Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My beef with Gandhi

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Pekka
    ...when did he 'invent non-violence' ???
    He didn't.
    For example, Jesus advocated non-violence.
    Result: Christianity became the official religion of Rome.
    Other Jews advocated violent resistence.
    Result: Masada.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Zkribbler
      For example, Jesus advocated non-violence.
      Result: Christianity became the official religion of Rome.
      Other Jews advocated violent resistence.
      Result: Masada.
      But they were lucky for not facing Hitler. They basically won a lottery. They are villains.
      THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
      AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
      AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
      DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

      Comment


      • No, just because they got lucky doesn't mean they are villains. Gandhi, however, was, for other traits he had.

        Oncle Boris, OK, I have to conclude that I might have been mistaken by the factor of cojones. But that changes nothing!!
        In da butt.
        "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
        THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
        "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by LordShiva
          But they were lucky for not facing Hitler.
          Does the name "Nero" ring a familiar note?
          Psychopathic killer, fiddled while Rome burned, killed his wife and kid so that he could experience grief & then kept his tears in a jar as a souvenir of the experience.

          Comment


          • [SIZE=1] Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
            And SU thing, this is laughable. They fell because of economy, just like Sloww points out. This is too obvious, protests had no part in the real desctruction. They were an outcome, not the catalyst, they were a sideshow, not the reason.


            So, if the economy collapses, the authoritarian state will collapse? Explain North Korea then.

            The fact of the matter was through brute force, the USSR could have survived, even with a crumbling economy. But the people said no more. They marched into the streets and said this is over. And the military couldn't stand in the way, even though they were trying to take over.
            I hate to say it, but Russians were not a uniform gray mass of teh eeevil opressor overlords. Had there not been a large enough liberty-yearning, educated and dissident section of the population in Russia, 13 deaths at Vilnius TV tower and later casualties in Riga would not have mattered one bit.
            Originally posted by Serb:Please, remind me, how exactly and when exactly, Russia bullied its neighbors?
            Originally posted by Ted Striker:Go Serb !
            Originally posted by Pekka:If it was possible to capture the essentials of Sepultura in a dildo, I'd attach it to a bicycle and ride it up your azzes.

            Comment


            • The Soviet Union didn't finally collapse because of violence, but because of passive resistance and non-violent protest.

              The SU collapsed because a small group of people seeked power, and used the non-violent protest as a justification for regime change... that was more like an overthrow.

              Comment


              • Pekka, why do you ALWAYS make two posts in the row?

                Comment


                • The fact of the matter was through brute force, the USSR could have survived, even with a crumbling economy. But the people said no more. They marched into the streets and said this is over. And the military couldn't stand in the way, even though they were trying to take over.

                  What the people said means sh*t.

                  There was a different balance of power, and the military was ordered to do nothing against the masses, by the new leading group.

                  Comment


                  • Ecthy, that's not the answer you want to hear, so that's really not the question you want to ask.
                    In da butt.
                    "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
                    THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
                    "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

                    Comment


                    • Even when replying to one single person. You're such a sad boy.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Zkribbler


                        He didn't.
                        For example, Jesus advocated non-violence.
                        Result: Christianity became the official religion of Rome.
                        Other Jews advocated violent resistence.
                        Result: Masada.
                        I rather doubt Rome would have gone Jewish if not for Masada (And yeah, i know about conversion to J in Rome, but it was being surpassed by conversion to C for reasons unrelated to nonviolence)

                        Masada happened at the end of the first revolt, which was at most lukewarmly supported by the rabbis. Anyway it was started largely because of the desire of the jewish people in Judea to regain statehood.

                        Jesus advocated rendering unto caesar that which is caesars. IE financially supporting the non-pacifist state. If a Jewish revolt had succeeded in JCs lifetime, presumably Jesus and his followers would have been obliged to pay their taxes and be good citizens of that Jewish state.

                        But political quietism is pretty logical when you expect the imminent end of history. Once that didnt happen, the christians did the logical thing, which was to take over the state.
                        "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Sirotnikov
                          The fact of the matter was through brute force, the USSR could have survived, even with a crumbling economy. But the people said no more. They marched into the streets and said this is over. And the military couldn't stand in the way, even though they were trying to take over.

                          What the people said means sh*t.

                          There was a different balance of power, and the military was ordered to do nothing against the masses, by the new leading group.
                          which point are you referring to? The August 1991 coup? The military was ordered by the coup plotters to support the coup. Gorby was under house arrest. Yeltsin ordered them not support the coup, but he wasnt part of the chain of command. When the crowds rallied to Yeltsin, the army units approaching Moscow had to decide whether to take on Yeltsin and the crowds. They didnt, and thats how WHO the leading group was changed.
                          "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

                          Comment


                          • I hate being too sick to argue.
                            Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

                            Comment


                            • It wouldn't be fair to argue in this case.
                              THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
                              AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
                              AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
                              DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sirotnikov
                                The SU collapsed because a small group of people seeked power, and used the non-violent protest as a justification for regime change... that was more like an overthrow.
                                Why the ambiguity? Spell out the "small group of people".
                                Originally posted by Serb:Please, remind me, how exactly and when exactly, Russia bullied its neighbors?
                                Originally posted by Ted Striker:Go Serb !
                                Originally posted by Pekka:If it was possible to capture the essentials of Sepultura in a dildo, I'd attach it to a bicycle and ride it up your azzes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X