite able to exercise real power in the political system. 

Wars of all kinds are started and conducted by the wealthy and powerful. Violent uprisings without the support of the wealthy and politically powerful generally last fewer than days and rarely are significant enough to be considered anything more than a riot or criminal action. Consider that there was over 250 slave rebellions in the US and all of them were crushed in a matter of days or less. Discontent among a large class might be required for a successful revolution, but in itself, I do not believe it is sufficient.

And it does not necessarily have to be poverty. American colonists were hardly impoverished or uncomfortable, the discontent was manufactured and political. On a practical day to day basis, the average American colonist had better standards of living than the average British citizen. Poor Americans didn't really have that much to be unhappy about, by and large they were not being signficantly impacted by the Crown's actions. It was the relatively wealthy that were being impacted. After the war, I don't think it is fair to say that the average American was better off or even noticed a significant change in their daily lives than before the war.  

Meanwhile, you have areas of the world where extreme poverty exists and there is little to no chance of a significant revolution because the current political power has such an ironfisted control over the political system and the wealthy. People who are extremely poor tend to be more worried about finding food for today than fixing the system.  

  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
The revolutions were started

The revolutions were started by very uncomfortable people. They are led by middle or upper class, but they aren't formented by them. And those middle and upper class people leading them are never comfortable either, which is why they step into the position.

Most every revolution is powered by the poor, led by the middle to upper class people who were marginalized by those with power and thus motivated out of self preservation as much as the poor who follow them. No rich person who spent all their time lounging and partying ever led a revolution of fat and happy poor people. Nor will it ever happen.

The American revolution was not really a revolution. It was much more a war between an overextended nation and its colony which had grown to be sufficiently powerful to stand on its own, and no longer wanted to have its destiny controlled by people who never set foot there and demanded tribute. That was a war. Much like the English civil war, it was about power between semi equal opponents.

Most often, revolutions are led by militaries who recognize and support the plight of the people, and which have the support of the people. They often aren't much better, but it is rare for a military led coup to end up making things worse.

All over the world you see snapshots of before, where the people aren't desperate enough and/or do not yet have the leadership to move. No example you can give is evidence against it because every one of them has a revolution coming. Some have already experienced them. They aren't always successful, but inevitably comes the revolution that is successful.

Nowhere is safe from revolution, and the rich are no longer necessary to lead them. The tools once only acquirable to the wealthy are now in the hands of all. No wealthy people are necessary to organize and weaponize anymore, though likely they will remain a key component due to higher education and their wealth giving them the ability to provision food and materiel. Communications across the entire world is at the hands of children. There are more weapons than there are people, and the wealthy don't have a monopoly on them.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5441
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:The revolutions

Vastet wrote:
The revolutions were started by very uncomfortable people. They are led by middle or upper class, but they aren't formented by them. And those middle and upper class people leading them are never comfortable either, which is why they step into the position. Most every revolution is powered by the poor, led by the middle to upper class people who were marginalized by those with power and thus motivated out of self preservation as much as the poor who follow them. No rich person who spent all their time lounging and partying ever led a revolution of fat and happy poor people.

The poor are merely the pawns of those seeking change. Of course anyone seeking to overthrow a government is going to appeal to the poor- they are by definition those who have the most reason to be upset about how things are. The poor don't magically disappear at non-revolutionary times. In fact, I'd be willing to be that if demographics could be obtained, the percentage of impoverished 50 years before a revolution is approximately the same as 50 years after a revolution. Post revolution, they generally remain marginalized, and sit there until someone has need to appeal to their anger again in the future. Perhaps one of the more unique things about a democracy is that there is significant motivation to leverage the anger of the poor every 2 years. So you see politicians regularly stoke the anger, but generally not to the point of violence. Whereas historically, as soon as a new monarch was installed the poor were instantly forgotten and once again politically irrelevant until conditions arose that someone thought they could challenge the status quo and started stoking up the anger of the poor. 

