1. Next UFC Strawweight title challenger, Jessica Andrade joins us TODAY(April 28th) for a LIVE Q&A at 12:00 PM EST! Check it out here.
    Dismiss Notice

WRDL Debate #3: The Rise of European Nationalism: Winner: Thurisaz | Page 5

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Fawlty, Apr 8, 2017.

  1. Limbo Pete Super Samoan Belt

    Limbo Pete
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,361
    Likes Received:
    10,199
    Yeah, it's interesting how few people were willing to step up and take on a debate. Maybe part of the problem is the topics themselves, and i'm going to be cleaning out the topic list in a bit here and bring in some fresh stuff. But I also think a lot of guys just aren't willing to put up their positions to scrutiny in a structured format.
     
    #81
    Palis, HomerThompson and Bald1 like this.
  2. Bald1 War Room Can

    Bald1
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    7,229
    Likes Received:
    9,341
    Location:
    Canada
    To be honest with you I would only debate maybe a couple of topics. There are few subjects where I'm completely committed to a side, and usually would rather have a conversation than try to prove my point. Thankfully, there are many here who enjoy a good back and forth.

    Now I'm going to quit going off topic before I tell myself to shaaadup.
     
    #82
    Palis and Limbo Pete like this.
  3. snakedafunky Brown Belt

    snakedafunky
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    3,714
    Likes Received:
    3,446
    Yeah, I am looking forward to this civil war debate. Because I don't know anything about it. From a constitutional point of view or human rights.
    Like I have 0 input right now. Because that doesn't concern me. I am interested but as a German, it's not the kind of thing they teach you.
     
    #83
    Limbo Pete likes this.
  4. Thurisaz TITANOMACHY

    Thurisaz
    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,859
    Likes Received:
    3,352
    Location:
    #Altright
    The conclusive coup de grace. I hope you, dear reader, enjoy, for my opponent won't.

    My opponent is entirely wrong on the very nature of Nationalism. I quote Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
    Although the term “nationalism” has a variety of meanings, it centrally encompasses the two phenomena noted at the outset: (1) the attitude that the members of a nation have when they care about their identity as members of that nation and (2) the actions that the members of a nation take in seeking to achieve (or sustain) some form of political sovereignty (see for example, Nielsen 1998–9, 9).
    Boom. It also just so happens to be the very definition I have been using the whole time and applied consistently to all nations and peoples and one my opponent denies having basis in nothing else than American web sites. But those two things are what every Nationalist anywhere subscribes to. No supremacist claims, no racism or Lebensraum doctrines, nothing such is included in Nationalism. The case that Nationalism means, and only can mean, the sort derived from the French revolution and Nazis is simply and utterly bullshit.

    I am quite happy about my input on the subject. I made a strong case for Nationalism in Europe (and, indeed, everywhere) and every one of my arguments for it still stand entirely unchallenged. I’ve shown that Nationalism is not only rooted firmly in the very DNA of the human animal, but also sound philosophy that serves the best interest of every people. My opponent’s hapless flailing at history repeating itself makes no sense in current situation – and as I’ve shown it makes no sense in the context of Nationalism at all. His arguments were few and not once but twice he managed to refute his own argument which he presented against European Nationalism and the way it’s defined. Even though those self-refuting comments of his are hardly in the crux of the matter at hand, they do reveal the lack of substance and consistency in my opponent’s position. He has more an attitude than an argument.

    His attempts at arguing his side consist of two approaches: the first is to deny that we’re talking about anything of relevance in the last 80 years. I consider that a dishonest approach to the subject, considering the above definition and the fact that we’ve witnessed recently the rise of nationalism in Europe (and the US, to some extent) in both attitudes and party platforms. The pendulum is definitely swinging toward nationalism, but somehow all my opponent considers relevant are supremacist anti-Nationalist ideologies at least three generations separated from our day. I consider that a cop-out and a dishonest one at that. His other approach was to hurl adjectives, giving nothing of substance to the table. A debate is about the subject at hand and one does not accomplish anything by talking only about his personal disdain towards one’s opponent’s arguments. If he considers taking on arguments so much beneath him, he should not have taken part in the debate in the first place. Also, if he was honest about not having seen me refer to historical events directly after my mentioning the peaceful separation of Czechoslovakia he’s also very ignorant about recent history. I got the impression that he was trying to play a moderator more than an opponent and instead of addressing any of my arguments he simply ruled them out like they weren't there.

    His answers to my questions were more than a bit lackluster. The first one was precisely the answer I emphasized I didn't ask for. I understand that when you have only one argument and even that is rooted in attitude instead of facts this is what one gets, but still, I would have expected a cogent thought or two. The second one was more of an answer to my third question, though a bad one, considering that Europe is in a steep demographic and economic crisis and currently under population replacement from the third world. It also revealed that he doesn't know what a nation even is nor understands what I asked for. To answer my question he would have needed to explain why people fought each other, while dismissing the tribal mindset as he already did. He sort of answered my third question in his second answer, but sadly could not provide any reason to consider the ongoing slow European suicide a better alternative than a healthy mindset that would ensure the existence of indigenous Europeans and European societies in the future.

    His argument is like stating that a scientist in the 1900s gets the same exact results as one of today and that no changes in either method, knowledge base or anything else has happened or can ever happen. He has a bogeyman in his head that has him flailing at windmills. He claims having backed his claim up with historical facts and present day realities. He has, for sure, mentioned historical facts, but omitted the quite pertinent fact that neither German National Socialism nor Napoleon was Nationalist. Nations are not empires, as I pointed out in my initial post. Napoleon and the NSDAP were thoroughly imperialist and strongly opposed to sovereign nation states. As for the present day realities he claims to have shown I have seen crickets, and for my side mentioned the crisis Europe is currently in and also why Nationalism is the only answer that doesn't necessarily involve civil war throughout every state in the West. For some reason he seems to be happy about the fact that European populations are being attacked by foreigners all the time in their own countries, but can't possibly even consider the possibility that it could result in a backlash, which, as I pointed out, is inevitable and only preventable through Nationalist policies.

    I came to this debate to test the strength of my arguments pro Nationalism. All I learned was that my opponent can’t help me with that. While he has been civil throughout, and for that matter, so have I, I’d be a liar if I didn’t admit feeling very underwhelmed by the reluctance of my opponent to even try engaging my case for Nationalism in Europe with arguments of his own. When I could have easily made a more substantive case against my position than my opponent did, I simply conclude that I will have to dust the shelf and make room for another skull there. This debate was over after his initial post revealed that he has absolutely no answers to anything I posted, only posturing and flat out denial of facts and arguments based on them.


    @Lead @Limbo Pete @JDragon @HomerThompson @IDL @Palis @Thurisaz @snakedafunky @Bald1 @Fawlty
     
    #84
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
  5. Limbo Pete Super Samoan Belt

    Limbo Pete
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,361
    Likes Received:
    10,199
    Well done chaps.
    That wraps this thing up. Solid job overall, both of you guys stayed on topic and made interesting posts.
     
    #85
    Bald1 and JDragon like this.
  6. m52nickerson EXTERMINATE!

    m52nickerson
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,290
    Likes Received:
    3,002
    Location:
    In your castle advising your King!
    My break down of this...

    Thurisaz opening is a weak one, casting all immigration as evil and even raising the specter of a one world government. He talks about the total disaster that muti-cult has been, yet give no examples. Really, he makes no really sound argument for nationalism.

    snakedafunky's opening has clear examples of how nationalism has cause wars and conflict. He does however fail to address any of Thurisaz opening. However, giving concrete examples and much more solid arguments results in a better opening post.

    snakedafunk - 1
    Thurisaz - 0

    The second round we see Thurisaz trying to directly address snakedafunky's opening points and raising a couple good points of his own, but utterly failing at others. He tries to separate nations and empires seemingly calling anything that does not agree with his stance an empire and not a nation. snakedafunky tries to recenter the debate, again using actual examples from history, but fails to really address Thurisaz's arguments directly again. This round pretty much a draw.

    snakedafunky - 1.5
    Thurisaz - 0.5

    The free exchange round we see snakedafunky decide not to go on the attack but merely respond to Thurisaz. This was a mistake. While Thurisaz attacks largely miss their mark they hit enough to do damage an take this round. snakedafunky hammered home the point about what history has taught us, but it was not enough.

    snakedafunky - 1.5
    Thurisaz - 1.5

    Q&A round. Here again snakedafunky does not engage, opting not to ask any questions. Thing is it works for him this time. Thurisaz questions gave snakedafunky the opportunity to expand on his arguments with yet more real world examples, even pointing out that Thurisaz's definition of nationalism is a theoretical one. snake takes this round.

    snakedafunky - 2.5
    Thurisaz - 1.5

    The closing arguments has snakedafunky continuing to pound on with his historical examples. Thurisaz goes to the encyclopedia to try and frame the debate where he wants it, but fails right off the bat because the very first part talks about various meanings. The rest of his closing largely misses as he seems just as interested at patting himself on the back as he does addressing the topic.

    snakedafunky - 3.5
    Thurisaz - 1.5

    If judging the debate as a whole, it was a poor showing from both. snakedafunky still wins as he made arguments using historical events. Thurisaz arguments are simply try and shift definitions to suit his needs and give little in the way of real world arguments.
     
    #86
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2017
    Buck Swope likes this.
  7. Thurisaz TITANOMACHY

    Thurisaz
    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,859
    Likes Received:
    3,352
    Location:
    #Altright
    When you have to stoop to lying your ass off to fabricate justification for your bullshit judgment I think I did pretty well.
     
    #87
    Pale Man In Black and Palis like this.
  8. IDL Gold Belt

    IDL
    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    20,171
    Likes Received:
    9,951
    Location:
    Lending money to your government
    Having two different definitions of what nationalism is in play does make this one tricky.
     
    #88
  9. m52nickerson EXTERMINATE!

    m52nickerson
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,290
    Likes Received:
    3,002
    Location:
    In your castle advising your King!
    Of course you do, again reality has never been your friend.
     
    #89
    Buck Swope likes this.
  10. Thurisaz TITANOMACHY

    Thurisaz
    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,859
    Likes Received:
    3,352
    Location:
    #Altright
    One guy claims it is a supremacist ideology that places nations in a hierarchy and makes the destruction or subjugation of all others an imperative. Based on, well, his opinion that that's what nationalism in Europe, not a subset called historical French Nationalism, inevitably is.
    His opponent claims that it is a political philosophy, as put in the Encyclopedia of Philosophy, that ensures the existence of different nations both today and in the future and is in harmony with the nationalist elements currently rising in Europe. Really, there are literally no European Nationalists advocating for attacking other countries.

    It's not really that hard to judge. One of us is right in an objective sense.
     
    #90
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2017
    Pale Man In Black and Palis like this.
  11. snakedafunky Brown Belt

    snakedafunky
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    3,714
    Likes Received:
    3,446
    Are we still allowed to argue after the debate is over?

    @Lead @Limbo Pete @JDragon @HomerThompson @IDL @Palis @Thurisaz @snakedafunky @Bald1 @Fawlty

    Also, I have to point this one out.
    This is the greatest delusion about Nationalism I have read here.
     
    #91
    hitcher likes this.
  12. Bald1 War Room Can

    Bald1
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    7,229
    Likes Received:
    9,341
    Location:
    Canada
    #92
    Fawlty and snakedafunky like this.
  13. Fawlty Silver Belt

    Fawlty
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    10,567
    Likes Received:
    12,415
    Agreed, let's hold off until the decision is in. If @Palis ever decides to do any judging. It would be a damn shame to have to impeach him from debate league...
     
    #93
    Bald1 likes this.
  14. Thurisaz TITANOMACHY

    Thurisaz
    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,859
    Likes Received:
    3,352
    Location:
    #Altright
    Okay, delete my post above if it was unsportsmanlike.
     
    #94
  15. Limbo Pete Super Samoan Belt

    Limbo Pete
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,361
    Likes Received:
    10,199
    "Presidential Tardiness"
     
    #95
  16. m52nickerson EXTERMINATE!

    m52nickerson
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,290
    Likes Received:
    3,002
    Location:
    In your castle advising your King!
    Well, he has not even posted in his own Presidential thread in nearly a week.
     
    #96
  17. Lead /Led/

    Lead
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,600
    Likes Received:
    6,870
    Location:
    Around Pittsburgh
    He's on a foreign policy trip in the sports bar now.
     
    #97
    Shoemaker, Kafir-kun, Bald1 and 2 others like this.
  18. Limbo Pete Super Samoan Belt

    Limbo Pete
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,361
    Likes Received:
    10,199
    Sports bar is his Mar-a-lago imo
     
    #98
    Turtle Up and CEROVFC like this.
  19. Palis ♔ President of the War Room

    Palis
    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    11,738
    Likes Received:
    10,069
    Location:
    ✌ @King_Palis
    [​IMG]

    Actually I kind of am. My daughter was just born so I have 12 weeks off to play with hehehe.

    [​IMG]

     
    #99
    lecter, Lead, Bald1 and 1 other person like this.
  20. m52nickerson EXTERMINATE!

    m52nickerson
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,290
    Likes Received:
    3,002
    Location:
    In your castle advising your King!
    Congratulations!
     
    #100
    Palis likes this.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "fd5733925866a04e50edd70f38dfaa35"
monitoring_string = "603ac9fff68f23709f2a42bf5e29272b"