Rest in Peace, Beatiful Prince
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
164 comments displayed.
#264 to #13
-
trimageryan (03/25/2015) [-] 
God damn man, it's 5am, I just got home from work. I don't need these feels right now.
#176 to #6
-
anon (03/25/2015) [-]
I don't get what you people are saying. Are you saying that you don't believe there was systematic genocide of millions of Jews by Hitler and that most of them and the germans died because of starvation and disease because the constant allied bombing, and therefore Hitler actually was only fighting the good fight for his people?
Or are you saying you accept that the holocaust happened the way it's depicted in the movies and books and you're just supporting Hitler to be trolls?
Which is it?
Or are you saying you accept that the holocaust happened the way it's depicted in the movies and books and you're just supporting Hitler to be trolls?
Which is it?
#166 to #6
-
straitedge (03/25/2015) [-] Great. My foreign national girlfriend came in on me watching this.
She's Peruvian and doesn't get the hilariousness behind it.
She thinks that I worship Hitler now.
Thanks, FJ. Thanks.
She's Peruvian and doesn't get the hilariousness behind it.
She thinks that I worship Hitler now.
Thanks, FJ. Thanks.
#235 to #166
-
thegameujustlost (03/25/2015) [-] >mixing races
>not contributing in the survival and spread of the white race
You deserved it.
>not contributing in the survival and spread of the white race
You deserved it.
#93 to #80
-
anon (03/25/2015) [-]
It's the soundtrack of Gandalf when he dies
www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3pDTfCKjiA
www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3pDTfCKjiA
#85 to #6
-
anon (03/25/2015) [-]
So yes HItler unified the German people and did great things for the country (especially economically), but am I the only person here who doesn't beleive mass murder is worth this?
I mean sure it's important to know all about him and the good things he did but there is no way you can say a man who is responsible for the deaths of at least 6 million people (not even counting soldier who died fighting) as a good person.
Not that I'm saying you were saying Hitler was a good person but the Neo-Nazism on this site is kind of scary. I can't tell if people are joking or not sometimes.
I mean sure it's important to know all about him and the good things he did but there is no way you can say a man who is responsible for the deaths of at least 6 million people (not even counting soldier who died fighting) as a good person.
Not that I'm saying you were saying Hitler was a good person but the Neo-Nazism on this site is kind of scary. I can't tell if people are joking or not sometimes.
#90 to #85
-
galiogolem (03/25/2015) [-]
Look I will state something true and clear.
I consider myself a national socialist, i.e: Neo Nazi (That's more of a slander but meh, for the sake of the argument..).
I hate no one, but one thing is sure, I will make my stand, I will better my people, not at the expense of others, but those who are getting the better from MY people, I will fight them, for ever, publicly, I don't care about social suicide, I don't care I can't get a job, I don't care how hard it is. I love my people, I love all peoples, but my people the most, I will work for its betterment, I will work to make every homeless and rich man in my country happier and never stop.
I will fight against those who want to strangle my people and those who want to squeeze my nation dry.
Those are the true vows of national socialism, not what you have been thought in school.
Nazis did HORRIBLE things, and ALL of the allies did things AS horrible or WORSE during their existence. Except nazi germany and hitler did it for their people instead than for personal gain of an elite.
Media will always demonize NS because it defends trully, the people.
I consider myself a national socialist, i.e: Neo Nazi (That's more of a slander but meh, for the sake of the argument..).
I hate no one, but one thing is sure, I will make my stand, I will better my people, not at the expense of others, but those who are getting the better from MY people, I will fight them, for ever, publicly, I don't care about social suicide, I don't care I can't get a job, I don't care how hard it is. I love my people, I love all peoples, but my people the most, I will work for its betterment, I will work to make every homeless and rich man in my country happier and never stop.
I will fight against those who want to strangle my people and those who want to squeeze my nation dry.
Those are the true vows of national socialism, not what you have been thought in school.
Nazis did HORRIBLE things, and ALL of the allies did things AS horrible or WORSE during their existence. Except nazi germany and hitler did it for their people instead than for personal gain of an elite.
Media will always demonize NS because it defends trully, the people.
#92 to #90
-
severepwner (03/25/2015) [-] Man that was an intense read while the above webm was playing.
#237 to #90
-
mehturtlesareok (03/25/2015) [-] I don't see how you can make the argument that allies did worse things than implement "einsatzgruppen" or run death camps, or anything even close to that level of brutality for that matter. Though I'd still like to hear your rationale.
#277 to #237
-
galiogolem (03/25/2015) [-]
Thanks for keeping it so polite! France has ****** up tenths of countries, the squeezed and plundered Haiti, cote d'ivoire, and in many of those countries, commited mass murders. The english under the command of Mr Churchill (when he was a soldier) commited mass murders in India, he deliberately starved 6-7 million Indians to death, plus he invented the concept of concentration camps in africa where he incarcerated and killed hundreds of Dutch people. Belgium's king Leopold 2 conducted a genocide in congo. No need to get started on Stalin, however you can still say you are a communist, the stigma will be a lot less worse than saying you're a national socialist (and if you're outside USA it is pretty much A-OK to say you're a communist, even though they murdered far more people even its OWN people during their "reign").
I can of course go on. Germany's crimes where awful, but not unmatched and they are seen as so awful because of all the continuous hatred you see it receives. If they didn't go so hard about germany in schools and highschools, you'd be more open to national socialism. But this is the real goal, destroying national socialism as a concept, as an idea! Because it is one of the only forms of government for a nation that does not permit outsiders to control its wealth.
Why not rant against all the other countries that commit atrocities? Because they can be controlled and they are controlled, because their forms of government are okay, hey, they can or are corrupt most of the members of the western "democracies" so who cares what democracy has ever done to people? Those who control the public view of things want them to like democracy, to WORSHIP IT even! This way we will always have democracy and they will always have their HUGE disgusting pile of the cake.
Well, I don't want to friggin bore you to death, these would be the (emotional let me admit) rational about national socialism, there is a lot more to see and to read. And if you'd like an interesting read, I'll give you this, easy, short and it'll explain a lot of the NS ideals:
You need to login to view this link have in mind this was created even before hitler joined the nasdap.
I can of course go on. Germany's crimes where awful, but not unmatched and they are seen as so awful because of all the continuous hatred you see it receives. If they didn't go so hard about germany in schools and highschools, you'd be more open to national socialism. But this is the real goal, destroying national socialism as a concept, as an idea! Because it is one of the only forms of government for a nation that does not permit outsiders to control its wealth.
Why not rant against all the other countries that commit atrocities? Because they can be controlled and they are controlled, because their forms of government are okay, hey, they can or are corrupt most of the members of the western "democracies" so who cares what democracy has ever done to people? Those who control the public view of things want them to like democracy, to WORSHIP IT even! This way we will always have democracy and they will always have their HUGE disgusting pile of the cake.
Well, I don't want to friggin bore you to death, these would be the (emotional let me admit) rational about national socialism, there is a lot more to see and to read. And if you'd like an interesting read, I'll give you this, easy, short and it'll explain a lot of the NS ideals:
You need to login to view this link have in mind this was created even before hitler joined the nasdap.
#152 to #90
-
electronicbacon (03/25/2015) [-] That was amazing. I know a guy in college who'd absolutely love to hear this and spread it around. Mind if I tell him about it?
#112 to #90
-
welliguessitsaname (03/25/2015) [-] having trouble telling whether or not you're serious
#95 to #85
-
severepwner (03/25/2015) [-] #90
For me, I have always known Nazis as the bad guys. For good damn reason. They acquired an insatiable lust for land that wasn't theirs, they exterminated millions for asinine reasons, were the spark of the most brutal conflict in human history. That is what they did and they will not be forgiven of it.
However, we live in an age of white hate, of hate of men. An age where we are treated like the bad guys for the color of our skin. Once, people were seen as inferior, or animals because of their heritage, which was wrong. Now we are being treated as villains, deserved to be killed, which many agree to.
What if blacks, homosexuals or women were in this position? The world would come to their aid and punish any that oppressed them. What about us? Who are our advocates? Who stands for us? Who do I have to turn to when I need assistance from oppression? No one cares about us, no one wants to stand for us, they don't think we need help. Because we have white privilege.
This isn't an offense, it's a defense. If the world continues to treat me as a villain, continues to not care about our agenda, continues to advocate and baby others, continues to support inequality, then I won't stand with the world. If they'll stand up for us, why wouldn't we stand with them instead?
For me, I have always known Nazis as the bad guys. For good damn reason. They acquired an insatiable lust for land that wasn't theirs, they exterminated millions for asinine reasons, were the spark of the most brutal conflict in human history. That is what they did and they will not be forgiven of it.
However, we live in an age of white hate, of hate of men. An age where we are treated like the bad guys for the color of our skin. Once, people were seen as inferior, or animals because of their heritage, which was wrong. Now we are being treated as villains, deserved to be killed, which many agree to.
What if blacks, homosexuals or women were in this position? The world would come to their aid and punish any that oppressed them. What about us? Who are our advocates? Who stands for us? Who do I have to turn to when I need assistance from oppression? No one cares about us, no one wants to stand for us, they don't think we need help. Because we have white privilege.
This isn't an offense, it's a defense. If the world continues to treat me as a villain, continues to not care about our agenda, continues to advocate and baby others, continues to support inequality, then I won't stand with the world. If they'll stand up for us, why wouldn't we stand with them instead?
#292 to #113
-
severepwner (03/25/2015) [-] Of course not quite. However, they're extremists of a relatively common opinion and outlook. Of course not everyone hates whites, however when it comes between them and another race. Whites lose every single time, why?