The leaders were generally wealthy and powerful- often children of "old money" who grew up never having to work a day in their life. Look at the French revolution Marquis de Lafayette a French aristocrat who spent his time idealizing and went to assist in the American Revolution for the fun of it before returning home to help the revolution there. He easily could have just sat at his inherited estates living a very comfortable (if boring) life. Whenever I read of Marquis de Lafayette, I cannot help but think that his foray into becoming such an influential impact on history was just a rich boy who was bored with life and looking for adventure.

Talleyrand was born to one of the most prominent aristocratic families in Paris. While it is believed they were not particularly wealthy, both his parents held positions in Court. his father and his uncle were both Lieutenant Generals in the army. He went on to become an ordained bishop before joining the revolution. While not the wealthiest, he could have lived a very comfortable life in the Catholic Church with well more than his basic needs taken care of.   

Robespierre was born to an upper middle-class family, raised by his grandparents and was given a top-notch education to become a lawyer and then a politician. As a politician, he was known for his opposition to authority and the death penalty- which is ironic since when he took power he ordered all sorts of executions and purges and imposed extremely strict laws. He is perhaps a classic example of a revolutionary who leveraged the poor and was well known for his concern for the working class, then to do virtually nothing for them once he gained power. Some might say that he did care and then had a mental breakdown that made him completely insane. Then again, maybe he never gave a damn and just saw the opportunity to rise to power. Either way, hero that went insane or crafty populist who went too far- Robespierre could have just stayed out of politics and lived a much longer life working as a lawyer.

Sieyes was born to a family of modest means with some noble blood. He went into a successful career in the Catholic Church which he parlayed into politics. Like Talleyrand, he was not exactly wealthy, but he lived far better than most and didn't want for anything. 

Napoleon was born into Italian nobility. He had a very successful military career and ended up fighting against the Royalists mostly because he wasn't French. He was born and raised in Corsica and he was against the French occupation of Corsica, the revolution was an opportunity. After falling out with Paoli made him and his family flee the island, it was only natural for Napoleon to fight for the rebellion, because they would have him. Once he became a military hero, I think it is pretty obvious that his main motivation for accepting Sieyes' offer to make him leader of the coup was personal ambition. He had a big head, saw an opportunity to become emperor and he seized it. Napoleon easily could have said no and retired a famous general.  

Try naming some leaders of a successful revolution that were poor, that didn't have the option of living a comfortable life and retiring. 

 

Vastet wrote:
They often aren't much better, but it is rare for a military led coup to end up making things worse.

Depends on how you measure "better", there have been countless military coups where people live absolutely miserable lives afterwards. Often, one military coup follows another. 

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:The poor

Beyond Saving wrote:

The poor are merely the pawns of those seeking change.

The poor are merely the pawns of those seeking pussy.

Read about the lives of any revolutionary leader. You'll see they all had a huge number of 'conquests'. Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac. Deciding to take on the established powers is very high risk behavior. So for men to do this, there must be a high incentive/reward. Revolutions are about alpha males being challenged for top position. But people like Vastet are so brainwashed by political propagada, they can't understand the basic and obvious facts of life.

The people hoping for a revolution think there are some true altruistic savior that will bring about the revolution, bring justice to the poor and death to all non-believers so there will be permanent utopia for those oppressed. And the leaders will do this for non-selfish motives, because they are so holy and pure. It is the same as Christians believing the second coming bringing utopia to earth. False hope to the easliy duped.

 

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:The poor

Beyond Saving wrote:
The poor are merely the pawns of those seeking change. Of course anyone seeking to overthrow a government is going to appeal to the poor- they are by definition those who have the most reason to be upset about how things are. The poor don't magically disappear at non-revolutionary times. In fact, I'd be willing to be that if demographics could be obtained, the percentage of impoverished 50 years before a revolution is approximately the same as 50 years after a revolution.

I would bet the same, but I would also bet that for the first year or two following a revolution the poor are much better off. And I have some recent examples with demographics to back up that bet. The Arab spring is one such example.
Of course the poor don't disappear or become wealthy, that isn't the point. The point is the families with the most money and power are the most likely to be wiped out. A lot of poor families may also be wiped out, but not by being targets.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Post revolution, they generally remain marginalized, and sit there until someone has need to appeal to their anger again in the future. Perhaps one of the more unique things about a democracy is that there is significant motivation to leverage the anger of the poor every 2 years.

