489 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkDragon777]

UpiH wrote...

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

As a historian, I agree with Ken's answer about Greeks Sciences. Greeks mostly developed philosophy and mathematics.

Really?

Where'd do you think, for example, the concept of zero came to be? Would't it be in any way possible that the far eastern cultures contemplated more on vacuum than the all-practical near-eastern ones?

You have to be in an enermous denial, being able to ignore far eastern cultures - or an outright racist.

Unless you're talking about the true Far-East (Oriental), nations like Babylon ad Egypt weren't as Eastern as we think of them today. They are now of course. The Greeks did make what they created vastly superior.

Modifié par DarkDragon777, 10 septembre 2011 - 07:04 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

UpiH wrote...

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

As a historian, I agree with Ken's answer about Greeks Sciences. Greeks mostly developed philosophy and mathematics.

Really?

Where'd do you think, for example, the concept of zero came to be? Would't it be in any way possible that the far eastern cultures contemplated more on vacuum than the all-practical near-eastern ones?

You have to be in an enermous denial, being able to ignore far eastern cultures - or an outright racist.

Fast comment brings misunderstanding. Yes, I mean most of the sciences origins was in Babylonia, Egypt, India and China and Greeks developed those sciences.

[DarkDragon777]

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

UpiH wrote...

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

As a historian, I agree with Ken's answer about Greeks Sciences. Greeks mostly developed philosophy and mathematics.

Really?

Where'd do you think, for example, the concept of zero came to be? Would't it be in any way possible that the far eastern cultures contemplated more on vacuum than the all-practical near-eastern ones?

You have to be in an enermous denial, being able to ignore far eastern cultures - or an outright racist.

Fast comment brings misunderstanding. Yes, I mean most of the sciences origins was in Babylonia, Egypt, India and China and the Greeks developed those sciences.

No, the Far-West and Far-East developed on their own. The Greeks improved on the Babylonian culture, which at the time, wasn't that Eastern (if it even was, I'm not sure).

[UpiH]

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

UpiH wrote...

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

As a historian, I agree with Ken's answer about Greeks Sciences. Greeks mostly developed philosophy and mathematics.

Really?

Where'd do you think, for example, the concept of zero came to be? Would't it be in any way possible that the far eastern cultures contemplated more on vacuum than the all-practical near-eastern ones?

You have to be in an enermous denial, being able to ignore far eastern cultures - or an outright racist.

Fast comment brings misunderstanding. Yes, I mean most of the sciences origins was in Babylonia, Egypt, India and China and Greeks developed those sciences.

Just wanted to make sure, using the "you" passive instead of the more apt "one" passive.

We're in agreement but what's a BSN thread without misinterpretations...

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Persian Empire was the bridge between India, Babylonia, Anatolia and Greece. There were many trade routes in middle east at that era.
I don't know how Greeks get their knowledge, but Persia was surely influential.

@UpiH
True.
This tread is like a chat room now. Feel free to discuss about everything you want!

Modifié par Jedi Sentinel Arian, 10 septembre 2011 - 07:18 .

[UpiH]

Luc0s wrote...

Anyway, the point is that Ancient Greek did a lot of things we still profit from today, while the (Christian) church did very little to improve life.

Our modern civilisation has much more roots in the Ancient Rome and Greek than in Christianity, that's the point I was trying to make and it seems most of you agree, right?

Quite so, I think. Anyways, I wouldn't belittle the impact even Christianity during the medieval times had on science. It was not just about arguing over how many angels will fit onto the head of a pin.
 
And that coming from an irreligious person.

[Wereparrot]

Luc0s wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

But what is the common era in relation to? It's the same as BC/AD, but without meaning. Seems to me it would be better if we just had a continuous calender, rather than one that started 2011 years ago for no reason at all. Someone didn't think that one through properly. Our culture is Christian; it's best to leave it that way.

And as for your example of hypocritical 'religious freedom': a while ago a couple were prosecuted for not allowing gays to stay at their B&B. Yeah, so much for religious freedom. That can be traced back to liberalism. In the liberalists' haste to appease all groups so that their is no offence, they will inevitably offend someone. That is why liberalism/communism will never work. Trying to alter our culture to suit all comers is destined to disaster.