#294 to #293
-
severepwner (03/25/2015) [-] Sorry it won't be an example you heard of.
A few years ago, my friend who was in highschool at the time. got into a fight with a few other black kids, because they were all delinquents, that's what they did. His friend (white) came up to help because he was outnumbered. Two other whites (presumed to be friends with the black group) then came to help.
The fight didn't last very long of course, this is a highschool that **** is hard and fast. And everyone got sent to the principals office, except the black kids who were there from the beginning. Him, his friend, and the black dudes' friends were all suspended. The black kids? I heard they didn't even get detention.
A few years ago, my friend who was in highschool at the time. got into a fight with a few other black kids, because they were all delinquents, that's what they did. His friend (white) came up to help because he was outnumbered. Two other whites (presumed to be friends with the black group) then came to help.
The fight didn't last very long of course, this is a highschool that **** is hard and fast. And everyone got sent to the principals office, except the black kids who were there from the beginning. Him, his friend, and the black dudes' friends were all suspended. The black kids? I heard they didn't even get detention.
#279 to #95
-
galiogolem (03/25/2015) [-]
National Socialists believed that ALL races should better themselves in their countries, Hitler has islamic SA's because they believed in national socialism.
NS IS the ideal that you must better your race and your interests. But in YOUR countries, and with YOUR culture. It is a shame all the mixing that has been going on has been giving people alien to cultures the thought of having rights of that culture.
A black man growing in france with french culture and french cuisine and what not.. Immigration ruined everything, and it will be hard to deal with this problem.
Living with whites will never leave you satisfied, blacks must get back to africa and help its betterment with some foreign aids from europe I admit, for it is part their doing that they've lost so much. But MOSTLY black africans WORKING themselves for AFRICA, whilst whites work THEMSELVES for europe and their countries.
And in the meanwhile great respect will grow between the two cultures, but only if they do not mix (en masse, some exceptions are okay let's not be silly) and if they maintain said cultures separated.
NS IS the ideal that you must better your race and your interests. But in YOUR countries, and with YOUR culture. It is a shame all the mixing that has been going on has been giving people alien to cultures the thought of having rights of that culture.
A black man growing in france with french culture and french cuisine and what not.. Immigration ruined everything, and it will be hard to deal with this problem.
Living with whites will never leave you satisfied, blacks must get back to africa and help its betterment with some foreign aids from europe I admit, for it is part their doing that they've lost so much. But MOSTLY black africans WORKING themselves for AFRICA, whilst whites work THEMSELVES for europe and their countries.
And in the meanwhile great respect will grow between the two cultures, but only if they do not mix (en masse, some exceptions are okay let's not be silly) and if they maintain said cultures separated.
#161 to #6
-
kunterz (03/25/2015) [-] Before I even came to this site or 4chan, I had great respect for hitler, I used to think he did a lot of things wrong Even though he didn't do anything wrong, but the amount he accomplished just gives me great respect for him.
Rest in peace Adolf Hitler, you are the hero germany needs, but didn't deserve.
Rest in peace Adolf Hitler, you are the hero germany needs, but didn't deserve.
#33
-
ldnelson (03/24/2015) [-] I've always wondered about that. You become dictator of the world, kill billions, force a uniform language/culture, and annihilate democracy but in the process you create a one world government with near perfect institutions to ensure good governance, a birthing program that makes the human race better with each succeeding generation, and a society that values virtues like environmentalism, conservation, and individual responsibility while it condemns vice and excess. Everyone hates you and even grade school children learn of your as "evil" and a genocidal murderer but in the process you unify the world under one banner and a government that rules in accordance with the common weal rather than the common will. You basically use tyranny to force mankind to be better and actually responsible because people would never do it on their own. It's an interesting moral question.
#201 to #33
-
kallebanan (03/25/2015) [-] Brave New World by Aldous Huxley sounds like a book for you.
#63 to #33
-
arreatface (03/24/2015) [-] thats the kind of reasoning that put hitler and the likes in charge while keeping them convinced they were doing good. The end justify the means english not native language I could have translated that wrong sounds like a viable way to think but bias and subjectivity put a hold on it, what you think is a good thing eugenics for example might be plain wrong and evil when put under a different light.
I hope that was clear im in a kinda fuzzy state of mind atm.
I hope that was clear im in a kinda fuzzy state of mind atm.
#141 to #63
-
nigeltheoutlaw (03/25/2015) [-] I understand what you are saying, but I think just about every society would agree that preventing human extinction is a moral cause, and a world government is needed to prevent at least the self-inflicted ways that we could go extinct. The minutiae of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would probably lead to some contention, but as long as the most important goal is met then it doesn't really matter.
#282 to #141
-
freedombirdman (03/25/2015) [-] Maybe It's just me, but I value freedom and natural rights over simple survival. What's the point of living if your life is nothing more than a pawn to those in power? That's not an existence I wish to lead, and I think it's accurate to say all those who died in the name of freedom shared that viewpoint.
Give me liberty or give me death, I say.
Give me liberty or give me death, I say.
#283 to #282
-
nigeltheoutlaw (03/25/2015) [-] Honestly man, that's stupid, and this is coming from someone who loves America and all of the ideals it stands for. The entire purpose of life is to perpetuate life and if you place ideas beyond the entire species then you are incredibly short sighted and small minded. I agree that freedom and liberty are great in theory and oftentimes even in practice and that I have enjoyed many of the benefits of them, but all of the conflicting ideas on what those are for different people are a huge reason why the whole planet is one bad decision from nuking itself into a ball of radioactive slag. Not only that, but true freedom and liberty are nonexistent today, and what I propose is more of the same. Freedoms and liberties limited by necessary restrictions as they are now, just with the further caveat that your personal freedoms and liberties can not endanger the species. I think it's pretty damn reasonable, especially since the current path with those rights is a self-destructive one.
Case point: ISIS is only able to do the evil **** they do because they have virtually unrestricted freedom, which they are using to restrict the freedoms of others and to rape, pillage, and slaughter. I'm not saying that every nation with those ideals are the same way, but Russia, America, Pakistan, India, and any other nuclear power also has the freedom to start a world ending war if they felt so inclined, and there's a large chance that the people would support them. That freedom needs to be removed, as do the freedoms to destroy our environment and wantonly waste our resources, as those freedoms also impinge on the freedoms of others. This is what I meant when I said that the minutiae of the traditional American view of freedom does not matter in the grand scheme.
Case point: ISIS is only able to do the evil **** they do because they have virtually unrestricted freedom, which they are using to restrict the freedoms of others and to rape, pillage, and slaughter. I'm not saying that every nation with those ideals are the same way, but Russia, America, Pakistan, India, and any other nuclear power also has the freedom to start a world ending war if they felt so inclined, and there's a large chance that the people would support them. That freedom needs to be removed, as do the freedoms to destroy our environment and wantonly waste our resources, as those freedoms also impinge on the freedoms of others. This is what I meant when I said that the minutiae of the traditional American view of freedom does not matter in the grand scheme.
#287 to #283
-
freedombirdman (03/25/2015) [-] You misunderstood what I am saying, and perhaps I was not clear in my wording. Obviously you cannot have total freedom to step on others, because that would be violating their natural rights as well ('my right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins' so to speak). I do not have the freedom to wantonly destroy the environment because that violates other people's right to life (since we need a healthy environment to survive). I am simply speaking of the danger that comes with placing your life and prosperity in the hands of government. Government is force, since it uses police power to maintain order. Force alone is not justice nor legitimacy, it must be tempered by a respect for natural rights and liberty. When government steps outside of the bounds of a constitution based on natural rights, it becomes tyrannical, and history has proven that any government can become tyrannical (even our own).
Believe it or not, many of the problems today that seem to stem from the private sector are ultimately the result of government meddling in the freedom of the people.
'Rights and freedoms' doesn't imply having total leeway to do whatever you want, it means you are the master of your own destiny, and as long as your choices do not harm others you are free to pursue your own happiness, whatever that may be.
Believe it or not, many of the problems today that seem to stem from the private sector are ultimately the result of government meddling in the freedom of the people.
'Rights and freedoms' doesn't imply having total leeway to do whatever you want, it means you are the master of your own destiny, and as long as your choices do not harm others you are free to pursue your own happiness, whatever that may be.
#288 to #287
-
nigeltheoutlaw (03/25/2015) [-] I think I did, sorry. It was early when I wrote that and I was still pretty out of it. I think this is a case of differing opinions as you said prior, as I think there is no greater justice than ensuring humanity continues. Our rights aren't worth **** if we all die out, and my contention with your "I'm willing to die for freedom" statement is that it would only be some people dying for it, which is okay. If everyone dies for it then it's a pointless endeavor.
"many of the problems today that seem to stem from the private sector are ultimately the result of government meddling in the freedom of the people"
I'm not gonna even touch that as that's not what I want to discuss and those discussions always end up ************ where everyone just ends up frustrated.
That's true and I agree with that sentiment, but that is only taken in the context of individual nations, which is why it is still not sufficient. As Americans, our actions directly harm both other people in other nations as well as the environment globally (perhaps you do not personally go dump oil in the ocean, but many people and corporations are equally irresponsible with zero repercussions), but we don't care/aren't aware nor does the government care and we are allowed to continue the destructive ways in the name of "freedom". This freedom needs to be curtailed in the sense of all of humanity, so that a business can not have the freedom to horribly pollute the Niger river to ship oil to America, as it did the infringing of rights in another nation. What I want, and I think I was unclear as well, is to have the American ideals of "your rights ends where my noes begins" to be applied and enforced internationally, rather than our current way where most of our abuses and crimes (whether we're ignorant or not or complicit or not) end up just being shunted off onto other people in other nations or onto the environment to fester until it reaches a boiling point.
tl ; dr: Essentially, I want America to rule the globe. For all our failures, I think we do it best, but we just need to not only apply the concept of freedom and rights to just within our borders.