That may be the intent, but that isn't how it actually works. Else there would be much higher rates of voter participation. In democracy, the rich and poor both are divided between parties. And, in America at least, only the rich have a voice.

Beyond Saving wrote:
So you see politicians regularly stoke the anger, but generally not to the point of violence. Whereas historically, as soon as a new monarch was installed the poor were instantly forgotten and once again politically irrelevant until conditions arose that someone thought they could challenge the status quo and started stoking up the anger of the poor.

No. No leader who has any interest in remaining a leader instantly forgets those who brought them into power, because there's always someone willing to topple the new guy at his most vulnerable point, which is when he's new. They take their time and establish a power base before starting to twist any screws on the poor. Only existential threats would suffice to prevent a revolution following the revolution in a scenario where the poor are immediately forgotten.

Beyond Saving wrote:
The leaders were generally wealthy and powerful- often children of "old money" who grew up never having to work a day in their life. Look at the French revolution Marquis de Lafayette a French aristocrat who spent his time idealizing and went to assist in the American Revolution for the fun of it before returning home to help the revolution there. He easily could have just sat at his inherited estates living a very comfortable (if boring) life. Whenever I read of Marquis de Lafayette, I cannot help but think that his foray into becoming such an influential impact on history was just a rich boy who was bored with life and looking for adventure. Talleyrand was born to one of the most prominent aristocratic families in Paris. While it is believed they were not particularly wealthy, both his parents held positions in Court. his father and his uncle were both Lieutenant Generals in the army. He went on to become an ordained bishop before joining the revolution. While not the wealthiest, he could have lived a very comfortable life in the Catholic Church with well more than his basic needs taken care of.   

Robespierre was born to an upper middle-class family, raised by his grandparents and was given a top-notch education to become a lawyer and then a politician. As a politician, he was known for his opposition to authority and the death penalty- which is ironic since when he took power he ordered all sorts of executions and purges and imposed extremely strict laws. He is perhaps a classic example of a revolutionary who leveraged the poor and was well known for his concern for the working class, then to do virtually nothing for them once he gained power. Some might say that he did care and then had a mental breakdown that made him completely insane. Then again, maybe he never gave a damn and just saw the opportunity to rise to power. Either way, hero that went insane or crafty populist who went too far- Robespierre could have just stayed out of politics and lived a much longer life working as a lawyer.

Sieyes was born to a family of modest means with some noble blood. He went into a successful career in the Catholic Church which he parlayed into politics. Like Talleyrand, he was not exactly wealthy, but he lived far better than most and didn't want for anything. 

Napoleon was born into Italian nobility. He had a very successful military career and ended up fighting against the Royalists mostly because he wasn't French. He was born and raised in Corsica and he was against the French occupation of Corsica, the revolution was an opportunity. After falling out with Paoli made him and his family flee the island, it was only natural

There are exceptions to every rule, but in general no rich and comfortable people go around starting revolutions. For every one you name that did, I can name a million who didn't. And I'm being conservative in that claim.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Depends on how you measure "better", there have been countless military coups where people live absolutely miserable lives afterwards. Often, one military coup follows another.

Most often they don't. Most often stability is restored and conditions improve and the military hands power back to a government after a decade or 3. At which point there may be another coup depending on the individuals in charge of that government and what they do.
A coup following a coup is as rare as a rich comfortable person starting revolutions. It just doesn't happen from a statistical perspective.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Beyond Saving

EXC wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

The poor are merely the pawns of those seeking change.

The poor are merely the pawns of those seeking pussy.

Read about the lives of any revolutionary leader. You'll see they all had a huge number of 'conquests'. Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac. Deciding to take on the established powers is very high risk behavior. So for men to do this, there must be a high incentive/reward. Revolutions are about alpha males being challenged for top position. But people like Vastet are so brainwashed by political propagada, they can't understand the basic and obvious facts of life.

