"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." -Winston Churchill

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill

@enoch, I didn't see your response to me since you didn't "reply" to me, or "message me" ("@Trancecoach"), so I'm just seeing this now:

> you argue like someone who has found religion.

What is this, then, if not ad hominem? What has religion got to do with economics in this context? I'm willing to change my mind, if you can show me the flaws in my argument.

> and its not just you that never wants to address the dark side of capitalism.

So, please tell me what didn't get 'addressed?' Did I not respond to every point in your post? Where are your replies to my reply?

> disciples of free market capitalism never want to talk about their deformed child
> locked in the upstairs bedroom.out of sight..out of mind.

Again, what wasn't addressed? Free market capitalists love to talk about free market capitalism. Ok. So are you stuck on this such that you're unable to read/respond to my response?

Seems to me that you're projecting, because while you say that my responses are like a 'sermon,' this portion of your post actually sounds like a sermon:

> every system has its flaws.
> both positive and negative.
> and no system is a rigid single dimension but rather varying layers of slight
> differences.
> this includes every political and economic system thought of or just living in the
> realm of dreams.
> it is through discussion with people we may disagree in which new ideas can breed
> and grow.
> this was my ultimate goal in talking with you.
> instead i get a sermon.
> hope has two daughters.
> anger and courage.
> anger at the way things are,and courage to change them.
> i havent had a beer in ten years.
> gonna go grab me a beer or two.
> what a silly,sad old man i have become.
> old men should stop dreaming.....

Let's not degrade the level of discourse to ad hominem or sob stories. If you need help, ask for help. But don't blame me if you relapse. We are all accountable for our own thoughts, feelings, and behaviors.

> old men should stop dreaming

Dream all you want, but don't expect everyone else to take your dreams seriously just because you say so. (Why not address any of the points I made in my response?)

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the
average voter." ~ Winston Churchill

I'm at a loss as to what response I can give you that would 'appease' your sensibilities? As far as I could tell, all of your questions were addressed. But you ignored my reply, and went back to "no one wants to talk about it" or whatever. So, what can be said?

It seems like you don't really want to "debate" or "converse" or whatever. If I refute your arguments, then you interpret that as meaning that I don't want to talk about it. Did I get that right? That doesn't make much sense to me. If not, please explain what I am missing here.

Also, what does it matter if you are old or young, or a dreamer or not, in terms of getting to the truth about socialism and capitalism?

> but you are blinded by dogma.

If so, why not show me what part of my argument is dogmatic or not epistemologically sound?
For example, what specifically about the right to and/or preference for non-aggression is 'dogmatic?' I don't like being bullied, so does that make me dogmatic? What about the impossibility of economic calculation under any sort of socialism is 'dogmatic?' And how so?

If someone doesn't understand calculus, they might call it 'dogma.' But if you understand it, then you can look at the equations and see for yourself if they make mathematical sense (or not). Was Galileo's contention that the Earth orbits the Sun dogmatic? What about the assertion that the Sun orbits the Earth, was that dogmatic? What's the difference?

> it is through discussion with people we may disagree in which new ideas can breed
> and grow. this was my ultimate goal in talking with you.

This is all very nice, but did you bother to find out what my 'ultimate goal' in talking to you was? Or is it all about yours?

Some-but-not-all people get upset when you point out how their beliefs do not correspond to the facts. Socrates was sentenced to commit suicide and Galileo died under house arrest.

I won't say whether or not this is true, or applies in this instance.

> every system has its flaws. both positive and negative. and no system is a rigid
> single dimension but rather varying layers of slight differences. this includes every
> political and economic system thought of or just living in the realm of dreams.

This, in itself is a dogmatic statement.

Look, man. I like you. I appreciate your comments, your earnestness, and willingness to engage our discourse. I also appreciate your respect and appreciation (although I can't say I'm sure how I've earned or deserved it). You've apologized for what seems to me to be ad hominem and I appreciate and accept your apology. I, too, apologize if you seem that I've been terse or avoidant in authentic engagement in dialogue with you. But in keeping with the points and arguments themselves, I think we'll both be much better off in terms of learning and growing and avoiding going off-track or off-topic into commentary about the messenger as opposed to the message.

The alternative, as far as I am familiar with the counterargument to this viewpoint, would have been to loosen the requirement of "unconditional surrender" of Japan, and possibly to demonstrate the bomb by dropping it on an unpopulated area. Inviting Japanese scientists to a staging ground for a controlled demonstration was also on the books.

Now, assuming the US top brass were convinced Japan was not going to surrender, the argument presented here is quite valid. Bombing a live target certainly had the most shock value, and the bombs were likely in quite limited supply. (I confess, I don't know how many there were at the time.) A continued conventional war would have been horrendous.

But... Were the Japanese really unwilling to surrender, and if so, why? According to what I've read... Well, let me just quote the story, I've seen this in a number of texts:

"At the conclusion of the conference, Roosevelt and Churchill held a press conference. Roosevelt said that he and Churchill…

…were determined to accept nothing less than the unconditional surrender of Germany, Japan, and Italy…

Churchill said later that he was surprised by this statement. Churchill adds that he was told by Harry Hopkins that the President said to him:

…then suddenly the Press Conference was on, and Winston and I had had no time to prepare for it; and the thought popped into my mind that they had called Grant “Old Unconditional Surrender,” and the next thing I knew I had said it."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2012/04/jonathan-goodwin/roosevelt-demands-unconditionalsurrender/

It was Jonathan Glover who I first read giving this account of events, but I don't remember what his source was. The argument he and others make, though, is that the Japanese did signal their willingness to surrender, but were not willing to do so unconditionally. This is because they feared the emperor might have been deposed and put to trial, which was simply unthinkable to them. If this is true, then dropping the bombs may have been unnecessary and even before the bombs, the war effort in the Pacific could have been ended through diplomatic means.

All this does leave one with some disconcerting questions. Would Allied leaders really have refused to reconsider their demands of Japan simply due to prestige and the need to show resolve? Was there no diplomatic backchannel? Certainly the fog of war must have played a part in the decisions made. I haven't been able to find a source beyond hearsay for what, exactly, the Japanese diplomatic position on surrender was. Considering this debate still goes on, no such source is likely to surface.

What stands out here, to me, as the saddest thing is: it seems countless lives were lost for lack of solid information and communication between enemies. Had Japan and the Allies been able to negotiate further, had the allies dared show their nuclear hand, had they made it possible for the emperor (while not a nice guy by any means) to be protected, how many lives could have been saved? Unfortunately, no-one has the benefit of hindsight when it's most needed.

I can't help but think of the Cuban missile crisis - what would have happened, had a similar failure to communicate occurred at that time? It was very close...

@Sniper007 Fine if you weren't being literal, but framing candy as a vice seems a bit of a big moral statement; I'm not a fan of classifying things that way.

Half the vices which the world condemns most loudly have seeds of good in them and require moderate use rather than total abstinence.
- Samuel Butler

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire.
- Winston Churchill

It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues.
-Abraham Lincoln

Thatcher saved the UK. And, after Churchill, voted greatest prime minister.

Churchill - my favourite historical figure: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn04zRd3yQ

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Churchill said that Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities. I think 2-3 more school massacres will probably do it. :-(

*promote

This is unconscionable appeasement. All it does is reinforce their fiefdom ideas, that they should be treated as a special group, and be given special treatment.It is scarily reminiscent of Chamberlain's stance with Hitler: "Please, do as you wish, but don't start a war." Leaders should be more like Churchill and say to these people: "This country has laws based upon democratic consensus, not theocracy. And to those of you set on violence we say, we will come down on you with the full force of the laws which are in place to protect those residing in this country, a country you have decided to live in."

*love
*talks
reminded me of
When I look back on all these worries, I remember the story of the old man who said on his deathbed that he had had a lot of trouble in his life, most of which had never happened..
-Churchill

Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. -Churchill

That said, can America still be considered a democracy at this point?

Hah, it's quite apt that he's playing the Pink Panther theme, considering the colour of your name and your penchant for kitties

And in the words of Winston Churchill he "makes you proud to be British".

>> ^obscenesimian:

>> ^Shepppard:
>> ^obscenesimian:
>> ^luxury_pie:
>> ^obscenesimian:
Wow, what a tard. 50 below and he decides to ride his snow machine or atv.

wtf? empathy much?

