The Political Discussion Thread

[KEK]

Ah, that makes sense.

[Womble]

I think education and prosperity work wonders.

Not always.

The most profoundly disturbing thing about political radicalism is that education and prosperity rarely cures it- but all too often breeds it. The nucleus of any terrorist group is usually made up of middle class students who pick up their ideas in their educational institution, socialize with the like-minded fellow students, form tight-knit groups and eventually become proactive enough to buy Kalashnikovs and brew TATP. Most of Al-Qaeda bigwigs are graduates of the Al-Azhar university in Egypt. Abdel Aziz Rantissi, former leader of Hamas reduced to fertilizer by a well-placed Israeli missile a few years ago, had a degree in pediatric medicine from the Alexandria university in Egypt (straight A student, too). Statistically, most suicide bombers were middle class, and more educated than the average of their population. Muammar Gaddafi's son, recently killed by a NATO airstrike, had a degree from the London School of Economics; Bashar Assad who is mowing down peaceful protests as we speak, has a medical degree from the University of Damascus and did his specialization as an ophtalmologist in one of the hospitals in London.

[lordofseas]

Canadian Election today! Yayz.

[KEK]

Not always.

The most profoundly disturbing thing about political radicalism is that education and prosperity rarely cures it- but all too often breeds it. The nucleus of any terrorist group is usually made up of middle class students who pick up their ideas in their educational institution, socialize with the like-minded fellow students, form tight-knit groups and eventually become proactive enough to buy Kalashnikovs and brew TATP. Most of Al-Qaeda bigwigs are graduates of the Al-Azhar university in Egypt. Abdel Aziz Rantissi, former leader of Hamas reduced to fertilizer by a well-placed Israeli missile a few years ago, had a degree in pediatric medicine from the Alexandria university in Egypt (straight A student, too). Statistically, most suicide bombers were middle class, and more educated than the average of their population. Muammar Gaddafi's son, recently killed by a NATO airstrike, had a degree from the London School of Economics; Bashar Assad who is mowing down peaceful protests as we speak, has a medical degree from the University of Damascus and did his specialization as an ophtalmologist in one of the hospitals in London.

Why consider this political extremist though over religious extremism? It's the religion that motivates these beliefs, and I believe it's the religious nature of them that make them so invulnerable to reason.

[Galileo_Galilee]

there is no such thing as consent that is not "forced".

You've obviously never heard of the TSA. According to them they can search you because of something called implied consent and if you refuse to let them search you will not be allowed to fly and be fined thousands of dollars.


I don't know or understand what implied consent is though.

And yes, there is such a thing as forced consent.

A good example of this is in order to participate in any discussion forum, you have to agree to their rules and if you don't you will not be allowed to register.

That in itself is forced consent.

[lordofseas]

You've obviously never heard of the TSA. According to them they can search you because of something called implied consent and if you refuse to let them search you will not be allowed to fly and be fined thousands of dollars.


I don't know or understand what implied consent is though.

And yes, there is such a thing as forced consent.

A good example of this is in order to participate in any discussion forum, you have to agree to their rules and if you don't you will not be allowed to register.

That in itself is forced consent.

No one forced you to join GW.

[Galileo_Galilee]

No one forced you to join GW.

That's not the point. The point is there is such a thing as forced consent.

[lordofseas]

That's not the point. The point is there is such a thing as forced consent.

Then use a better example. No one forced you to join GW, and you (presumably) clicked the "I Agree to the blah blah blah", so therefore, you willingly and actively consented.

[Ben 'Teal'c would WIN!!' Noble]

I thought everyone deserved a fair trial?

I am glad hes dead but we are supposed to be better than him.

Maybe they shot because he posed a threat to the soldiers and they had no other choice.

[Galileo_Galilee]

Then use a better example. No one forced you to join GW...

No I didn't. I had to agree to obey the rules. Obey the rules and agreeing with them are two different things. And that's still forced consent because you would not be allowed to participate in the forum if you did not agree to obey the rules. So I really had no choice in the matter. It is not a poor example. It is indeed forced consent. And I did provide another example with the TSA.

If I was allowed to, I would not obey some of the rules I disagreed with. That's the difference. But if I do not obey any single one of the rules I will be banned.

If I had full consent I would be allowed to disregard the rules that I do not agree with. That is the difference. I do not agree with grandma rules and rules that allow others to censor you because there are some words they do not like.

It's an all or nothing deal.

And any all or nothing deal is forced consent.

You can be argumentative all you want and hide behind that I did join. But the truth is on any forum that has rules like this, it is indeed forced consent.

[Joachim]

I think they meant there's no consent that is forced.

not so.

You've obviously never heard of the TSA.

that isn't what i was arguing.



hey, guys: just to make things clear, i actually meant what i wrote. there is no such thing as consent that is not forced. its amazing how people can misinterpret.

every want, every desire, every decision is ultimately defined by the reasons for it. "we" are slaves to our desires, and our desires are determined internally and externally. on a level superseding that of humanities interpersonal influence, all of our decisions are forced.

[Galileo_Galilee]

Then I do not agree with you.

Here's the litmus test:

A man walks into a house with a gun and forces the family together at gunpoint. There is a father with a wife and a daughter.

The man with the gun points it at the father's head and says:

"Okey dokey there dude, I'm going to give you a choice. I'm going to rape either your wife or your daughter, and you get to choose which one I get to rape. If you don't choose, I'll simply rape both of them and then kill all three of you. My way, you get to live.

So which one do I get to rape?"

So, how is that not forced consent?

[Joachim]

what? are you reading what i'm writing? i'm saying that all consent is forced.

[Galileo_Galilee]

Oh okay, then I do not agree with that either.

For example, marriage.

Some cultures do have arranged marriages, but for the most part you generally can not force two people to marry you.

Of course you can trick a person, and it has been done before and will be done again as long as the human race appears.

But for the most part, marriage is completely consensual.

Divorce, however, is often not.

[Joachim]

marriage is consensual in the sense that both parties desire it: but, as i said before, these desires are determined by internal and external factors, which are also themselves determined.

we marry because we love. we love because their traits match what we want, what we're looking for, on a subconscious level. we like what we like because our genetics and our life to this point compelled us towards these specific traits. et cetera.

"we" have no freedom to choose, no consent to give to begin with; the whole matter is "forced". consent is a legal construct meant to lessen the impact that men have on other men; nothing more.