"many of the problems today that seem to stem from the private sector are ultimately the result of government meddling in the freedom of the people"
I'm not gonna even touch that as that's not what I want to discuss and those discussions always end up ************ where everyone just ends up frustrated.
That's true and I agree with that sentiment, but that is only taken in the context of individual nations, which is why it is still not sufficient. As Americans, our actions directly harm both other people in other nations as well as the environment globally (perhaps you do not personally go dump oil in the ocean, but many people and corporations are equally irresponsible with zero repercussions), but we don't care/aren't aware nor does the government care and we are allowed to continue the destructive ways in the name of "freedom". This freedom needs to be curtailed in the sense of all of humanity, so that a business can not have the freedom to horribly pollute the Niger river to ship oil to America, as it did the infringing of rights in another nation. What I want, and I think I was unclear as well, is to have the American ideals of "your rights ends where my noes begins" to be applied and enforced internationally, rather than our current way where most of our abuses and crimes (whether we're ignorant or not or complicit or not) end up just being shunted off onto other people in other nations or onto the environment to fester until it reaches a boiling point.
tl ; dr: Essentially, I want America to rule the globe. For all our failures, I think we do it best, but we just need to not only apply the concept of freedom and rights to just within our borders.
#117 to #58
-
trivdiego (03/25/2015) [-] deadpoolsupplier.imgur.com/
Link to the page that has all of the comics on it. just use control f and type in year one to start from the beginning
Link to the page that has all of the comics on it. just use control f and type in year one to start from the beginning
#140 to #33
-
nigeltheoutlaw (03/25/2015) [-] Honestly, it's not much of a question for me, it's just a wholehearted "yes". Humanity will kill itself on the current path, whether that's through overpopulation, resource scarcity (possibly linked to the overpopulation), environmental destruction, or war, it will definitely do it. The only way out of the eventual self-destruction is unification as a species as well as a drive to responsibly and quickly address issues like environmental degradation and excess. If that's done through the removal of some personal liberties like the right to vote that so many people don't even use then I'm okay with it because that is vastly preferable to extinction.
However, the kicker is that whatever dictator undertook this endeavor and succeeded could not lose their way with all that power. If they did then they could very well lead to one of the above doomsday scenarios even with humanity united into one government.
However, the kicker is that whatever dictator undertook this endeavor and succeeded could not lose their way with all that power. If they did then they could very well lead to one of the above doomsday scenarios even with humanity united into one government.
#242 to #94
-
viscerys (03/25/2015) [-] I think the point of Watchmen was Veidt nuking major places, so A) Nobody would have the manpower left to fight a war and B) Nobody would be willing to fight a war. They'd all turn their hatred from each other onto Dr. Manhattan.
I'm not sure it's quite the same thing, seeing as Veidt didn't get called out. They all think it was Dr. Manhattan.
I'm not sure it's quite the same thing, seeing as Veidt didn't get called out. They all think it was Dr. Manhattan.
#99 to #33
-
pokemonstheshiz (03/25/2015) [-] watch Psycho Pass, if you haven't
kinda that principle, but on a smaller scale. Anyone who is deemed a criminal by the system (which determines this through psycho-somatic scans) is institutionalized, and sometimes killed if they're too dangerous. I'm kinda torn on whether or not it would be a good thing.
kinda that principle, but on a smaller scale. Anyone who is deemed a criminal by the system (which determines this through psycho-somatic scans) is institutionalized, and sometimes killed if they're too dangerous. I'm kinda torn on whether or not it would be a good thing.
#168 to #133
-
pokemonstheshiz (03/25/2015) [-] that chick's whole existence is annoying. The season would have been a lot better without her at all, and had more time to focus on other things
#170 to #169
-
pokemonstheshiz (03/25/2015) [-] yep. Which is kind of unfortunate, because I think Akane is probably one of the best developed female characters I've ever watched. This chick is literally just a bad cliche
#62 to #33
-
onecommentonlyone (03/24/2015) [-]
It is an interesting question. I believe that if a utopia is forced into existence through violence and tyranny it is no utopia. Whilst the base morals for the vast majority of people are similar, there is a large enough spectrum to make it impossible to force the entire population to wholeheartedly agree on everything.
It is similar to the concept 'can you be forced to be free?' What freedom means to you may mean something very different to me, so can we be forced to live under the banner of 'freedom' if we disagree on the key meaning of said banner? It is the same here. You say you 'use tyranny to force mankind to be better', but surely the fallibilities of mankind is what makes for progress. No advancement has been made by everyone agreeing with each other. 'Group-think', in any guise, political parties forcing everyone to 'toe the party line', religions stopping the evolution of scientific progress for a millenium, is the most dangerous thing known to mankind. Argument and debate lead to improvement. All this tyranny-lead utopia would lead to is more problems for the society, resentment of the leaders, potential anger at the deaths of billions. Constant fear that you are only living at the behest of a leader far superior in stature to you.
