What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Scomo saving me

carcharias

carcharias

Immortal
Messages
43,120
Quicksilver said:
I don’t think they did, but if they did it’s not an unreasonable fee/tax.

It’s is a bit annoying if you’re a person that doesn’t fish often but I think it’s justified in the scheme of things.
Click to expand...

I’ve had one for nearly 20 years.
Been asked for it once.
Standing at a boat ramp at Nelson’s bay.
Not fishing.
 
W

wibble

Bench
Messages
4,661
Eion said:
And there we have it. Txta has shat the bed and this thread has now officially jumped the shark.
Click to expand...

Txta rates Chad a 0/10 and you think Txta has shat the bed only when comparing ScoMo to Hitler? (sorry for bringing footy to this thread...)

txta2 said:
Hitler changed laws to favour him and then began descrimating and destroyed human rights. Morriscum and his conservative Bible bashing henchmen are following the same path.
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-17/religious-freedom-bill-will-threaten-rights-act-government-says/11969036?pfmredir=sm
Click to expand...
txta2 said:
Authoritarian rule , be scared because scummo is a Nazi in hiding
Click to expand...


I think the Nazi comparison is both apt and troubling. Perhaps comparing to Putin would be less troubling.

It is troubling because people can rightly say the Nazi's herded men, women and children into gas chambers and killed them painfully for racist, authoritarian, nationalist reasons, and whenever something is compared to Nazism that doesn't involve horrid mass murder and torture, you can say it is both an unfair comparison, and an insult to those killed and tortured by Nazis.

This is the "standard" line, and has some merit. Perhaps Putin, who stole democracy from Russia with similar methods (albeit a fledgling and corrupt one), is a less contentious comparison. But Putin has also committed authoritarian atrocities (as have the CPC if you used them as another example).

On the other hand, it is important to understand that Hitler was democratically elected and Nazism came about in a perfectly "normal" nation (by our standards of judging nations based on tradition, religion, economy, language, culture etc) that was not that dissimilar to modern western democracies.

So this comparison is an apt reminder that democracy only stays as a democracy when its people vigorously defend it from authoritarian leaders. To compare a leader to Hitler in this context, especially as Txta has made the context of using laws and discrimination to maintain authoritative control, is a reminder that Hitler before he became Fuhrer of a horrific regime, was an elected official trying to place himself above the democracy he was elected in. And to suggest that this could happen again when elected leaders try to hide from scrutiny, change laws to reduce democratic power, and use low popularist rhetoric as an excuse for crushing minorities, is a perfectly reasonable objection to such policies.

In fact, to counter this with glib protests that no-one is gassing children or some such is a bit disingenuous, in the context raised. It is also a bit ironic that a politician famed for locking up children to prevent the actions of their parents, is defended by people who celebrate such action, from accusations of misusing authoritarian control that compare him to Hitler.​
 
Eion

Eion

First Grade
Messages
8,034
wibble said:
Txta rates Chad a 0/10 and you think Txta has shat the bed only when comparing ScoMo to Hitler? (sorry for bringing footy to this thread...)



I think the Nazi comparison is both apt and troubling. Perhaps comparing to Putin would be less troubling.

It is troubling because people can rightly say the Nazi's herded men, women and children into gas chambers and killed them painfully for racist, authoritarian, nationalist reasons, and whenever something is compared to Nazism that doesn't involve horrid mass murder and torture, you can say it is both an unfair comparison, and an insult to those killed and tortured by Nazis.

This is the "standard" line, and has some merit. Perhaps Putin, who stole democracy from Russia with similar methods (albeit a fledgling and corrupt one), is a less contentious comparison. But Putin has also committed authoritarian atrocities (as have the CPC if you used them as another example).

On the other hand, it is important to understand that Hitler was democratically elected and Nazism came about in a perfectly "normal" nation (by our standards of judging nations based on tradition, religion, economy, language, culture etc) that was not that dissimilar to modern western democracies.

So this comparison is an apt reminder that democracy only stays as a democracy when its people vigorously defend it from authoritarian leaders. To compare a leader to Hitler in this context, especially as Txta has made the context of using laws and discrimination to maintain authoritative control, is a reminder that Hitler before he became Fuhrer of a horrific regime, was an elected official trying to place himself above the democracy he was elected in. And to suggest that this could happen again when elected leaders try to hide from scrutiny, change laws to reduce democratic power, and use low popularist rhetoric as an excuse for crushing minorities, is a perfectly reasonable objection to such policies.

In fact, to counter this with glib protests that no-one is gassing children or some such is a bit disingenuous, in the context raised. It is also a bit ironic that a politician famed for locking up children to prevent the actions of their parents, is defended by people who celebrate such action, from accusations of misusing authoritarian control that compare him to Hitler.​
Click to expand...
Oh I’ve been critical of the unfair criticism of chad as well. I shudder to think of the state of txtas mattress.
 
taipan

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,500
wibble said:
Txta rates Chad a 0/10 and you think Txta has shat the bed only when comparing ScoMo to Hitler? (sorry for bringing footy to this thread...)



