I've been directed to either apologize to King Arts or post statements proving every assertion made in
this post. Due to media limits and time constraints, I will offer my assertions in episodic format since I can't address all the assertions I made in a single sitting and post. Also I was told to post this in the News Subforum but I don't have access to it, so I'll post it here instead.
EPISODE III: The Voyage of the Slave Treader
So... is that all of the evidence I have to legitimize this claimed assertion below?
When that was established King Arts then shifted the topic the away from the actual topic being discussed to his own personal opinions on whatever pops into his mind, which in this case ultimately brought up (again) involves his support of Child Rape and Sex Slavery in certain cases for nebulous reasons.
Well, in that thread, for the most part.
There have been... other incidents.
August 2023, Five Minutes of Hate News thread. The discussion is regarding Thomas Jefferson.
An assertion is made below where King Arts makes an argument of how Thomas Jefferson advocated castration for sodomy. :
Thomas Jefferson did advocate for sodomy to be punished by castration.
Another poster replies Jefferson raped his slaves.
He also raped slaves. But 2 guys kissing on a stage for adults? Clearly deserves castration. Totally, that's a sane measure. Oh, how did cracking down on terrorists (but mostly 'terrorists') in the US go for you with the Patriot Act, btw? No backlash from that? Glad to hear it.
The issue quickly becomes a debate over where a Slave can or cannot consent to have sex.
Also do you have proof that Jefferson raped Sally? Do you have proof it was not consensual? Oh and I don't accept liberal college bullcrap like "MUH POWER IMBALANCE!"
He calls "Power Imbalance" in cases of rape and slavery "liberal college bullcrap."
A slave can't fucking consent. If the slave's choices were accepted, they wouldn't even be there.
Idk anything about this Jefferson story, but having sex with your captive human is rape every time.
Even if she did develop empathy for him and chose to have sex with him, that'd Stockholm syndrome, because again, she is a slave. She is being held captive. It's still rape.
Fuck that I disagree. That is stupid liberal bullshit, it's shit like this that the left wins, because even conservatives decide to follow what was taught in universities 10 or 20 years ago. Slaves can be raped if they don't want to and the master makes them do it against their will. But if they choose to engage with their master then it's consensual.
No "stockholm syndrome" or love it does not matter if she chooses to be with him, it was her choice.
Honestly with a stupid take like that you cheapen rape because now every absolute monarch is a rapist because he can kill his wife, or his lovers, or anyone else for any reason.
King Arts not only states its Rape if there is clear force "if they don't want to and the master makes them do it against their will." He then argues it "cheapens rape because now every "absolute monarch is a rapist because he can kill his wife or his lovers or anyone else for any reason." (re: nebulous rearing its head again)
I'm saying EVEN IF he did have relations with Sally it was not neccesarily rape. He may or may not have had relations with Sally I don't know. But saying that if he HAD it is automatically rape is eye roll worthy. At that point you might as well go bow down to the radical feminists.
He states that calling sex with your slaves is equal to "bowing to the radical feminist." So we've established thinking that a slave cannot properly consent to have sex with their master is equal to "bowing down to radicial feminism" and "liberal college bullcrap" with many F-Bombs thrown around showing just how PASSIONATE King Arts is about this topic.
Then another enters the conversation.
Also Sally Hemings was between the ages of 14 to 16 during this intimate relationship which resulted in her first pregnancy as well. So if Jefferson wants people castrated for sodomy, I hope he has an even more stern punishment for pedophilia.
And it occurred in Paris before they returned to Monticello. So that's international child sex trafficking or something.
"God's Children Are Not For Sale" IMHO.
I point out that Sally Hemings, the alleged sexual partner of Thomas Jefferson was underaged, and brought to France, pointing out she is both underaged and making a joke that its international child sex trafficking. I then reference the popular Christian Movie about Child Sex Trafficking,
The Sound of Freedom by restating its famous quote from the film.
Now keep in mind, the point of this discussion is to point out that Thomas Jefferson shouldn't be seen as someone to base modern sex laws upon and in fact, that was the thrust of my post as well... but SOMEONE really wants to talk about Children and Sex and Slavery and argue... something... nebulous.
King Arts response below:
*sigh* Husky are you going to just parrot brain dead liberal takes about "Muh evil founding fathers." Look up the age of consent laws in 1777, even if Jefferson did sleep with Sally at age 14 that is not pedophillia and was not illegal.
Also ironically that brain dead quote about God's children not being for sale? Umm sweetie have you read the Bible? It allows slavery. Now true American chattel slavery was different from Hebrew slavery in the old testament, but your objection is towards slavery itself not towards "cruel slavery" I mean if the slaves were not mistreated you would still be for going to war to free them right?
