|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Guynemer
I think Cagliostro is pulling our collective leg.
|
Well - I tried to express them as controversial as possible, but there is a true core in them (not starting a discussion here, just explaining that I'm not (completely) pulling your leg...):
"I think islamic fundamentalism is a bigger threat to civilized mankind than nationalsocialism was."
- It's far more spread than nationalsocialism was, just as aggressive and even less rational due to it being a religion (ok - NS was practised like a religion by some, but it wasn't as such). I'd call Nationalsocialism wicked, but fundamentalism foolish - and as Alexandre Dumas said: "I prefer the wicked rather than the foolish. The wicked sometimes rest."
"I think western nations should invade fundamentalist countries and enslave the population."
Basically, I propagate going back to imperialist and colonialist behaviour more openly than it's currently done - the "slavery" part was to make it sound more controversial. People working for minimum wages (mainly to produce goods for western nations) is veiled slavery in my eyes and this is allready taking place all over the world. There's just no need to invade if there are "friendly" governments - if they are unfriendly, they should be attacked for some false pretenses and have a new governmet installed to ensure the above - mmmh - wait wan't there something? Ah - no - Iraq isn't exactly fundamentalist
"I think all drugs should be legalized."
If citizens are to be considered emancipated, the government has no right to dictate which drugs to use and which not.
Example: Alcohol is legal too - and someone addicted to alcohol is more likely to stay so than someone on heroin as a matter of fact - the difference is that alcohol causes more organic damages than heroin and most people dying of heroin are doing so because of the circumstances under which it's consumed due to it being illegal. I don't propagate drug abuse (I don't even drink myself), but if someone does, should be his own decision.
"I think casualties are more bearable if the victims are children, because there was not yet too much effort put into their education compared to adults and they can easily be reproduced."
In fact I'm all serious here - it was a common practice in certain regions of ancient China in times of famine: The children were eaten first - I allways admired the logic behind that.
It was partially even in europe: My own grand-grandfather allways let the youngest son climb up the highest trees to harvest fruits because "if he falls down, it's the one one having cost the least money 'til now" (besides him weighting the least
)
"I think women are primitive animals compared to men."
In terms of behaving illogical and uncontrollably emotional (which I would call animal and primitive) they are imo.
"I think AIDS is a good thing because overpopulation is a far more concerning problem."
With the current worldpopulation and it's current tumor-like growth rate, there has to be a limiting factor sooner or later - let it be famine, AIDS (it's overrated - simple diarrhea is more effective) or future multi-resitant bacteria - Nature will defend itself, if anyone thinks it's positive or not.
wow