I think the Nazi comparison is both apt and troubling. Perhaps comparing to Putin would be less troubling.

It is troubling because people can rightly say the Nazi's herded men, women and children into gas chambers and killed them painfully for racist, authoritarian, nationalist reasons, and whenever something is compared to Nazism that doesn't involve horrid mass murder and torture, you can say it is both an unfair comparison, and an insult to those killed and tortured by Nazis.

This is the "standard" line, and has some merit. Perhaps Putin, who stole democracy from Russia with similar methods (albeit a fledgling and corrupt one), is a less contentious comparison. But Putin has also committed authoritarian atrocities (as have the CPC if you used them as another example).

On the other hand, it is important to understand that Hitler was democratically elected and Nazism came about in a perfectly "normal" nation (by our standards of judging nations based on tradition, religion, economy, language, culture etc) that was not that dissimilar to modern western democracies.

So this comparison is an apt reminder that democracy only stays as a democracy when its people vigorously defend it from authoritarian leaders. To compare a leader to Hitler in this context, especially as Txta has made the context of using laws and discrimination to maintain authoritative control, is a reminder that Hitler before he became Fuhrer of a horrific regime, was an elected official trying to place himself above the democracy he was elected in. And to suggest that this could happen again when elected leaders try to hide from scrutiny, change laws to reduce democratic power, and use low popularist rhetoric as an excuse for crushing minorities, is a perfectly reasonable objection to such policies.

In fact, to counter this with glib protests that no-one is gassing children or some such is a bit disingenuous, in the context raised. It is also a bit ironic that a politician famed for locking up children to prevent the actions of their parents, is defended by people who celebrate such action, from accusations of misusing authoritarian control that compare him to Hitler.​
Click to expand...

One of the most ridiculous comparisons I have ever read.You need to do a full historical sequence of events from the Treaty of Versailles/the Great Depression et al.
The only thing troubling ,is having someone suggesting the comparison with the Nazis as being apt.When we have political prisoners in jail because of opposition, no opposition parties, superiority of race,Christian pastors being thrown in jail or executed because of opposition,execution camps, liquidation of people ,Darwinism survival of the fittest excuse etc etc etc.,then you can draw a comparison.
Hitler was elected, then he got rid of his opposition.
One of K Rudd's heroes is a Lutheran Pastor(Dietrich Bornhoffer) executed by the Nazis on 8/4/45.If Rudd read your ScoMo comparison he would puke.

I further suggest ScoMo values human life.How dare he protect our borders from mercenary boat owners, and protect life in doing so.Even Albanese in 2018 agreed this and overseas processing is the correct procedure

Putin's mob shoots a plane out of the sky ,and hundreds killed and he continues to deny it.Menawhile he continues to bomb the sh*t out of the poor civilians in Idlib.But he compares with schmo.

The only thing you got correct, even democratic elections can turn up disasters. But nowhere near the extremities that you suggest.

Or perahps we have the Chinese socialist system ,no opposition, no value on human life.the state controls your movements, no protesting.And we' re stuck with that party for ever.

We have a senate(House of review) that is supposed to act as a guardian against any form of extremism.
 
BatteredFlake

BatteredFlake

Bench
Messages
4,213
Scomo,/ Abbot /Barnaby legacy will be shameful enough without any Hitler comparisons ---.Entirely different reasons ---And just adds to the obfuscation that the "Denialist"/"dont want to know or do anything aboutitists" ,love..
 
BatteredFlake

BatteredFlake

Bench
Messages
4,213
Sometimes questions asked and answers avoided is more telling than the usual obfuscatiing answers . For example in pg 1 or two Carch was saying he demanded to know who else Gretas Bandwagoners "followed " or beleived etc. But whenever Ive asked him "a beleiver" who the experts are that he believes he avoids answering.or gives some long winded personal observation theory.

I Asked coify a genuine question about Batteries in his "system" ... No answer? I would really like to know if true cause I was told a few yrs back Battery bank for my needs would cost about Twenty grand , No subsidies, Very limited Warantee , And Batteries didnt look likely to last the time it would take to pay them back. So if coify has found a solution Id genuinely like to hear it or has he been hitting the Movicol again ?
 
W

wibble

Bench
Messages
4,661
taipan said:
One of the most ridiculous comparisons I have ever read.You need to do a full historical sequence of events from the Treaty of Versailles/the Great Depression et al.
The only thing troubling ,is having someone suggesting the comparison with the Nazis as being apt.When we have political prisoners in jail because of opposition, no opposition parties, superiority of race,Christian pastors being thrown in jail or executed because of opposition,execution camps, liquidation of people ,Darwinism survival of the fittest excuse etc etc etc.,then you can draw a comparison.
Hitler was elected, then he got rid of his opposition.
One of K Rudd's heroes is a Lutheran Pastor(Dietrich Bornhoffer) executed by the Nazis on 8/4/45.If Rudd read your ScoMo comparison he would puke.