Yes, the fact that BCE/CE doesn't have meaning is a good thing, because that means it's neutral and acceptable to anyone.

the fact that we have BCE and CE is because it's impossible to have a continuous calender. If you want a continous calender then where should it start? With the Big Bang? That was about 13.7 billion years ago. That means we would live in the year 13.700.000.011 right now. That's quite a lot of zero's to write down, not very practical, is it?

Besides, we don't even know the EXACT moment of the BB. We know only that it happened ROUGHLY 13.7 billion years ago.


No, we don't live in a Christian culture and not it's not best if we leave it at that. Right now we live in a Humanist culture, at least I do (I live in The Netherlands). Many of the most succesful countries in The Netherlands have their moral values based on Humanism. Christianity has very little left here in Europe (especially in Scandinavia and The Netherlands).

If religious freedom means the oppression of others (gays) then of course it should be prosecuted! Religion has no right to take the freedom we try to create away. Those anti-gay Christians are discriminating against homosexuality. Discrimination should not be tolerated.

Besides, since when is Christianity about anti-homosexuality? Isn't Christianity supposed to be about Jesus Christ? So why all the hate against homosexuals?


Liberalism is all about freedom, your religion clearly isn't. So either your religion has to adapt or just go away.

You stll haven't said what was at the beginning of the common era. Guess what? The birth of Christ! It's a transparent attempt to appease other religions. If I was a Muslim, I would actually be offended; it's patronising. If I was a Muslim I would accept the Christian tradition of BC/AD gladly.

Whether you like it or not, we live in a Christian culture. It's grown that way for about 1500 years (England).What room is there for argument? Since then our morals, values, art and architecture have all been influenced by Christianity. If I go abroad I respect the culture and religion of the country I am in. I expect nothing less from visitors to England.

You are undermining your own political ideology when you say that discriminating religions (I did not say oppresion) should be prosecuted. Hypocrite much? Muslims are anti-gay aswell; you care to prosecute them aswell, and Jews? 

There are too many ideologies in the world, be they religious or polical. Therefore liberalism cannot work. Liberalism is not just about freedom; it is about freedom through suppresion; suppresion of anything that may cause offence, and in doing so, it rips the heart out of culture.

Edit: the whole anti-gay thing is related to the moral law, which is a part of Christianity as much as the Gospel is.

Modifié par Wereparrot, 10 septembre 2011 - 07:54 .

[DarkDragon777]

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

Persian Empire was the bridge between India, Babylonia, Anatolia and Greece. There were many trade routes in middle east at that era.
I don't know how Greeks get their knowledge, but Persia was surely influential.

To some extent... Persia and Greece weren't friendly towards eachother and India wasn't friendly towards anyone.
I credit Babylon for the beginnings of Western culture.

Babylon is like the fetus, Greece is like the child, and Rome was the adult.

[UpiH]

That's what you get by just pasting a link - no-one will read. Let's retry.

[quote]
 
Silkroad Foundation

-959 King Mu (Mu Wang),. West Chou king and the earliest reputed Silk Road traveller. His travel account Mu tianzi zhuan, written in the 5th-4th century BC, is the first known travel book on the Silk Road. It tells of his journey to the Tarim basin, the Pamir mountains and further into today's Iran region, where the legendary meeting with Xiwangmu was taken place. Returned via the Southern route. The book no longer exists but is referenced in Shan Hai Zin, Leizi: Mu Wang Zhuan, and Shiji.

-138-116. Zhang Qian (Chang Ch'ien). Chinese general and envoy credited with opening the Silk Road after his mission from the Han Emperor Wudi to recruit the Yueh-chih people to form an alliance against the Xiongnu. First trip (138-125) skirted the Taklamakan desert via the northern route, passed the Pamir, then reached Ferghana. Returned via the southern route. His second trip (119-115), a mission to seek alliance with Wu-sun people, took him to Dunhuang, Loulan, Kucha, then the capital of Wu-sun kingdom in the Ili river. His missions to the west led to the formalization of trade, especially the silk trade, between China and Persia.

40-70. Anonymous author of the Periplus of the Erythraen (=Red) Sea. A merchant handbook, written apparently by an Egyptian Greek, about trade routes through the Red Sea and involving both East Africa and India. One of the most important sources for Roman Eastern trade, compiled after the discovery of how to use the monsoon winds to make the round trip to India. Includes extensive information on ports and products. 

Modifié par UpiH, 10 septembre 2011 - 07:24 .

[UpiH]

*******PIMF****

Why there isn't one?

Modifié par UpiH, 10 septembre 2011 - 07:25 .

[RAF1940]

Luc0s wrote...


Besides, since when is Christianity about anti-homosexuality? Isn't Christianity supposed to be about Jesus Christ? So why all the hate against homosexuals?

Luc0s, I live in a heavily Christian area. And I can tell you that 98% of Christians are not real Christians.

[Volus Warlord]

RAF1940 wrote...

Luc0s wrote...


Besides, since when is Christianity about anti-homosexuality? Isn't Christianity supposed to be about Jesus Christ? So why all the hate against homosexuals?

Luc0s, I live in a heavily Christian area. And I can tell you that 98% of Christians are not real Christians.

Yawn...

[DarkDragon777]

Luc0s wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

You stll haven't said what was at the beginning of the common era. Guess what? The birth of Christ! It's a transparent attempt to appease other religions. If I was a Muslim, I would actually be offended; it's patronising. If I was a Muslim I would accept the Christian tradition of BC/AD gladly.

How is BCE/CE patronising?

And no, the beginning of the Common Era is not the birth of Christ, because Christ was born 7 years earlier. If the birth of Christ was the start of the Common Era, we would currently be living in 2018. But we live in 2011, so.

And yeah right, if you were a Muslim you wouldn't accept BC/AD at all. I bet most Muslims are more happy with the unbiased BCE/CE. Your Christian BC/AD is biased towards Christianity. BCE/CE is unbiased and neutral.

Wereparrot wrote...

Whether you like it or not, we live in a Christian culture.

No we don't, whether you like it or not. Our current modern culture is based on Humanism. The age where Christianity ruled our civilisations is long gone. Christianity has no power anymore. All the power the church once had is long gone now.

Wereparrot wrote...

It's grown that way for about 1500 years (England).What room is there for argument? Since then our morals, values, art and architecture have all been influenced by Christianity. If I go abroad I respect the culture and religion of the country I am in. I expect nothing less from visitors to England.

You're wrong. Our modern morals, values, art and architecture have all been influenced by the Ancient Greek and Ancient Romans. It all started with the Renaissance. The Renaissance was the reintroduction of the culture of the Ancient Greek/Romans. 

For a long time, Europe was culturally death (because of Christianity). But the Renaissance, when we went back to our Greek/Roman roots, blew new life in Europe.

The Renaissance was based on Humanist morals and values. Since the Renaissance, we live by Humanist morals and values. As I said, we live in a Humanist culture, not a Christian culture.

Wereparrot wrote...

You are undermining your own political ideology when you say that discriminating religions (I did not say oppresion) should be prosecuted. Hypocrite much? Muslims are anti-gay aswell; you care to prosecute them aswell, and Jews? 

You can be anti-gay, but you will not oppress the freedom of homosexuals. As soon as anyone starts oppressing homosexuals, they need to get stopped and eventually deserve punishment.

I don't care if you're Christian, Muslim or Jew, as soon as you start oppressing homosexuals, you're doing wrong and your behavior will have to be stopped for the sake of the oppressed homosexuals. It's not hypocrite at all, it's just the only right thing to do.

What is more important, your opinion on homosexuals, or the freedom of homosexuals? Obviously the freedom of homosexuals is more important than your opinion.

Wereparrot wrote...

There are too many ideologies in the world, be they religious or polical. Therefore liberalism cannot work. Liberalism is not just about freedom; it is about freedom through suppresion; suppresion of anything that may cause offence, and in doing so, it rips the heart out of culture.

Liberalism can work perfectly. And no, liberalism doesn't suppress anyone. Liberalism stands up for the freedom of people. As soon as some peopel start to oppress or suppress other people's freedom, those people need to be stopped, because those people are wrong.

What about criminals? Are you saying throwing a pedophile rapist in jail is suppresion? Are you now saying we shouldn't be allowed ot throw criminals in jail?

Criminals needs to be stopped. Racism needs to be stopped. Any form of discrimination needs to be stopped. If we don't then our society will fall to to the ground.


The only thing that rips the heart out of culture is your religion that supports hatred, oppression and suppression. Liberalism and Humanism will give our society the chance to grow and florish, while your religion only tries to suppress it.

Most liberals are more sympathetic towards criminals than conservatives.....
Conservatives believe people like that should die. Liberals don't.


I'm sorry, but total freedom is not possible. Any society that allows such total freedom will collapse in on itself.
And I also believe it's the lack of discrimination and the politically correct enviroment that people like me, (yes, I'm a child), are being raised in that's causing our decline. It doesn't allow for any competition, not much of it anyway.


You have to be realistic here.

[Nameless one7]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Wereparrot wrote...

You stll haven't said what was at the beginning of the common era. Guess what? The birth of Christ! It's a transparent attempt to appease other religions. If I was a Muslim, I would actually be offended; it's patronising. If I was a Muslim I would accept the Christian tradition of BC/AD gladly.

How is BCE/CE patronising?

And no, the beginning of the Common Era is not the birth of Christ, because Christ was born 7 years earlier. If the birth of Christ was the start of the Common Era, we would currently be living in 2018. But we live in 2011, so.

And yeah right, if you were a Muslim you wouldn't accept BC/AD at all. I bet most Muslims are more happy with the unbiased BCE/CE. Your Christian BC/AD is biased towards Christianity. BCE/CE is unbiased and neutral.

Wereparrot wrote...

Whether you like it or not, we live in a Christian culture.

No we don't, whether you like it or not. Our current modern culture is based on Humanism. The age where Christianity ruled our civilisations is long gone. Christianity has no power anymore. All the power the church once had is long gone now.

Wereparrot wrote...

It's grown that way for about 1500 years (England).What room is there for argument? Since then our morals, values, art and architecture have all been influenced by Christianity. If I go abroad I respect the culture and religion of the country I am in. I expect nothing less from visitors to England.

You're wrong. Our modern morals, values, art and architecture have all been influenced by the Ancient Greek and Ancient Romans. It all started with the Renaissance. The Renaissance was the reintroduction of the culture of the Ancient Greek/Romans. 

For a long time, Europe was culturally death (because of Christianity). But the Renaissance, when we went back to our Greek/Roman roots, blew new life in Europe.

The Renaissance was based on Humanist morals and values. Since the Renaissance, we live by Humanist morals and values. As I said, we live in a Humanist culture, not a Christian culture.

Wereparrot wrote...

You are undermining your own political ideology when you say that discriminating religions (I did not say oppresion) should be prosecuted. Hypocrite much? Muslims are anti-gay aswell; you care to prosecute them aswell, and Jews? 

You can be anti-gay, but you will not oppress the freedom of homosexuals. As soon as anyone starts oppressing homosexuals, they need to get stopped and eventually deserve punishment.

I don't care if you're Christian, Muslim or Jew, as soon as you start oppressing homosexuals, you're doing wrong and your behavior will have to be stopped for the sake of the oppressed homosexuals. It's not hypocrite at all, it's just the only right thing to do.

What is more important, your opinion on homosexuals, or the freedom of homosexuals? Obviously the freedom of homosexuals is more important than your opinion.

Wereparrot wrote...

There are too many ideologies in the world, be they religious or polical. Therefore liberalism cannot work. Liberalism is not just about freedom; it is about freedom through suppresion; suppresion of anything that may cause offence, and in doing so, it rips the heart out of culture.

Liberalism can work perfectly. And no, liberalism doesn't suppress anyone. Liberalism stands up for the freedom of people. As soon as some peopel start to oppress or suppress other people's freedom, those people need to be stopped, because those people are wrong.

What about criminals? Are you saying throwing a pedophile rapist in jail is suppresion? Are you now saying we shouldn't be allowed ot throw criminals in jail?

Criminals needs to be stopped. Racism needs to be stopped. Any form of discrimination needs to be stopped. If we don't then our society will fall to to the ground.


The only thing that rips the heart out of culture is your religion that supports hatred, oppression and suppression. Liberalism and Humanism will give our society the chance to grow and florish, while your religion only tries to suppress it.

Most liberals are more sympathetic towards criminals than conservatives.....
Conservatives believe people like that should die. Liberals don't.


I'm sorry, but total freedom is not possible. Any society that allows such total freedom will collapse in on itself.
And I also believe it's the lack of discrimination and the politically correct enviroment that people like me, (yes, I'm a child), are being raised in that's causing our decline. It doesn't allow for any competition, not much of it anyway.