No empathy here. As you can see by the condition of his finger tips, he was riding a snow machine or atv and froze his fingers where the knuckles faced the wind, leaving the finger tips less damaged. Like avalanche deaths from high marking or any other sort of motorized idiocy, this behavior is only worthy of scorn. If his children suffer because he cannot work, I will exhibit empathy and perhaps charity.

Here, have a picture of where Churchill Manitoba (where he's from) is located.
Now, you're American, so you most likely don't understand how Canadian population density works, but the farther north you get, the lower the populations.
And the lower the populations, the more likely it is that they don't have snow plows, and need to do things like use snowmobiles to get into town if they need supplies.
Until you have all the facts, how about not being an ass and giving the benefit of the doubt? Because most likely, he only rode because he had to.

Wow, Lotta hate going on. Anyone who fucking lives and works outside where it goes to 50 below should know that sitting on your ass creating your own windchill will give you frostbite. Plowing does not occur 40 to 60 miles an hour. At 50 below and high rates of speed heated grips don't work to keep ALL of ones hand warm . All of you fucking desk monkeys know jack shit! This type of frostbite happens to people involved in "Recreational Activities" now be good little nerds and fuck off.


How bout you read my post again carefully?

I never said HE was the one plowing, and if I did, why the fuck would he be doing it on something with an open cab.

Exactly what I said was: "IN THE NORTH, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE PLOWS, AND HE POTENTIALLY HAD TO USE A SNOWMOBILE TO GET INTO TOWN"

Nowhere is there ANY information as to why he was riding a snowmobile, but if it's 50 below, there's a pretty good fucking chance that he wasn't doing it recreationally, and until stated otherwise, once again, how about we stop assuming and have a little bit of sympathy?

>> ^Shepppard:

>> ^obscenesimian:
>> ^luxury_pie:
>> ^obscenesimian:
Wow, what a tard. 50 below and he decides to ride his snow machine or atv.

wtf? empathy much?

No empathy here. As you can see by the condition of his finger tips, he was riding a snow machine or atv and froze his fingers where the knuckles faced the wind, leaving the finger tips less damaged. Like avalanche deaths from high marking or any other sort of motorized idiocy, this behavior is only worthy of scorn. If his children suffer because he cannot work, I will exhibit empathy and perhaps charity.

Here, have a picture of where Churchill Manitoba (where he's from) is located.
Now, you're American, so you most likely don't understand how Canadian population density works, but the farther north you get, the lower the populations.
And the lower the populations, the more likely it is that they don't have snow plows, and need to do things like use snowmobiles to get into town if they need supplies.
Until you have all the facts, how about not being an ass and giving the benefit of the doubt? Because most likely, he only rode because he had to.


Wow, Lotta hate going on. Anyone who fucking lives and works outside where it goes to 50 below should know that sitting on your ass creating your own windchill will give you frostbite. Plowing does not occur 40 to 60 miles an hour. At 50 below and high rates of speed heated grips don't work to keep ALL of ones hand warm . All of you fucking desk monkeys know jack shit! This type of frostbite happens to people involved in "Recreational Activities" now be good little nerds and fuck off.

>> ^obscenesimian:

>> ^luxury_pie:
>> ^obscenesimian:
Wow, what a tard. 50 below and he decides to ride his snow machine or atv.

wtf? empathy much?

No empathy here. As you can see by the condition of his finger tips, he was riding a snow machine or atv and froze his fingers where the knuckles faced the wind, leaving the finger tips less damaged. Like avalanche deaths from high marking or any other sort of motorized idiocy, this behavior is only worthy of scorn. If his children suffer because he cannot work, I will exhibit empathy and perhaps charity.


Here, have a picture of where Churchill Manitoba (where he's from) is located.

Now, you're American, so you most likely don't understand how Canadian population density works, but the farther north you get, the lower the populations.

And the lower the populations, the more likely it is that they don't have snow plows, and need to do things like use snowmobiles to get into town if they need supplies.

Until you have all the facts, how about not being an ass and giving the benefit of the doubt? Because most likely, he only rode because he had to.