I further suggest ScoMo values human life.How dare he protect our borders from mercenary boat owners, and protect life in doing so.Even Albanese in 2018 agreed this and overseas processing is the correct procedure

Putin's mob shoots a plane out of the sky ,and hundreds killed and he continues to deny it.Menawhile he continues to bomb the sh*t out of the poor civilians in Idlib.But he compares with schmo.

The only thing you got correct, even democratic elections can turn up disasters. But nowhere near the extremities that you suggest.

Or perahps we have the Chinese socialist system ,no opposition, no value on human life.the state controls your movements, no protesting.And we' re stuck with that party for ever.

We have a senate(House of review) that is supposed to act as a guardian against any form of extremism.
Click to expand...

How did Hitler come to power? He was elected.

Why was he elected? Popularist, racist rhetoric, and German hope/pride for a turn around in fortunes from their disastrous World War 1 (and complicated communist and nationalist militia conflicts through Europe in the 20's and 30's creating a penchant for violence in European governments)

What did he do when elected? Intimidated, used thugs, changed rules, and turned a democracy into a dictatorship.

How was this possible? Business, citizens, interest groups (and yes, the Christian Church) accepted erosions of democracy

To the extent any current politician tries to erode democracy, the comparison is apt.

Why do you say democracy can't turn up disasters capable of creating Nazi Germany or Putin's Russia, when that is exactly what happened.

Hitler didn't set up concentration camps until he had total power. He didn't get elected on a platform of executing Jews and dissidents. But these things happen after a democracy allows itself to become undemocratic.

I specifically said the comparison is troubling to some (who are likely to blow up like you did) if you think people are saying that a current person, compared to Hitler, is executing civilians. That is the sort of thing happening in authoritarian states still today, but thankfully not here. I'd like to keep it that way. Keeping a free press, independent judiciary, transparent government, are important pillars of free democracies (more so than a house of review, which is still another safe guard).

But the issue is how do authoritarian states get that way, if they were once democracies (as Nazi Germany was). A house of review is absolutely useless in stopping an elected leader unless they are interested in keeping democracy over their own power (consider some senators in the USA who just agreed that Trump is fine to rig elections in his favour, if he thinks he is the best person to be president).

You've entirely missed the point if you think we need only become wary of authoritarian action after execution camps are set up or opposition parties are banned. By then it is too late.​
 
Last edited:
W

wibble

Bench
Messages
4,661
Defer to the coifed said:
No my reply to your 1 million words or less rubbish is this. You are a bed wetter.
Click to expand...

Showing your master debating skills.

Famine isn't a problem. 3 million starving children each year isn't a problem. $80 billion a year in drought damage isn't a problem. If we didn't stop the hole in the ozone layer, 280 million skin cancer cases isn't a problem. But 11 supposed deaths from windmills is a disaster. If you disagree you are a bed wetter.

And this, ladies, gentlemen and others, is the level of thought that climate change deniers have summoned to back up their pet conspiracy theory.
 
Eion

Eion

First Grade
Messages
8,034
wibble said:
How did Hitler come to power? He was elected.

Why was he elected? Popularist, racist rhetoric, and German hope/pride for a turn around in fortunes from their disastrous World War 1 (and complicated communist and nationalist militia conflicts through Europe in the 20's and 30's creating a penchant for violence in European governments)

What did he do when elected? Intimidated, used thugs, changed rules, and turned a democracy into a dictatorship.

How was this possible? Business, citizens, interest groups (and yes, the Christian Church) accepted erosions of democracy

To the extent any current politician tries to erode democracy, the comparison is apt.

Why do you say democracy can't turn up disasters capable of creating Nazi Germany or Putin's Russia, when that is exactly what happened.

Hitler didn't set up concentration camps until he had total power. He didn't get elected on a platform of executing Jews and dissidents. But these things happen after a democracy allows itself to become undemocratic.

I specifically said the comparison is troubling to some (who are likely to blow up like you did) if you think people are saying that a current person, compared to Hitler, is executing civilians. That is the sort of thing happening in authoritarian states still today, but thankfully not here. I'd like to keep it that way. Keeping a free press, independent judiciary, transparent government, are important pillars of free democracies (more so than a house of review, which is still another safe guard).

But the issue is how do authoritarian states get that way, if they were once democracies (as Nazi Germany was). A house of review is absolutely useless in stopping an elected leader unless they are interested in keeping democracy over their own power (consider some senators in the USA who just agreed that Trump is fine to rig elections in his favour, if he thinks he is the best person to be president).

You've entirely missed the point if you think we need only become wary of authoritarian action after execution camps are set up or opposition parties are banned. By then it is too late.​
Click to expand...
You can find some elements of common ground on any 2 people if you search hard enough.

Hitler was a vile, racist thug. The most hated figure in history for his atrocities. It’s offensive to make comparisons and you know you it. You can do better I’m sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top