The people hoping for a revolution think there are some true altruistic savior that will bring about the revolution, bring justice to the poor and death to all non-believers so there will be permanent utopia for those oppressed. And the leaders will do this for non-selfish motives, because they are so holy and pure. It is the same as Christians believing the second coming bringing utopia to earth. False hope to the easliy duped.

 

 

Everything EXC says is a lie.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
 Keep dreaming about your

 Keep dreaming about your socialist messiah. Before that happens, you'll end up living on the streets with you current residence replacing you with immigrants. You don't believe this could ever happen to you, that is what the homeless all say.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5441
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Of course the

Vastet wrote:
Of course the poor don't disappear or become wealthy, that isn't the point. The point is the families with the most money and power are the most likely to be wiped out. A lot of poor families may also be wiped out, but not by being targets.

Of course the poor aren't targets, because they are irrelevant outside of being used as a pool for manpower. The question is not who is targeted, it is who is doing the targeting and inevitably it is other rich people. Poor people collecting a few weapons and killing some soldiers (generally other poor people) does not create a revolution. Those events usually end up being termed an uprising, riot or revolt and are typically ended within hours or days with no change of political power. A significant number of such events might be the signal that a revolution is about to happen, mostly because the political opponents of whoever is in power will see it as an opportunity. Until someone with political power steps in, regime change is virtually impossible no matter how angry, poor, miserable and upset the population is.  

Quote:
In democracy, the rich and poor both are divided between parties. And, in America at least, only the rich have a voice.

Bullshit. There is no major political party in any democracy, now or at any point in history, that is made up exclusively of poor people. There might be those that have rhetoric that caters more to the poor, but those who obtain power are inevitably wealthy and/or backed by the very wealthy. If the division truly was rich vs poor, there would be no competition- the rich would win everything every time. The reality is that the rich are not monolithic in their political views. Politics has always been a rich man's game and any major political fight is going to have rich people on both sides. 

Quote:
There are exceptions to every rule, but in general no rich and comfortable people go around starting revolutions. For every one you name that did, I can name a million who didn't. And I'm being conservative in that claim.

Then it should be pretty easy to name one person who played a significant role in starting one successful revolution who was poor. I'll wait. 

 

Quote:
Most often they don't. Most often stability is restored and conditions improve and the military hands power back to a government after a decade or 3. At which point there may be another coup depending on the individuals in charge of that government and what they do. A coup following a coup is as rare as a rich comfortable person starting revolutions. It just doesn't happen from a statistical perspective.

Thailand has had two coup's in the 2000s. In Africa, it is shorter to list the countries that have NOT had multiple coups during our lifetimes. In the 1970's Afghanistan had 4 successful coups. Argentina had 3 successful coups in the 1960's and 1970s. Brazil had 3 coups in the early 1900s. In the 1910's and 20's, China went through 5 or 6 coups. Cuba had 3 coups, two of which were in the 50's. Haiti has coups like they are changing underwear well over a dozen in the 1900s. Iraq had 6. Mexico had 3 in the early 1900s. Panama had 4. Syria had 6 in the 1950-1970s. Need I go on?

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
The Socialist Messiah will

The Socialist Messiah will come. He will provide those millions living in tent cities with expesive high tech weapons systems. He will turn them into highly skilled soldiers overnight. You must have faith.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote: Keep dreaming

EXC wrote:

 Keep dreaming about your socialist messiah. Before that happens, you'll end up living on the streets with you current residence replacing you with immigrants. You don't believe this could ever happen to you, that is what the homeless all say.

Everything EXC says is a lie.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Of

Beyond Saving wrote:
Of course the poor aren't targets, because they are irrelevant outside of being used as a pool for manpower. The question is not who is targeted, it is who is doing the targeting and inevitably it is other rich people.