He states my comments are "brain dead liberal takes" and that even if Jefferson did sleep with Sally at the age 14 it's not pedophillia and was not illegal.
Then in response to me bringing up the Christian anti-sex trafficking movie The Sound of Freedom, he states its a brain dead quote and that the Bible allows slavery. He then points out the difference between "Slavery" and "Cruel Slavery." Keeping in mind, he's responding to my quote of The Sound of Freedom film as well as in general. He then states if I would "stil be going to war to free them if they slaves were not mistreated."
IOW he supports slavery.
However he makes an important distinction.
Though having sex with your slaves in Christianity is strictly forbidden(this is not Islam lol) If you want to have sex with your slave you would have to marry her. So if I'm not saying Jefferson did it, but if he was with Sally then he did do something evil.
Having sex with your slaves in Christianity is strictly forbidden but points out its allowed in Islam (you know, the same Islam that he defends in the original Southport thread) and finally admits... Oh... if Jefferson did have sex with Sally, he did something evil. He makes this admission a couple pages and many F-Bombs later.
This comes up later in the Hamas Launches Offensive Against Southern Israel Thread where I make this ON TOPIC Post Below.
Oh yeah seeing those posts was hilarious.
Brown people literally have no agency. Everything has been decided for them by White Colonizers decades earlier.
Maybe we'll see an exodus of Queers going to Gaza to form a Volunteer battalion like they did with the Kurdish SDF in the Syrian Civil War?
It's so commonplace now the posts are violating Poe's Law.
Here's another sarcastic post!
Oh wait no that guy is actually serious. Nevermind...
King Arts responds that he likes the Palestinians for this, in jest of course...
So you trying to make me like the Palestinians are you? Well it's working at least they take their religion seriously unlike the Jews.
He likes the Muslims because they take their religion seriously unlike the Jews and likes them more if he sees them throwing Queers off of rooftops etc. Okay.
I respond thusly.
And hyperlink his comments from the Five Minutes of Hate News thread.
He responds:
Go fuck yourself I merely defended Thomas Jefferson, I did not say that such actions are supposed to be supported or be done.
I let it lie and then a few weeks later when King Arts is driving the thread off topic again as he always does. Here he is accusing Bacle of Supporting Genocide.
Hell I wouldn't be surprised if he would clap in support of Israel if they went Old Testament and killed all the men and took all the women and children as sex slaves.
I then stumble in...
Bro, you be going Old Testament in arguments all the time lol.
We dance around a bit...
Can I have a source? I have said I admired the old mosaic law. And SOME a parts of it should make a comeback. However I am an orthodox Christian I recognize that the law was for a specific people and for a specific time.
Last time I referenced your selective affinity for that old timey religion, earlier in this thread actually, you got offended and I don't want to do that to you again lol.
Ahh yes when you took what I said out of context. I said that I support criminalizing adultery in another thread. And said I admire the Muslims for doing it. That doesn’t mean I support war slaves.
I never took what you said out of context... but if you want to revisit it... I'm more then game.
Here he is asking if I support genocide.
We can do that as long as you answer a few questions since you are defending Bacle. I’m assuming you also strongly support Israel no matter what.
Would you still support Israel if they decided to put all Palestinians in camps and kill them?
I ignore his stupid genocide question that he always asks... and reference the Sally Hemings discussion from before.
Thanks, I don't need you to explain anything more. I know what 'We Can' means.
The reason I made
this comment was because I originally posted this:
Also Sally Hemings was between the ages of 14 to 16 during this intimate relationship which resulted in her first pregnancy as well. So if Jefferson wants people castrated for sodomy, I hope he has an even more stern punishment for pedophilia.
And it occurred in Paris before they returned to Monticello. So that's international child sex trafficking or something.
"God's Children Are Not For Sale" IMHO.
Oh that reminds me of a Norm MacDonald
joke about how the worst thing about Bill Cosby was the hypocrisy.
I ended with a bemusing quote that came directly from the popular Christian film
The Sound of Freedom which was extensively discussed on this board and whose main topic was quite literally CHILD SEX SLAVERY.
And then you responded...
*sigh* Husky are you going to just parrot brain dead liberal takes about "Muh evil founding fathers." Look up the age of consent laws in 1777, even if Jefferson did sleep with Sally at age 14 that is not pedophillia and was not illegal.
Also ironically that brain dead quote about God's children not being for sale? Umm sweetie have you read the Bible? It allows slavery. Now true American chattel slavery was different from Hebrew slavery in the old testament, but your objection is towards slavery itself not towards "cruel slavery" I mean if the slaves were not mistreated you would still be for going to war to free them right?