It is similar to the concept 'can you be forced to be free?' What freedom means to you may mean something very different to me, so can we be forced to live under the banner of 'freedom' if we disagree on the key meaning of said banner? It is the same here. You say you 'use tyranny to force mankind to be better', but surely the fallibilities of mankind is what makes for progress. No advancement has been made by everyone agreeing with each other. 'Group-think', in any guise, political parties forcing everyone to 'toe the party line', religions stopping the evolution of scientific progress for a millenium, is the most dangerous thing known to mankind. Argument and debate lead to improvement. All this tyranny-lead utopia would lead to is more problems for the society, resentment of the leaders, potential anger at the deaths of billions. Constant fear that you are only living at the behest of a leader far superior in stature to you.
#76 to #33
-
freedombirdman (03/24/2015) [-] Except this begs the question, how can you call something 'the greater good' or 'the general welfare' if it involves killing/oppressing innocent people? You're basically saying that they're not people, and not worthy of basic natural rights. It's not really for the good of all, it's for the good of whatever group happens to be in power.
It's easy to condemn others in the name of 'the greater good' until you find your own neck on the chopping block.
It's easy to condemn others in the name of 'the greater good' until you find your own neck on the chopping block.
#256 to #224
-
migueldecervantes (03/25/2015) [-]
Right. You should sacrifice yourself first.
We'll see about the rest of us afterwards.
We'll see about the rest of us afterwards.
#259 to #258
-
migueldecervantes (03/25/2015) [-]
If you are American and yet still don't know how to enlist into the marines, you are a ******* retard...
#153 to #33
-
gerfox (03/25/2015) [-] This IS already a thing imo. tho. Leaders who improve the world, and their own country are often either strongly disliked or strongly liked. People hate change, and others will jump on every opportunity to bash their political opponents even though they do/did a good job. Pic kinda related.
#151 to #33
-
terafyde (03/25/2015) [-] Honestly it depends on where you stand on Civil Liberty and Personal Freedoms. If you look into the history of Germany during Nazi rule you will find it was insanely prosporous and depending on your stance on Freedom, it might be worth it. People like me who identify as Libertarian Socialist Adolf Hitler's total control over a large portion of your personal life and the backbone of manufacturing. The cost was not worth the outcome. Sure, your nation would be a strong one, but your people would be oppressed. I don't know if you know what Fascism is or if you've got the correct definitons of it but ever since Hitler's rule, Fascism has become synonmous with Racism and Homophobia. This isn't the case. National Socialism It was more akin to National Capitalism was given these Racist views from Hitler. The Fascism ideology isn't a discriminatory one, but can be used in a discriminatory way; like all Ideologies.
Fascism is kind of difficult for some people to grasp as it isn't actually on the Political Compass or whatever you use. Sure, it's Totalitarian but outside of that it contributes some good values, like Class Collaboration People in different classes working together to achieve a common goal, Fascism is very Nationalist and thus the idea of a great nation or the common good is usually the goal , Personality Cult Essentially you try and make an ideal figure for all humans to aspire to. This is seen in western countries with the idea of the "Sexiest Man/Woman alive". In Germany it was done with Hitler. and a Mixed Economy Which thinks that both Public and Private sector should contribute to the economy as some things are better for the people on a monopoly, e.g. Healthcare Don't get butthurt over the idea of Government paying for your healthcare, the Private Sector isn't doing a good job at it. .
Now I'm not saying that Fascism doesn't hold some ideas that other ideologies hold. Fascism does like the idea of the world being united under one banner and so does Communism, but they go about in different ways.
Communism seeks to help the working class revolt against their government on a global scale.
Fascism wants to use Military or Economic or in some cases, simply voluntary conquer over their terrorites to establish a one world goverment. This is similar to Imperialism.
Now I'm not saying that either of these are a good way to go about it. I do not support either ideology, but instead of using force and commiting atrocities in order to make the world identify as one. Unity by force. isn't exactly a good idea. It can lead to Puritanism, much like seen in Nazi Germany Now some really edgy people who think the Holocaust never happened would argue Hitler wasn't a racist, and to a certain extent. that latter part is true, Hitler did have high ranking ethnic members in his government. There was a Half Jew labeled as an Honourary Aryan. and you might see mass genocide take place. Potentially billions killed in order to purify humanity.
I apologise if I accidently went on a tangent.