Irrelevant. They wouldn't be able to without the support of the masses which comes when the masses are sufficiently unhappy.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Poor people collecting a few weapons and killing some soldiers (generally other poor people) does not create a revolution. Those events usually end up being termed an uprising, riot or revolt and are typically ended within hours or days with no change of political power. A significant number of such events might be the signal that a revolution is about to happen, mostly because the political opponents of whoever is in power will see it as an opportunity. Until someone with political power steps in, regime change is virtually impossible no matter how angry, poor, miserable and upset the population is.

That is not a realistic appraisal. Poor people need only organize to do more than a riot or uprising, and now even poor people can do so cheaply and effectively.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Bullshit. There is no major political party in any democracy, now or at any point in history, that is made up exclusively of poor people.

I just said that. Read my statement again. I didn't say rich are on one side and poor are on the other, I said both are DIVIDED.

Beyond Saving wrote:
There might be those that have rhetoric that caters more to the poor, but those who obtain power are inevitably wealthy and/or backed by the very wealthy. If the division truly was rich vs poor, there would be no competition- the rich would win everything every time. The reality is that the rich are not monolithic in their political views. Politics has always been a rich man's game and any major political fight is going to have rich people on both sides.

I said that too. "only the rich have a voice."

Beyond Saving wrote:
Then it should be pretty easy to name one person who played a significant role in starting one successful revolution who was poor. I'll wait.

And I'll wait for you to point out exactly where I said any revolution was started and seen through by a poor person. I won't hold my breathe because I never said that.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Thailand has had two coup's in the 2000s.

Thailand has the second most powerful country on Earth interfering constantly in everything. Nothing that happens in Thailand is comparable to a historical revolution.

Beyond Saving wrote:
In Africa, it is shorter to list the countries that have NOT had multiple coups during our lifetimes.

Africa is even worse off than Thailand. It has the top 5+ world powers interfering constantly.

Beyond Saving wrote:
In the 1970's Afghanistan had 4 successful coups.

Afghanistan was a pawn of America and the Soviet Union. Yet another non-example of a revolution/coup.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Argentina had 3 successful coups in the 1960's and 1970s. Brazil had 3 coups in the early 1900s. In the 1910's and 20's, China went through 5 or 6 coups. Cuba had 3 coups, two of which were in the 50's. Haiti has coups like they are changing underwear well over a dozen in the 1900s. Iraq had 6. Mexico had 3 in the early 1900s. Panama had 4. Syria had 6 in the 1950-1970s. Need I go on?

Every one of which driven by the US or the colonial powers, none of which correspond to an actual revolution/coup.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:EXC

Vastet wrote:
EXC wrote:

 Keep dreaming about your socialist messiah. Before that happens, you'll end up living on the streets with you current residence replacing you with immigrants. You don't believe this could ever happen to you, that is what the homeless all say.

Everything EXC says is a lie.

Better get that tent and blankets ready while you can....

Housing Shortage, Immigrants’ Struggles Are Signs Canada Is Fumbling Its Population Boom

I guess when you live on the streets, you'll believe it was because they didn't bring in enough 'skilled labor' and refugees.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Vastet wrote:EXC

EXC wrote:

Vastet wrote:
EXC wrote:

 Keep dreaming about your socialist messiah. Before that happens, you'll end up living on the streets with you current residence replacing you with immigrants. You don't believe this could ever happen to you, that is what the homeless all say.

Everything EXC says is a lie.

Better get that tent and blankets ready while you can....

Housing Shortage, Immigrants’ Struggles Are Signs Canada Is Fumbling Its Population Boom

I guess when you live on the streets, you'll believe it was because they didn't bring in enough 'skilled labor' and refugees.

Everything EXC says is a lie. Housing has been improving across Canada all year.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3878
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Housing has

Vastet wrote:
Housing has been improving across Canada all year.

Yes, you've got Mr. Open Borders still running the country. Housing crisis will be solved by him waving his magic wand and giving housing for millions more refugees any day now.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13208
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Vastet

EXC wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Housing has been improving across Canada all year.

Yes, you've got Mr. Open Borders still running the country. Housing crisis will be solved by him waving his magic wand and giving housing for millions more refugees any day now.

 

Everything EXC says is a lie. Canada does not have and never has had open borders.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.