I don’t remember elph declaring an allegiance with Maoism or Stalinism.

“Not every socialist is an anarchist but every anarchist is a socialist.”

Substitute communist for socialist. He suppprts the people controlling industry communally and democratically not by totalitarian dictatorship or crushing state sponsored bureaucracy.

Felt like answering for you elph - correct me if I’ve misrepresented your position

Whether he is self-declared communist or socialist or Bolshevik or Nazi (I don't know and I really don't care) but he certainly like to join in on their blame game.

Until industry is controlled by AI computers, it controlled by people.

You been knocking back a few Coca-Colas tonight?

I’ll give Lee Harvey Oswald a pass.

Because I don't promote zionist agenda. Try to keep up kiddo ;)

There's a reason its considered poor writing when you begin a sentence with, "in my opinion". Its redundant and obvious.

Also, it's possible to not respect people for one thing and respect them for another thing. I'd assume, based on what he's said in this thread, that Frownland doesn't disrespect his military family members and may even be close with some of them. That doesn't means he has to respect them for serving in the military.

^ Well that has the merit of consistancy at least! "Totes": :laughing:

^ Let's be aware that, afaik, there is not a single country or legal system that agrees with your definition. Although I have little sympathy with them, even those hallowed guardians and guides to morality, the organised religions, usually* distinguish between killing people in armed combat and killing people outside of armed combat.
* Yes, some religions, e.g. Buddhism, take a different position.

Also, for every immoral war of aggression, isn't there, of necessity, a corresponding war of defense in which the morality is more, er, defensable? While many men (perhaps yourself included) are honourable pacifists, there comes a point at which most people prefer to take up a gun to protect what is theirs.
( In Britain, during times of conscription, this point was neatly summed up like this: any conscripts displaying a reluctance to take up arms were asked this question- "If you saw an armed soldier raping your sister, what would you do?" Anyone who thought they would resort to violence was not thereafter considered a pacifist. )
__________________________________________________ _________________

In more pressing news, isn't anyone else alarmed that the US is edging ever closer to a constitutional crisis? The much-vaunted devision of power seems to be under threat and the "system of checks and balances" is not checking or balancing any longer. Trump is demanding that the DOJ reveal info which will damage their ability to do their job, not just now, but permanently. The Dems aren't being given so much as a seat at the table, and the bulk of the GOP are silent on Trump's escalating abuses of power. As one guy said, in the face of acknowledged Russian meddling, the GOP are not defending the country, they are defending Trump.

When has the US ever gone to war because "it's the right thing to do"? It costs massive resources to fund a war, they ain't going unless they are getting something out of it. The people who serve in the military are the puppets who enable this.

You may view some of the things these soldiers aided in as helpful and good, but that doesnt negate the above, which I think is what Frown and other like minded people are arguing.

The US is analogous to the "friend" who helps you if you pay them, with the soldiers being the help? Idk, haven't put much thought into the analogy or where/if it falls apart, feel free to critique it.

^ True.

^ Not true. Outside of surreal/pyschedelic poetry,, etc, good writing is about conveying ideas with clarity. As we are constantly jumping between fact and opinion and it's frequently polite, if not necessary, to clearly distinguish between the two. As they say these days, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts." Amid allegations of Fake News, it's a distinction that's becoming more and more relevant, imo.

Yes, true. I don't think you are from the US, but this is how it is taught:

https://www2.ivcc.edu/rambo/tip_form...ting_voice.htm
I can find more examples if you'd like.