Though having sex with your slaves in Christianity is strictly forbidden(this is not Islam lol) If you want to have sex with your slave you would have to marry her. So if I'm not saying Jefferson did it, but if he was with Sally then he did do something evil.
So when I said this:
I figured, oh quotes from Christian anti-Child Sex Trafficking movies are "parroting brain dead liberal takes" and then you get into a
vigorous defense of the age of consent laws of 1777 and that even banging a 14 year old isn't illegal. Then you defended slavery as a Biblical allowance right after defending pedophilia as a symptom of the times.
So needless to say, I feel you gave off the wrong impression. I quote a Christian movie about child sex trafficking which you deride as brain dead and parroting liberal arguments and you get into a nice meaty and vigorous defense of pedophilia as being legal at the time, and that (child) slavery is allowed in the Bible as long as it's not "cruel" and so forth so I feel your post was poorly represented.
But then you replied with this...
Go fuck yourself I merely defended Thomas Jefferson, I did not say that such actions are supposed to be supported or be done.
I figured that's reasonable. I'm more then willing to let it lie though keeping in mind I didn't post anything out of context. I literally hyperlinked the post after all where you made that claim.
Then Mrtattoo, I can't spell his name,
rightfully corrected me in mischaracterizing your post. I said I was losing the pro-child sex slavery Christian demo.
He points out that having sex with your slaves in Christianity is forbidden in the very post I hyperlinked. So I would like to take a moment to apologize.
With that said, I wasn't wrong to make that impression. Just because I labeled the demo as pro-child sex slavery it doesn't imply that the Christian demo in question is engaging in sex with their child slaves, just that they're pro-child sex slavery. Actually engaging in sex with children isn't a requirement for approving of child sex slavery.
Also... while I have you here, I also think you might be a closet Queer. You called me Sweetie several times despite believing I was a God fearing Man at the time, which is pretty Gay. And since a topic of that thread was how Jefferson wanted to castrate Queers, well... insert some Bible quote about stone throwing here or something.
TLDR.
I feel I was only partially responsible for the misinterpretation of your stance in being a member of the "pro-child sex slavery Christian demo." but if I could go back in time and correct the record, I would've said, no I should've said "
pro-child slavery AND pro-child sex Christian demo is a tragic loss." So that's all...
And that your Gay.
I can’t find the exact quote quickly because everything was moved but do you deny that you said you would support Israel gridblock deleting Gaza block by block with everyone in it? I said I'd be fine with turning Gaza into a parking lot instead of invading, yes. I wouldn't be willing to risk...
www.the-sietch.com
Then he replies...
Wow that's a lot. So that's what you are talking about.
Anyway in that I was defending Jefferson from you trying to smear him as an abuser or a rapist or a pervert. You brought up a tagline from a movie about human trafficking an activity that is doubly a sin. It's wrong to take a free person and enslave them(outside of debt for a set time or criminal punishment) and it's also against the law.
Thomas Jefferson never enslaved free blacks. He owned slaves that he inherited and he might have bought some but that is not specifically prohibited biblically as long as it's not illegal.
The reason I accused you of parroting liberal takes is because you are equating ancient forced slavery to modern day human trafficking.
Apparently ancient forced slavery was pretty chill compared to modern day human trafficking. Because the ol' timey Hebrew Law said you shouldn't mistreat Slaves. And same with Christianity as well, you also can't fuck them... but if you do, it's not rape because it's not illegal and you have to "force yourself" because there is no "
Muh Power Imbalance" in Slavery. That's
liberal college bullcrap/
radical feminism. In fact it's
stupid bullshit like this... which is why the Left Wins.
Remember in the prior Episode how he stated that the
Abolition of Slavery was just being Woke and a reason why the British should be devastated and weakened by Muslim barbarians?
So lets keep going. There's a lot to pick from, but I think I'm going to go for something a little farther afield for the next scene.
In a lighthearted Versus Thread made by Scooby Doo, he
offers a scenario of who can help Paradise Island, a post-apocalypyic faction in a war against a worldwide government.
So you are Eren, ROB gives you the chance to pick one of the following Civs to help Eldia as an alternative to genocide. Scenario 1) NCR. (Fallout) The NCR will be donating the same amount of resources and personnel that they did to the Mojave campaign in the defense for Eldia but their...
www.the-sietch.com
Notably one of the options is pretty extreme, but also pretty strong.
