Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Your Major Malfunction Is, ?

  1. #1

    Your Major Malfunction Is, ?

    Joining in the first place!
    Being a soldier myself, I love Full Metal Jacket. The basic training scene alone could have given the movie a 5 star rating in my book. It was not only hilarious but also very true to life. Every time I watch it brings back fond memories of my days at basic training. Not to say that I was a Private Pyle but they treat everyone with that same tender loving care. As the film shows they treat everyone with the upmost respect and decency. LOL. No it really, really sucks and they talk to you like crap but Drill Sergeants say some of the funniest stuff sometimes and the movie is a good representation of that. It also shows how hard and stressful basic training is for the soldiers that go through it. It shows just how fragile some people’s minds can be in such stressful situations as well. In my company we had two guys that had to be put on suicide watch 24 hours a day. One morning at about 2 a.m. I woke up to sirens, a guy in the company down the street had blown his own head off in the bathroom with his M16. It makes you realize just how strong the notion of patriotism is. It’s a word that can put a nation to collectively agree to go to war or make someone put themselves in a situation that they know they can’t handle. That’s what I took away from this movie. It made me reevaluate why I joined. Did I join for the true sense of contributing to something greater than myself or was I duped by a clever ploy designed to make me pickup arms against my fellow man? But I know the answer to that regardless of the intent of my leaders. — J.R
    - http://www.philfilms.utm.edu/1/fullmetal.htm

  2. #2
    Classic Leftism. Blame the system and the victim in lieu of the psychopath and his behavior, and while demonizing nationalism all at once. Well done good little drone.

  3. #3
    Nothing wrong with what that man wrote, nationalism is evil, whether it comes from the right or the left, it pretends that one nation is superior than the other, rather than unite, it divides humanity... I don't think nationalism is sanctioned by God.
    Ain't nobody better mess with the fine feathered figaro!

  4. #4
    No idea what you are talking about .. but the concept of a 'city on a hill' destroys the notion of multiculturalism and diversity held as precious values. A free and just society is not only looked highly upon by God, but sanctioned by God. It takes that to fight EVIL in this world, but sadly that light is waning in these dark days and the outlook is bleak for the best hope that we have, i.e. the United States of America.

    You seem to object to exceptionalism, like many on the Left.

  5. #5

    Values vs. Ideology, Continued

    What follows is a moralistic, value-based explanation of my position on this.

    IBG seems to take exception to Objectivism, unlike many on the Right who follow the philosophy of Ayn Rand i.e. Paul Ryan, Rand Paul or Paula Abdul. Since reasoning is the means of human knowledge it is therefore a person's most fundamental means of survival, and necessary to the achievement of values. The use or threat of force neutralizes the practical effect of an individual's reason, whether that force originates from the state, or from a criminal. According to Rand, man's mind will not function at the point of a gun.

    The only type of organized human behavior consistent with the operation of reason is that of voluntary cooperation. Persuasion is the method of reason. This is the means by which posters like Slik and sometimes even I myself try to communicate. By their very nature, the overtly irrational cannot rely on the use of persuasion and must ultimately resort to force to prevail [IBG.]

    Based on this understanding of the role of reason, the initiation of physical force, against the will of another, is immoral, as are indirect initiations of force through threats, fraud, or breach of contract.

    While the use of defensive or retaliatory force is not always inappropriate, an opportunity to use reason without the initiation of force is necessary to achieve moral values. Each individual has an inalienable moral right to act as his own judgment directs and to keep the product of his effort.

    Further I assert IBG offers a response that is bereft of any reason or values.

  6. #6
    "Persuasion is the method of reason" reason, persuasion, methodology.... you sound like a sophist. one who tries to win arguements with little regard to truth. you dont get to truth with reasoning, you get relativism

  7. #7
    Rudderless bullsh!t is another way to describe it. The only "value" is the agreement that there is no Truth, no objective morality, no meaning or purpose to existence, only mere preferences and opinions. So then utilitarian/Marxist ideals are raised up and secular humanism/progressivism almost invariably becomes the State religion, assuming it's not an Islamo-fascit regime.

    Anyone is free to disagree with me. There is no "force" or intimidation in what I say confidently, but there is power and reason and rationality for anyone willing. Bring something to the table that forms the basis of your argument if you disagree. Most will see through it since we've heard it all before.

  8. #8

    You're Either With Us or You're Against Us

    IBG offers us his opinion that many of the left object to exceptionalism. Of course they do, particularly if the leftie considers any kind of nationalism to be grounded in the immoral. Can he find any place in the BIBLE where Nationalism is celebrated or even promoted, in any way? No, look at the Old Testament, lots of prophets are at odds with their King.

    They warn their fellow men of retribution from the LORD, insisting they instead follow the will of GOD. A few minor prophets proclaimed that Israel was about to be destroyed by conquering armies sent by the LORD; one had even been censured for doing so.

    I, on the other hand, say that IBG takes exception to Objectivism because it doesn't embrace myticism, only basic rationality. Is it no more pertinent than his remark?

    Hey, this is a political forum. I don't necessarily invoke the word of GOD with every comment. Ethics implies a theory of justice. Politics, on the other hand is the concrete mode of distrubution rather than how that society ought to distribute privilege. It creates an ineluctable tension, and if you can't freely debate these issues, you want to retract into an ideological shell of like-minded individuals, then don't bother commenting at all.

    I don't know any other way I can convey this, but I sense that many on this board believe this country has to be like the Soviet Union where everybody must embrace an ideology of Anti-Leftism. Most every response is forwarded with some token potshot across the broad divide, then they put their best effort towards creating and furthering an insipid divisiveness, even proclaiming that the opposite tendency toward unity is bad, for some reason left unexplained.

    Ideologically speaking, if you don't like the historical roots of Socialism then I would say you cannot take the concept of Millennialism, either. That is when the chiliastic Englanders wanted to create a New Jerusalem on Earth, dating far back in time, preceding Socialism, but I would say inspiring it.

    Take up some English history. This is the root of American Exceptionalism, too I think, because the expectation was that as Americans we could get away from the troubles of the old country and create a fresh start, society based on Biblical principles. All they had to do was make peace with I guess the native Americans already dwelling here.

    Well, that turned out to be a big problem for them, but not so much for the slaves they brought over here.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO