Dear Fake-Patriots,
POSTED BY: STDOUBT
UPDATED: Wednesday, June 11, 2025 02:40
VIEWED: 17112
PAGE 3 of 13
History in part is a game of 20/20 hindsight. That's why context is an important part of understanding people's motivations. It's easy 50 years on with more information and a modern worldview to say "he should have done this" or "he should have done that." Looked at from a modern perspective every war leader is a fool because you can always make a case that this decision was disasterous, that there was always this alternative or that this decision was plain stupid. At the time, with the world view and information the leaders ahd there may not have been that many apparent choices.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Fletch and Citizen, I agree with both of you, but I think there's a difference in semantics (for lack of a better word). Probably Hitler could have been stopped if other countries threatened him with retaliation if he started being naughty, but threatening and ranting aren't the same. Had they tried to argue with him (or even rant), I still think he wouldn't have cared as long as they didn't seem like they were in a position of power.
Now, back to the original point regarding ueber-patriots (btw, I just realised that we're implicitly implying they're like Hitler - I hope that's not really the case, at least it's not what I meant to do), ranting and arguing is basically all we can do, and making any real sort of threats is both impossible (unless we know them personally) and unethical. So it's unlikely that they'll ever change their minds through people arguing against them.
Not that it shouldn't be tried, of course. They shouldn't think that their opinion is a universal truth because no one seems to disagree, but it's just not worth my time personally. I have people like the ones on this forum to do it for me 
.
Other people can occasionally be useful, especially as minions. I want lots of minions.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There is a question I want to ask American board users right now and it relates to my previous post. How is the fact that China will soon supersede America in world power being handled in the American media and in America in general? I have heard it said in the media over here that America is in a state of denial about the situation. Is it considered unpatriotic to admit it?
--------------------------------------------------
Who do you suppose is in there?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes citizen, you are very right in that across a lot of Europe, the memory of WWI was still very fresh. Many people denounced Churchill as a War monger for his belief that Nazi Germany (and the communists) were a large threat and needed to be met with military force.
Stdoubt, I have seen the same (or very similar) thread posted on many sites. You are not saying anything new, even if you do have a point. May I suggest that next time you post something along these lines, you write a more coherent post. People don't want to read unreadable posts as your original post in this thread was. 7% pointed out your use of swearing. He has a very good point. There is no need to swear. I'm afraid that it only makes you sound stupid. I consider FFF (and the show in general) as a site for people of all ages (well almost ALL ages).
I'm not trying to 
you but simply offering advice. Again I do agree that the USA has taken a turn for the worst in recent years. However every government/empire/ dictatorship will eventually fall or be forced to evolve (look at my own country’s monarchy). If you want to actually do something to actually help then may I suggest the following:
1) Use public transport, ride a bike or just walk. I know of even the most ardent environmentalists (particularly in the USA) drive fuel intense trucks/SUVs/sports cars. By reducing the demand for oil you'll reduce support for the companies that support Bush.
2) Campaign hard next election. Tell people that they have other choices. Even if it won't affect the result but it will send a message to the government.
3) Don't post fowl mouthed rants. You may of noticed that firefly as a distinct controlling government voice to it (properly why Fox pulled it.) This is a fan sit for the show. Hence a lot of people on this site properly agree with you. No point, preaching to the converted.
I hope you take my points on board and in the spirit that I intended.
Regards, WishuponaWash
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Everyone and their mom is pandering to the Chinese government and overlooking the fact that the Chinese government is evil, guilty of gross human rights violations (some of which we've gotten all worked up about in the Middle East), and guilty of withholding health/medical information that's relevant to the rest of the world. Then when a Chinese government official comes on an official state visit to the U.S., the Chinese official makes a big display of releasing some political prisoner (who was probably imprisoned on false charges or something ridiculous) and everyone goes "oooh, they are taking steps to become more progressive" when in all actuality they aren't.
So to answer your question, I would say it's mostly denial with the occasional voice speaking up. There are grassroots groups, but those groups aren't really the media. Oh! The Falun Gong newspaper had a big spread about the Falun Gong persecution that is ongoing in China--not entirely sure how I feel about the live organ harvesting claims that were being made though. I don't want to believe it, but I guess it's technically possible. I mean, look what Hitler did in Germany.
I don't know that it's considered unpatriotic to mention the China situation, but it's a bad business move to mention it. Look at the market! 1.5 billion people!!! That's way more teenages to coerce and brainwash than the companies will ever find in America.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Haze:
There is a question I want to ask American board users right now and it relates to my previous post. How is the fact that China will soon supersede America in world power being handled in the American media and in America in general? I have heard it said in the media over here that America is in a state of denial about the situation. Is it considered unpatriotic to admit it?
