|
|
#341
10-07-2007, 04:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: AC question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Adolf Hitler got a higher proportion of votes in 1932 than the Labour party in the UK did in 2005. Exactly how was this not democratic? [/ QUOTE ] Previous threads in this forum addressing this question have included such brilliant tactics as arguing that since it produced a "bad" result, it isn't democratic. [/ QUOTE ] And yet another one. Nazi Germany was not democratic, it was even based on an ideology that the tyranny was a better form of rule than democracy. The only 'democratic' election in 1932 was held in the Weimar Republic. Do anyone know history around here before they make statements? [/ QUOTE ] I don't know much about history. Please tell me this. Was hitler elected after skillfully manipulating the hearts and minds of the people and then over time his reign mophed into something more and more tyrannical or did he somehow step into a dictatorship from day one? [/ QUOTE ] Both of those would be a complete misrepresentation of the events that took place, if that is what you are asking. [/ QUOTE ] Well if you can break it down for me in an unbiased way in like a paragraph I'd be happy to receive the education. 
|
|
#342
10-07-2007, 04:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC question
[ QUOTE ]
I suspect we all fall in different places as we explore power and might in different area's though. [/ QUOTE ] I suspect we don't fall that far apart if we explore only power and might as you described......different story if you include the subjective measure of 'right'. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
|
|
#343
10-07-2007, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'm just wondering where you stand. [/ QUOTE ] k, well you got my answer. might does not necessarily make right (whether or not it does is dependent on how "right" is being defined/interpreted). [/ QUOTE ] So if 'right' is defined by me as sadistic sexual pleasure and I rape someones daughter in a particularly sadistic way, then that is 'right' (assuming I have the power to do so). [/ QUOTE ] Obviously. It's right by your definition. Why are we going on a pointless tangent about moral relativism? I've already said that whether it's "right" has nothing to do with it. [/ QUOTE ] Well lets assume Me, pvn, and you 2 guys are all to the left of this hypothetical sadistic rapist as definging might makes right in this situation. I suspect we all fall in different places as we explore power and might in different area's though. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? [/ QUOTE ] Forget it, that is a discussion for you and pvn to have.
|
|
#345
10-07-2007, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I suspect we all fall in different places as we explore power and might in different area's though. [/ QUOTE ] I suspect we don't fall that far apart if we explore only power and might as you described......different story if you include the subjective measure of 'right'. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Good point. agreed [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#346
10-07-2007, 04:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC question
[ QUOTE ]
Good point. agreed [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] At least you finally see that it is more an issue of subjective morality, unlike your buddy who focuses on whether or not it is a normative argument or descriptive statement. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#347
10-07-2007, 05:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Adolf Hitler got a higher proportion of votes in 1932 than the Labour party in the UK did in 2005. Exactly how was this not democratic? [/ QUOTE ] Previous threads in this forum addressing this question have included such brilliant tactics as arguing that since it produced a "bad" result, it isn't democratic. [/ QUOTE ] And yet another one. Nazi Germany was not democratic, it was even based on an ideology that the tyranny was a better form of rule than democracy. The only 'democratic' election in 1932 was held in the Weimar Republic. Do anyone know history around here before they make statements? [/ QUOTE ] I don't know much about history. Please tell me this. Was hitler elected after skillfully manipulating the hearts and minds of the people and then over time his reign mophed into something more and more tyrannical or did he somehow step into a dictatorship from day one? [/ QUOTE ] Both of those would be a complete misrepresentation of the events that took place, if that is what you are asking. [/ QUOTE ] Well if you can break it down for me in an unbiased way in like a paragraph I'd be happy to receive the education. [/ QUOTE ] Ok, but it will be a long read. I'm fairly certain this is should be fairly reflective of the events that took place, and I hope you will read it and not just skim it. If only skimming, the cliff note at the bottom is probably the best way to go. Ok. The Weimar republic was formed after Germany's defeat in 1919, and was an attempt to establish liberal democracy in german after the fall of the kaiser. Initially the republic had to take steps that makes it fall short of democratic ideals. Amongst others it had to recede control of the armed forces, who were in complete control by the officer class, not in political control. It was also plagued by revolutions, often communist ones, usually brutally crushed by the military of voluntary corps. A competing state 'the munich soviet state' was also started, but was brutally beaten down, something which gave birth to amongst others the nazi party. The goals sought by the weimar republic when it was established was mainly democratization, a goal which was never achieved. To understand this you also have to understand the times, democracies were not the common way to go, many countries in the world were still monarchies/tyrannies and germany had roots as an empire. The nazis were amongst them who desired an authorative state - this is important, because it is not something they put a lid on...in the 1920s this was a completely legit political stance. You probably know the story of the hyper-inflation in the 1920s. Suffice to say as the years got closer to 1930, Germany was a state who struggled to democratize itself, had no currency that worked and was plagued by constant disorder - iow. it is a state that was not working. Then in the last years of the republic, all appointed chancellors were dictators, and not based on democratic principles. When the government fell in 1932, elections were called and the Nazis got some 37% of the votes. Hitler failed to get the chancellorship, nobody seized government and germany had in effect no cabinet for some 3 months of time. After much political back and forth, Hitler and the Nazis finally came to power in the government. But note that this was not done in any democratic parliamentary principle, amongst others the cabinet wielded legislative power. The state of germany was not a true democracy because the democratization process had failed. It did have elections, but this is not enough to qualify for a democracy by any means. Opposition was outlawed, the nazi party assumed total control, the parliament was disbanded and all politics for a further democratization of germany was cancelled and in 1933 Germany became a dictatorship. Cliff notes: The weimar republic was a presidential republic that failed to install liberal democracy, and at the end became a tyranny.
|
|
#348
10-07-2007, 05:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC question
Good summary td, interesting read.
But what if Hitler were to break into your house and give you a $2000 TV that you didn't want and he demanded that you give him a $100 Hotdog in return......would you kick the PAT or go for two? Simple question, please answer yes or no. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
#350
10-07-2007, 06:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC question
[ QUOTE ]
Good summary td, interesting read. But what if Hitler were to break into your house and give you a $2000 TV that you didn't want and he demanded that you give him a $100 Hotdog in return......would you kick the PAT or go for two? Simple question, please answer yes or no. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Hehe ty. It is an important piece of history also, that should remind people that modern democracy is far more than allowing people to vote. The checks and balances system is incredibly important to make any society functionable, it is our 'safety switch' against Hitlers so to speak. In AC the checks and balances are (as I understand) largely given by the market, which is a fairly intriguing concept. As for the television example I obviously shoot hitler to save the world, steal the television set utilizing my stategiven monopolizing superpowers and eat the hotdog. Duh. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
