mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Profile: niblick
About
User Name: niblick
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: None Specified
Statistics
Joined: Thursday, September 30, 2010
Last Visit: Wednesday, May 8, 2013 4:02:09 AM
Number of Posts: 190
[0.02% of all post / 0.05 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: Optimism For the Arab Spring
Posted: Wednesday, May 8, 2013 4:02:06 AM
LostinSC wrote:
I'm afraid the 'Arab Spring' of Morsi has become the 'Arab Springboard' for the Muslim Brotherhood.

Anxious

Pray


It is certainly understandable to be naïve. To be a doctrinaire liberal, however,
you need to check your common sense at the door.
Topic: "Racist"?
Posted: Thursday, April 11, 2013 5:36:39 AM
FounDit wrote:
DontCloudMe wrote:
Machiavelli wrote about how to passively take over a country using settlements and immigration (Emphasis FD). One only has to look to the United States over the last 50 years, and how it's been shaken by ideas disguised with euphemisms such as tolerance, multiculturalism, and coexistence.

The word racism itself is less than 100 years old, making an extremely rare appearance after WW2. So why has it gained so much attention and enjoyed such widespread use in the last 30 years?


Known as an irridentist movement, the Southwestern border of the U. S. serves as an example.


The tough, fair dinkum Aussies of a generation ago would find Carr an embarassment.
Topic: "Racist"?
Posted: Thursday, April 11, 2013 5:36:30 AM
FounDit wrote:
DontCloudMe wrote:
Machiavelli wrote about how to passively take over a country using settlements and immigration (Emphasis FD). One only has to look to the United States over the last 50 years, and how it's been shaken by ideas disguised with euphemisms such as tolerance, multiculturalism, and coexistence.

The word racism itself is less than 100 years old, making an extremely rare appearance after WW2. So why has it gained so much attention and enjoyed such widespread use in the last 30 years?


Known as an irridentist movement, the Southwestern border of the U. S. serves as an example.


The tough, fair dinkum Aussies of a generation ago would find Carr an embarassment.
Topic: We're borrowing 46 cents out of every dollar we spend
Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 6:01:04 AM
Tovarish wrote:
Centre Left parties erring on the side of Socialism are more than a financial problem.


Amen!
Topic: U.S. Constitution under attack
Posted: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 7:00:35 AM
excaelis wrote:
niblick wrote:
Maggie wrote:
excaelis wrote:
The point being ( more calmly expressed ) that wherever we're from, looking to the past for answers to current questions is not generally helpful and may be a dangerous distraction. Again, my apologies for being rude.


"..... when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana


Well, yes. For me, the main point is that the qualitites which enobled people thousands
of years ago still do. Should our values be as transient as the blink of an eye which
represents our individual time on earth?



Sadly, niblick, human mores are fairly mutable. 200 years ago slave-ownership was perfectly acceptable. Now ? Not so much. There are qualities that humanity at its best must retain, but I still believe we should be wary of nostalgic yearnings for ' the good old days '. One could pick any decade of the twentieth century that contained both the best and the worst of human behaviour. In an ideal world all children would have two loving parents ; unfortunately that doesn't always work out, so we have to figure out a way to do the best we can. That's not always going to make everyone happy. Society is a process that should be constantly examining itself.


There are many examples of disgusting mores, some of them contemporary. I said nothing
of mores but rather addressed the qualities which enobled people thousands of years ago
and still do: love, honor, trust, faithfulness, self-sacrifice, empathy and courage to
name some.

Generally speaking, it is not considered gentlemanly to put words in someone's mouth. I shall
do all in my power to avoid responding to your future posts.
Topic: Democracy's road to tyranny
Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013 8:54:17 AM
excaelis wrote:
Speaking of ad hominem attacks, Niblick. Just because I disagree with you does not mean that I am stupid. I was making the point that it is not surprising to see a member of an aristocracy advocating monarchism, any more than it would be to see a labourer advocating democracy. All political systems threaten individual liberties, we just choose which particular form of oppression works the least badly.




I do not recall citing anyone as stupid and have not done so in many decades. People
have the mental horsepower which they were given at birth and may refine and develop
it according to their own lights.

Your post, to which I object, is biased and off-point. My observation, and I apologize if it
offended you, was that people can be well-educated and yet obtuse. Sometimes that density
is a product of their cultural prejudices and sometimes the formal education they have
acquired transcends their ability to use it profitably. Okay?
Topic: U.S. Constitution under attack
Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:12:51 AM
Maggie wrote:
excaelis wrote:
The point being ( more calmly expressed ) that wherever we're from, looking to the past for answers to current questions is not generally helpful and may be a dangerous distraction. Again, my apologies for being rude.


"..... when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana


Well, yes. For me, the main point is that the qualitites which enobled people thousands
of years ago still do. Should our values be as transient as the blink of an eye which
represents our individual time on earth?
Topic: Democracy's road to tyranny
Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013 10:06:59 AM
Maggie wrote:
Maggie wrote:
excaelis wrote:
You skipped the ' Catholic nobleman' part. Any particular reason ?




And you skipped the part about why you disagree with what was said in the article. I think the final two paragraphs sum it up nicely. It's also a conspectus of what's presently happening in the United States and various other countries around the planet.

In case you skipped over that part when you saw that he was a 'Catholic nobleman', I'm including it here. Even noblemen can be right some of the time.

"There is, in fact, only either just or unjust discrimination. Yet, egalitarian democracy remains adamant in its totalitarian policy. The popular pastime of modern democracies of punishing the diligent and thrifty, while re warding the lazy, improvident, and unthrifty, is cultivated via the State, fulfilling a demo-egali-tarian program based on a demo-totalitarian ideology.

Democratic tyranny, evolving on the sly as a slow and subtle corruption leading to total State control, is thus the third and by no means rarest road to the most modern form of slavery."
Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn




Have you no decency, Maggie, no shame? You seem to suggest that the Progressive view of an
omnipotent State is undesirable and, furthermore, you present compelling intellectual evidence
to bolster your case. You leave your opponents no choice save to present an ad hominem attack.

Could it be that some constant posters are educated well past their ability to utilize their
education for their own or someone else's profit? I do not know the answer to that but there
must be a reason for their anti-intellectualism.
Topic: Democracy's road to tyranny
Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013 8:02:51 AM
Maggie wrote:
The following article was written in 1988 by Erik Kuehnelt-Leddihn, an Austrian socio-political theorist. THIS is the primary reason for the second amendment. Never think that such a transition in ANY country is impossible.


Democracy's Road to Tyranny


Most excellent.
Topic: Equal rights between men and women
Posted: Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:51:55 AM
My political and personal positions are identical: fair and equal treatment for all with as
minimally intrusive a State as is feasible.

I do not attempt to understand the nuances of governmenance in Nordic countries nor in Australia
but do work for the cause of freedom in my own country where I am active in the legislature of
my home state.

Freedom for all people, but especially for women, is problematic in many countries. The point
of my post was that to attack Maggie for her position because of a native prejudice against
weapons of self-defense is, in my view, wrongheaded. My contempt for the usual tools of liberal
poltics remains strong.