I'm handling it the same as I did in the '80s when it was a fact that Japan was going to supercede us as a world power, and in the '90s when it was South Korea. Maintaining a skeptical wait and see attitude.
This isn't to say China won't cause trouble, especially in Africa. They will do this by sending the kind of aid most governments there really like, not food and medicine, but guns and money to help them maintain their power.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
STDOUBT
Quote:SLICK (I mean, GEEZER)
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Quote:Slick, look up the definition of scapegoat.
You mean like this?
STDOUBT You who support the current regime are the sickness that will eventually destroy this nation. You who are too cowardly to accept that our government has been overthrown from within by corporate interest and power-sick greed. You who support 'sneak and peek' law 'cuz it won't happen to you right? You who support 'extraordinary rendition' -I'd cut your throats. You who think
Guantanimo is just what we "have to do now" -fsck you and may you rot in hell.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The Germans who occupied the Rhineland in 1936 were told that if they should experience any resistance from France, that they should withdraw because Germany did not have the military power to hold the Rhineland. To a very large extent, I think the Rhineland was a test. The Germans, having essentially lost the First World War, were probably not committed in 1936 to an expansionistic offensive, until they were not removed from the Rhineland, at which point they began to build up their military force confident they could defeat countries that could not or would not oppose them. I think it relatively certain that if France and the UK (and I’ll throw the US in their as well,) had shown even a meager show of force by retaking the Rhineland, it might very well have forestalled the entire war. Of course we can’t really know what would have been, although what was, was certainly the worst of most possible scenarios.
Originally posted by Khyron:
Fletch and Citizen, I agree with both of you, but I think there's a difference in semantics (for lack of a better word). Probably Hitler could have been stopped if other countries threatened him with retaliation if he started being naughty, but threatening and ranting aren't the same. Had they tried to argue with him (or even rant), I still think he wouldn't have cared as long as they didn't seem like they were in a position of power.
Quote:There are lots of theories about where China will be in the coming years, but little can be said with any degree of certainty, at least according to Heisenberg. China is definitely growing as a military and an industrial power, whether that means it will supercede the US or if that should necessary matter is another issue entirely. I wouldn’t say the media in the US is in denial about it. There are varying opinions, but it’s largely speculation. I read an article in Time magazine a year ago that talked about the growing influence of China, and the issue of China concerning trade relations and gas prices is always in the news and the implication of China’s growing industrial or military power is never denied or overlooked. I don’t know what the European media, specifically, is saying about this issue, but based on your characterization, I would say they are probably wrong.
Originally posted by Haze:
There is a question I want to ask American board users right now and it relates to my previous post. How is the fact that China will soon supersede America in world power being handled in the American media and in America in general? I have heard it said in the media over here that America is in a state of denial about the situation. Is it considered unpatriotic to admit it?
Also Stdout is a little bit fruitcakey.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Slick, look up the definition of scapegoat.
Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary gives two:
1. An individual or group bearing the blame for others.
2. A goat sent into the wilderness on the Day of Atonement, symbolically bearing on its head the sins of the children of Israel.
So when StDoubt identifies those he/she (where's that non-gender-specific pronoun when you need it?) calls "COWARDS", curses and rants against them, and attempts to unify those who agree with him by this process, he's using them as "scapegoats", right? Thanks for clearing that up.
...unless you're talking about definition 2. I really don't want to go there and possibly provoke another megabyte's worth of anti-semitism from PN.
ps.
I may have been "slick" back in the day, but am now old, lumpy, and somewhat worn, I am also not MIB Agent J, so please give the nickname stuff a break.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And since Rue's gonna insult me anyway, I might as well make it worthwhile.
So here's a couple of questions about Dr. Britt's 14 Warning Signs of Fascism test.
1. Most symptom tests give a pass-fail number, i.e. "If you have more than 8 of the 14 symptoms, contact a doctor immediately". Is there a make/break for this test, or does meeting any one condition lead irrevocably to Fascism?
2. Actually sort of a subset of 1. Are all the questions only yes/no, or on a scale of 1 to 10? If Great Britain imprisons one man without trial for a week, and North Korea imprisons hundreds of thousands for life, is it fair to give them both the same score?
I also wonder if there are similar tests for, say, Communism, Socialism, Liberal Democracy, etc., so we can spin their results as we like as well.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME