War Room Lounge v63

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lord Coke said:
Good shoot or not? I personally think not

Click to expand...

I wouldn’t have shot in that instance but it’s hard to picture a scenario where fewer people get hurt in this.

Spazz had a gun right? He’s already threatened a person with said gun and is now fleeing from police. If Spazz runs anywhere, especially home, all that follows is an armed standoff where more people are likely to get hurt.

It’s a tough call. But shooting an armed suspect in the back isn’t murder or a sign of cowardice. @Prokofievian @Trotsky

How would that officer feel if Spazz gets away, then innocent people are killed in the ensuing standoff or struggle or otherwise?
 
A.C. said:
I wouldn’t have shot in that instance but it’s hard to picture a scenario where fewer people get hurt in this.

Spazz had a gun right? He’s already threatened a person with said gun and is now fleeing from police. If Spazz runs anywhere, especially home, all that follows is an armed standoff where more people are likely to get hurt.

It’s a tough call. But shooting an armed suspect in the back isn’t murder or a sign of cowardice. @Prokofievian @Trotsky

How would that officer feel if Spazz gets away, then innocent people are killed in the ensuing standoff or struggle or otherwise?
Click to expand...

Nah, it's murder.
 
Prokofievian said:
Nah, it's murder.
Click to expand...
Well words have meanings. Feel free to look up the definition of murder.

I think it’s an iffy shoot, but it was for the best in the end. But even if it’s a bad shoot it’s not murder.

Edit: came out weird. “For the best” would have been if the kid could have been apprehended without anyone being killed or victimized further. But at the time the officer shot that option was most likely off the table
 
Last edited:
Jack V Savage said:
The main mistake you're making is conflating conservatism--which is one generally right-leaning ideology--with "the right" and then conflating both with "classical liberalism" in an American context.
Click to expand...
No actually that's what I'm claiming you are doing. I'm saying conservatism is to maintain the status quo and depending on who you ask, the ideology is relative. Communism in Russia at the time of the Soviet union was the status quo and heairchy that needed to be maintained. In Europe the status quo was to maintain the monarchy while in America it was the directives of classic liberalism that needed to be upheld. Limited government, free market economies, constitutional republicanism and a seperation of church and state was the status quo. By your logic conservatism does not ebb and flow that way but instead is constant and a fixed ideology which is simply false. So yes conservatism in Europe at the time meant what you are saying but it is decidedly different in America.

We cannot continue in a meaningful way because of this fundamental difference. As a leftist you have more in common with a nazi or a communist than a classical liberal does and this is because we use statism and collectivism or a lack thereof to indicate we are on the political spectrum. We cannot go on if you insist on believing that conservatism in America is not a an amalgamation of philosophical thought that includes Hobbes, Locke, and Smith (among others) that were considered progressive at the time but are now conservative by our modern standards.

Jack V Savage said:
This is also very wrong. Accepting this would essentially mean rejecting the terms as they've been used throughout history, up to today.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Refer to the response above.

Jack V Savage said:
It's defined based on protecting existing hierachies (right) and equality because that was how the terms originated and what they have continued to mean. What confuses things is that the left won that first big battle, so you rarely see anyone saying that monarchy or an all-powerful state is good. If you look at the rare exceptions: Hoppe, Moldbug, Thiel, etc., they are all undeniably right-wing extremists. I'd recommend that you stop thinking in terms of what "side" what looks bad for, and just try for accuracy. Obviously if people genuinely support something, they will support it (that is, they'll say it's good).
Click to expand...

Again this is a fundamental disagreement we are having. It simply means to protect and uphold the status quo. What the status quo is, is relative.
Jack V Savage said:
I again strongly suggest reading Smith (his style isn't dense or difficult). I feel certain that you'll quickly see how he was very, very different from modern American right-wingers and more similar to modern American liberals, if not further left. Chomsky likes to quote this from him:
Click to expand...

Once more American conservatism/Classical liberalism is an amalgamation of thought. I have read a lot of his work for school and it makes not a lick of difference if he is left according to anyone because structure of government and alot of the language of the constitution was taken directly from Locke and not Smith. Smith provided an economic frame work.

Jack V Savage said:
Hmm. The right in America did support the Confederacy, Nazis (in the beginning--they mostly backed away later, though the National Review was strong anti-anti-Nazi and supported ex-Nazis basically getting away with it), Franco (huge darling of the American right), Pinochet (ditto), Apartheid in South Africa, etc. Putin is relatively more popular on the right (25% approval among Republicans vs. 9% among Democrats, for example).
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be looking towards the voting block as a monolith nor would I make a judgement on the ideology bases on how Republicans or Democrats voted. It's irrelevant. What's being discussed here is a political paradigm and the meaning of American conservatism which is an ideology.

I'm currently on my phone my responses are taking a while.
 
Trotsky said:
First of all, strong central authority with the charter of a government to enforce property rights is basically the foundation of right wing thought.
Click to expand...
That in no way negates anything I've said up until this point. I think you have been misled to believe that American rightism doesn't believe in having a government. We aren't talking about a stateless society. Please keep up if you want to join in.

Trotsky said:
Thirdly, Stalin was right wing in most respects. He ruled as a modern king of a feudalist society. He opposed due process, opposed gender equality (which Lenin made a serious organ of socializing society), reversed the downward redistribution of real property wealth, further neutered the worker Soviets, etc.
Click to expand...
He was right wing according to the political climate at the time. No American conservative would look at this description and be like "Yep that's what we know and call conservatism in America." Equality isn't something that differentiates left and right in America because there are two wildyl different perceptions. Correcting for inequity is one way and another is equality under the law and constitution. Inequality isn't a central tenet of American rightism. Remember they broke away from the status quo.
 
Trotsky said:
A better example of a left wing authoritarian would be Mao. Unlike Stalin, who repressed and terrorized through the central state apparatus, Mao urged a grass roots cultural revolution, in which authority was distinctly ground-up and decentralized to the extent possible.
Click to expand...
Any form of authoritarianism is a good example of leftism at work as it's antithetical to the American right. Period.
 
I think the main event is a pick 'em.

One of those fights that I'll be happy with whoever wins. Like them both.
 
Whenever I read someone write about someone else "As a leftist" - 99% of the time it is followed with some absurd statement.
 
EL CORINTHIAN said:
Any form of authoritarianism is a good example of leftism at work as it's antithetical to the American right. Period.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
Ah forgot about fights and booked overtime tonight booooooooo. WARmier!
 
Fawlty said:
Ah forgot about fights and booked overtime tonight booooooooo. WARmier!
Click to expand...

If you swish cola in your mouth and spit out the foam, it will look like you're vomiting. They'll send you home and you can watch the fights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,010
Messages
58,335,290
Members
176,003
Latest member
HeneryH

Share this page

Back
Top