You have to be realistic here.

So what kind of discriination would you like to see and what kind of politically correct things would you like removed?

[DarkDragon777]

Nameless one7 wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...




Most liberals are more sympathetic towards criminals than conservatives.....
Conservatives believe people like that should die. Liberals don't.


I'm sorry, but total freedom is not possible. Any society that allows such total freedom will collapse in on itself.
And I also believe it's the lack of discrimination and the politically correct enviroment that people like me, (yes, I'm a child), are being raised in that's causing our decline. It doesn't allow for any competition, not much of it anyway.


You have to be realistic here.

So what kind of discriination would you like to see and what kind of politically correct things would you like removed?

I'd like to see more tension between people so everyone will strive to get to the top.


You know, all the lies about how everyones a winner and everyone's equal and other things like that.

[Wereparrot]

[quote]Luc0s wrote...

[quote]Wereparrot wrote...

You stll haven't said what was at the beginning of the common era. Guess what? The birth of Christ! It's a transparent attempt to appease other religions. If I was a Muslim, I would actually be offended; it's patronising. If I was a Muslim I would accept the Christian tradition of BC/AD gladly.
[/quote]

How is BCE/CE patronising?

And no, the beginning of the Common Era is not the birth of Christ, because Christ was born 7 years earlier. If the birth of Christ was the start of the Common Era, we would currently be living in 2018. But we live in 2011, so.

And yeah right, if you were a Muslim you wouldn't accept BC/AD at all. I bet most Muslims are more happy with the unbiased BCE/CE. Your Christian BC/AD is biased towards Christianity. BCE/CE is unbiased and neutral.[/quote]

Of course I'd be fine with it. Why not? It's historically a Chistian culture. And what was at the beginning of the common era? What eart-shatteringly significant event occured that warrants a new calender and why should Muslims care more for that. I don't expect the calender to revert to BC/AD in Islamic cultures just for the benefit of a few Christians asnd I don't see why it should be any differnt here.


[quote]Wereparrot wrote...

Whether you like it or not, we live in a Christian culture.
[/quote]

No we don't, whether you like it or not. Our current modern culture is based on Humanism. The age where Christianity ruled our civilisations is long gone. Christianity has no power anymore. All the power the church once had is long gone now.[/quote]

Yeah, you've conveniently forgotten 1500 years of Christian influence. This is the wont of the liberals.


[quote]Wereparrot wrote...

It's grown that way for about 1500 years (England).What room is there for argument? Since then our morals, values, art and architecture have all been influenced by Christianity. If I go abroad I respect the culture and religion of the country I am in. I expect nothing less from visitors to England.
[/quote]

You're wrong. Our modern morals, values, art and architecture have all been influenced by the Ancient Greek and Ancient Romans. It all started with the Renaissance. The Renaissance was the reintroduction of the culture of the Ancient Greek/Romans. 

For a long time, Europe was culturally death (because of Christianity). But the Renaissance, when we went back to our Greek/Roman roots, blew new life in Europe.

The Renaissance was based on Humanist morals and values. Since the Renaissance, we live by Humanist morals and values. As I said, we live in a Humanist culture, not a Christian culture.[/quote]

The moral law was written before that. All others laws stem from that; consider it the law of God or natural order-it was still written before the Romans and Greeks came up with something based on this. To deny it just because it's found in the Bible is ridiculous. And the whole point about the culture is that is Christian culture. You won't find it in, say, Islamic countries.


[quote]Wereparrot wrote...

You are undermining your own political ideology when you say that discriminating religions (I did not say oppresion) should be prosecuted. Hypocrite much? Muslims are anti-gay aswell; you care to prosecute them aswell, and Jews? 
[/quote]

You can be anti-gay, but you will not oppress the freedom of homosexuals. As soon as anyone starts oppressing homosexuals, they need to get stopped and eventually deserve punishment.

I don't care if you're Christian, Muslim or Jew, as soon as you start oppressing homosexuals, you're doing wrong and your behavior will have to be stopped for the sake of the oppressed homosexuals. It's not hypocrite at all, it's just the only right thing to do.

What is more important, your opinion on homosexuals, or the freedom of homosexuals? Obviously the freedom of homosexuals is more important than your opinion.[/quote]

So it's ok to be gay, but it's not ok to dissaprove? And you believe in freedom? Seriously...