Fascism is kind of difficult for some people to grasp as it isn't actually on the Political Compass or whatever you use. Sure, it's Totalitarian but outside of that it contributes some good values, like Class Collaboration People in different classes working together to achieve a common goal, Fascism is very Nationalist and thus the idea of a great nation or the common good is usually the goal , Personality Cult Essentially you try and make an ideal figure for all humans to aspire to. This is seen in western countries with the idea of the "Sexiest Man/Woman alive". In Germany it was done with Hitler. and a Mixed Economy Which thinks that both Public and Private sector should contribute to the economy as some things are better for the people on a monopoly, e.g. Healthcare Don't get butthurt over the idea of Government paying for your healthcare, the Private Sector isn't doing a good job at it. .
Now I'm not saying that Fascism doesn't hold some ideas that other ideologies hold. Fascism does like the idea of the world being united under one banner and so does Communism, but they go about in different ways.
Communism seeks to help the working class revolt against their government on a global scale.
Fascism wants to use Military or Economic or in some cases, simply voluntary conquer over their terrorites to establish a one world goverment. This is similar to Imperialism.
Now I'm not saying that either of these are a good way to go about it. I do not support either ideology, but instead of using force and commiting atrocities in order to make the world identify as one. Unity by force. isn't exactly a good idea. It can lead to Puritanism, much like seen in Nazi Germany Now some really edgy people who think the Holocaust never happened would argue Hitler wasn't a racist, and to a certain extent. that latter part is true, Hitler did have high ranking ethnic members in his government. There was a Half Jew labeled as an Honourary Aryan. and you might see mass genocide take place. Potentially billions killed in order to purify humanity.
I apologise if I accidently went on a tangent.
#231 to #227
-
terafyde (03/25/2015) [-] Not everyone benefits in all systems. In this case, the German nationals benefited. I do agree that persecution took place though. However Hitler didn't want to kill the Jew (at first) and had an agreement where Jewish people could leave Germany with their wealth in tact.
And I would say Economically and in terms of Living Standards. A nation that was torn apart from WW1 made stronger.
And I would say Economically and in terms of Living Standards. A nation that was torn apart from WW1 made stronger.
#225 to #33
-
nustix (03/25/2015) [-] I could consider that a good moral question weren't it that most dictators also have a quirk about them. like hitler with his racial superiority and hitler is also an odd one out I the fact that the country did better. Under stalin the soviets did terrible. same goes for many African war leaders
#210 to #33
-
anon (03/25/2015) [-]
Yes to everything except the killing billions part. If a loss of freedom and even oppression is what's necessary to save the human race and drive it to new heights, that's honestly a small price to pay. But as soon as you start justifying mass killings, you've gone straight off the deep end, because there is no regime that can bring about a better humanity while condoning something like that. At that point you've lost basic human decency, so how could you possibly make things better?
#61 to #33
-
cupotruth ONLINE (03/24/2015) [-] The main issue being that it's all hunky dory if you're a part of the club.
If you aren't then you are going to be annihilated and crushed regardless of anything you could ever say in your defense.
Sounds fantastic if I'm a member of whatever group that is doing it you know beside the whole "living with the blood of thousands seeped into your hands" thing doesn't sound too great if I'm on the receiving end of the genocide.
And with the way modern world is going, there is no telling who is gonna fly off the handle and start killing people.
If you aren't then you are going to be annihilated and crushed regardless of anything you could ever say in your defense.
Sounds fantastic if I'm a member of whatever group that is doing it you know beside the whole "living with the blood of thousands seeped into your hands" thing doesn't sound too great if I'm on the receiving end of the genocide.
And with the way modern world is going, there is no telling who is gonna fly off the handle and start killing people.
#146 to #61
-
nigeltheoutlaw (03/25/2015) [-] Why would this necessitate genocide? It'd need lots of killing probably, but all you really need to do is force people under your thumb. I think genocide would actually hurt you in your conquest because people who agree with your overall moral goal of saving humanity would probably find trying to annihilate specific subsets of humanity to be a hypocritical method. Hitler probably would have had a lot more support (and success) if he hadn't tried to perpetuate genocide on specific groups. Not only did he alienate those in that group that might have agreed with him, but anybody who liked people in the persecuted group would also no longer side with him. It'd be okay to have a heavy hand as long as you distributed the whoop ass evenly on the basis of those who opposed you and only to combatants. If you start persecuting certain groups based only on their ethnicity or religion, or purposefully slaughtering noncombatants, then you will lose a **** ton of support.
#55
-
hewhoepicfails (03/24/2015) [-] Hitler really loves the Jews. He sent millions all across the country and even foreigners to his summer camps so they can be happy together and work for a nice yellow badge, and it's all for free. Too bad the showers sucked.
#103 to #55
-
stonetomcat (03/25/2015) [-] Okay, I'm probably going to fail hard at this
I hear the summer camps had the most manly-smelling soap ever
They made Jews into soap bars, so they likely smelled like people to an extent is what I'm getting at damn I am rubbish at this
I hear the summer camps had the most manly-smelling soap ever
They made Jews into soap bars, so they likely smelled like people to an extent is what I'm getting at damn I am rubbish at this
#131 to #120
-
xgrandmoffx (03/25/2015) [-] It's a sad day when the jokes go so far that such text is written as a caption for the unpopular opinion puffin.
#64 to #59
-
thatonetyler ONLINE (03/24/2015) [-] The main character has the power to control anyone he wants to by looking at them with his left eye, and whatever he tells them to do they will do it, he uses the power to help the Japanese people and separate them from the British, which in this show the British control almost everything, he uses the powers for good in the beginning and goes by the name Zero, he then ends up becoming the king and realizes the only way to save his people is by becoming a tyrant, one who they could hate, not just the Japanese but everyone and then he has Zero "the idol he made for the people" kill him, so his best friend becomes zero and kills the main character and after that japan is free and many other countries follow their footsteps, so pretty much he put everyone's hopes and wishes on his shoulders and had himself killed by Zero to show the people there will be hope and they will be free, sorry if i made it confusing for you. Its been a while since i watched the show. tl:dr he had his friend use his identity as zero to kill him while he was the king, in order for the country, and the world move on toward a better place
#98 to #64
-
severepwner (03/25/2015) [-] Why would you have a spoiler for one of the best animes of all time, in a paragraph NOT IN A SPOILER!?!
#239 to #64
-
epodax ONLINE (03/25/2015) [-]
Mainly correct but there are some flaws, it's not to save his "people" but to save the world. Nor does he "realise" it, from the very beginning he says that he will "tear down the old world, and shape it anew". - Which is one of the reasons I love this CG so much, while you as viewer may forget his "Main plot" through the whole series he follows / aims for the same goal and in the end he achieves it.
#296 to #239
-
thatonetyler ONLINE (03/26/2015) [-] thank you, you definitely refreshed my memory, and youre absolutely right
#297 to #296
-
epodax ONLINE (03/26/2015) [-]
Np, I think I've watched Code Geass R1 and R2 a dozen of times now, it still remains my very favorite anime to date (Might also be because it was among one of the first I saw).
Did you know they are / have released a couple of new episodes? Not continueing the previous plot but a new story!
Did you know they are / have released a couple of new episodes? Not continueing the previous plot but a new story!
#70 to #67
-
thatonetyler ONLINE (03/24/2015) [-] it was a fantastic ending but i wish the main character and the red head didnt die
#109 to #83
-
thatonetyler ONLINE (03/25/2015) [-] true that! pretty much everyone got **** on in that series
#82 to #2
-
viralkamina (03/25/2015) [-]
i always hear everyone saying this anime is so great, and i liked it aswell, but somehow i feel people make it better then it is. They claim it is so smart when it often suffers under the typical anime dumbness when it is plot convenient.
No hat, i just dont really understand.
But i guess it is the same as e and gurren lagan^^
No hat, i just dont really understand.
But i guess it is the same as e and gurren lagan^^
#111 to #82
-
thatonetyler ONLINE (03/25/2015) [-] there are certain animes i have watched that are just stupid, but there are also some that are extremely good, and well made. I just do my research before watching a show, i check the rating of the show and read the reviews, and i try to make sure that it actually has an ending so i dont have to read the manga, like i just finished watching spice and the wolf, and it was amazing, but then i had to read the manga and it took forever, but the ending was totally worth it.
#267 to #111
-
viralkamina (03/25/2015) [-]
true, but i only heard from friends that code geass is supposed to be so smart, and it just wasn't really. I had similar problems with death note, but not as much.
I think it happens when people write characters that are smarter then they are themselves.
I think it happens when people write characters that are smarter then they are themselves.
#295 to #267
-
thatonetyler ONLINE (03/26/2015) [-] the only show that i saw that was based on intelligence was gosick since it was kind of a investigation type of show
#150 to #111
-
anon (03/25/2015) [-]
I loved Spice and Wolf but man, that was a show that should've ended with season 1.
All it did was drag out the ending for an entire extra season.
Code Geass was just entirely stupid though. Every single character was exactly the kind of childish that all characters in anime apparently have to be. That's why Spice and Wolf had some excellent drive in the start, they knew they liked each other and they rolled with it, but then they had to extend the duration of it and the second season was just them trying to avoid the feelings they'd clearly accepted previously.
All it did was drag out the ending for an entire extra season.
Code Geass was just entirely stupid though. Every single character was exactly the kind of childish that all characters in anime apparently have to be. That's why Spice and Wolf had some excellent drive in the start, they knew they liked each other and they rolled with it, but then they had to extend the duration of it and the second season was just them trying to avoid the feelings they'd clearly accepted previously.
#137 to #2
-
nigeltheoutlaw (03/25/2015) [-] Same. Code Geass rocks. mfw people say they don't like Code Geass.
#126
-
mytwocents ONLINE (03/25/2015) [-] > implying Hitler will be remembered as a bad person forever