[quote]Wereparrot wrote...

There are too many ideologies in the world, be they religious or polical. Therefore liberalism cannot work. Liberalism is not just about freedom; it is about freedom through suppresion; suppresion of anything that may cause offence, and in doing so, it rips the heart out of culture.
[/quote]

Liberalism can work perfectly. And no, liberalism doesn't suppress anyone. Liberalism stands up for the freedom of people. As soon as some peopel start to oppress or suppress other people's freedom, those people need to be stopped, because those people are wrong.

What about criminals? Are you saying throwing a pedophile rapist in jail is suppresion? Are you now saying we shouldn't be allowed ot throw criminals in jail?

Criminals needs to be stopped. Racism needs to be stopped. Any form of discrimination needs to be stopped. If we don't then our society will fall to to the ground.


The only thing that rips the heart out of culture is your religion that supports hatred, oppression and suppression. Liberalism and Humanism will give our society the chance to grow and florish, while your religion only tries to suppress it.
[/quote]

Don't be ridiculous. If you think all forms of discrimination should stop, then why critisize the right of religious people to believe what they will? It's called discrimination. Freedom? Suppresion. 'You may follow a religion, but only if it's state-approved'. My religion? I have not claimed to be religious. I may be so, but I'm speaking as a traditional conservative.

Edit: I can't do walls of text very well.

Modifié par Wereparrot, 10 septembre 2011 - 08:32 .

[Nameless one7]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Nameless one7 wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...




Most liberals are more sympathetic towards criminals than conservatives.....
Conservatives believe people like that should die. Liberals don't.


I'm sorry, but total freedom is not possible. Any society that allows such total freedom will collapse in on itself.
And I also believe it's the lack of discrimination and the politically correct enviroment that people like me, (yes, I'm a child), are being raised in that's causing our decline. It doesn't allow for any competition, not much of it anyway.


You have to be realistic here.

So what kind of discriination would you like to see and what kind of politically correct things would you like removed?

I'd like to see more tension between people so everyone will strive to get to the top.


You know, all the lies about how everyones a winner and everyone's equal and other things like that.

I wouldn't think they teach that everyone is a winner beyond elementary or middle school.  You really don't hear about how everyone's a winner once you get out of high school.

[DarkDragon777]

Luc0s wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Most liberals are more sympathetic towards criminals than conservatives.....
Conservatives believe people like that should die. Liberals don't.


I'm sorry, but total freedom is not possible. Any society that allows such total freedom will collapse in on itself.
And I also believe it's the lack of discrimination and the politically correct enviroment that people like me, (yes, I'm a child), are being raised in that's causing our decline. It doesn't allow for any competition, not much of it anyway.


You have to be realistic here.

Again you confuse liberalism with social-liberalism. I know Americans automatically think liberalism is a left-wing movement, but it isn't. Only social-liberalism is left-wing. classical-liberalism, economic-liberalism, conservative-liberalism and national-liberalism is all right-wing or central-right.

Most conservative liberals (like me) do not sympathize with criminals. Conservative-liberals actually agree that we should increase the punishments for most crimes. Right now we're to soft on the criminals. I won't say they should die (I'm against the death-penalty) but I do think they should be punished heavily.


Please define "total freedom". I agree that total freedom in it's absolute sense is impossible, but we can still pursue to create a society with as much freedom as possible without destroying the society. 

And how on earth do you think the lack of discrimination (or the suppression of discrimination) is causing our society to decline? That doesn't make any sense. Sure it leaves room for competition! As a economical-conservative liberal I encourage competition between companies, because competition improves the economy! But I don't think discrimination and oppression is needed for a healthy competition, do you? In fact, discrimination and oppression only corrupts the competition!

classic liberalism isn't necessarily right wing, because most autocratic and totalitarian governments like monarchies and the n@zi party are right wing.

And "Liberalism" in general is considered left wing, so please don't insult me about being American. I actually try my very best to not be ignorant like most of us are.

You seem to be slightly socially liberal, so when I said "total freedom", I meant that I don't believe in social-liberalism. I apologize for the confusion.


I also think lack of discrimination makes people feel too comfortable, making competition decline.

Modifié par DarkDragon777, 10 septembre 2011 - 08:33 .