Scenario 4) Machines (Matrix)
The Machines Capital connects to the capital of Paradise, the portal is permanent. The Machines see a new untapped source of fuel and offer to leave Eldia independent if you commit 150,000 humans to be harvested as a battery every year (Can be citizen or enemy) in exchange they will Guarantee a standing garrison of one million sentinels and only reinforcements to replenish the Garrison, the replenishments will arrive every following calendar year.
The portal is permanently open.
Okay, seems pretty chill so far. King Arts makes a suggestion.
Couldn’t you just use the people you defeated? As long as you don’t exterminate them all just go dark elder on them. Destroy their armies and industries then harvest.
I point out its morally distasteful as well as some other reasons its a poor idea.
Seems morally distasteful, plus the Machines aren't exactly neighbors I'd trust. They enslaved their own Humans. Who knows what they'll do if they get a foothold in this place. At least with some of the other factions, you have some leverage in the military power department. And more practical tech sharing. And if you F up in the War you won't have to sacrifice tens of thousands of your own people.
I mean yeah it's morally wrong. But so is trying to genocide someone. So why not make a deal with the machines. After all they enslaved the humans from their world because the humans wanted to wipe them out. So make a deal with the machines, then enslave the survivors of Marley and the other nations except fantasy Japan. Make them live in shitty lifestyle with no tech and just do occasionally harvests when they get to big to capture slaves to sell to the machines.
Croms Black Blade also seems hesitant on allying with a non-human intelligence who views humans as cattle to be farmed and also adds some other reasons.
I absolutely reject the machines offer. Non-human intelligences who few humans as cattle to be farmed? Worse by agreeing I'd have already proven to be treacherous and immoral meaning the machines have every reason to assume *I* can't be trusted.
Once again, Kings Arts disagrees by stating the other person is stupid and furthermore states that "other humans (not of his nation) are no different then aliens."
I’m sorry this is a stupid argument how are you treacherous? If you betrayed Eldia yes. Because you are Eldian. But enslaving the rest of humanity to the machines, or genociding them through the rumbling is not treason since you aren’t loyal to or a part of some pan human government or group. You care about Eldia, other humans are no different than aliens.
Crom's Black Blade Responds on the ethics of Enslaving and Genociding Humanity as well as stating that the Machines would have an even more negative view of Humanity additionally.
Because, as you say, you view the other humans as "no different than aliens". If you will enslave or genocide them why should the Machines think that you'll somehow consider them "human"? It was such thinking which prompted the Machine-Human war in the Matrix universe IIRC and you'd have convinced them all of the worst, negative traits of mankind. For a race which already views humanity as little more than a battery.
Wait until the robots crack open a history book and see the cyclical history that led up to Attack on Titan as they realize there's basically no difference from one group of Genocidal Humans to another except happenstance so why bother dealing with one special group of Humans?
In this agreement the Eldians literally have no power if the Robots decide... Ya know... Why not enslave all the Humans as batteries?
Maybe it's a one percent chance of them doing so. Maybe it's a one hundred percent chance of it happening. Any agreement with the Robots however has that implied threat lording over Humanity in near perpetuity.
The Robots have proven in fact that they are comfortable with enslaving all Humans on their World regardless of guilt, are willing to enslave all Humans on this world regardless of guilt but Don't worry guys, we'll be the exception because we're betraying the rest of our species to show how exceptionally trustworthy we are and this agreement will last!
King Arts derails this thread so he can talk morality and why genociding and enslaving 99% of Humanity is totally morally justified.
Second why do you say that thing again betraying my species! What betrayal? If this was about the covenant and humans would selling the covenant be betraying all life? No it’s ridiculous Eldians can live without the rest of humanity there is nothing to betray human species would still exist as eldians.
You can call wiping out 99% of Humanity on behalf of Robots whose wiped out and enslaved 99.9% of all the Humans they encountered not betraying species, it doesn't change the fact that Eldians are completely subject to the whims of Robots who again have wiped out 99.9% of all Humans they've ever encountered and your counter arguments are "I'm not betraying Humans!" and "What about Europe-US relations? There's a power imbalance there too!"
Nothing about... The potential ramifications of making a deal with Robots who've enslaved 99.9% of all the Humans they've ever encountered.
The robots wiped out and enslaved humans who wanted to wipe them out and also killed the humans who were allied to the robots. I haven’t watched second renaissance in a long time but that is how it went I think.Also the robots treated the humans extremely nicely the first few simulations were a paradise but humans wouldn’t believe it so they eventually settled for modern 21st century America hardly a dystopian vision like I have no mouth and I must scream. Maybe if I recommend that as the simulation for non eldians it will actually work.
So your dispute of me stating the Robots killed or enslaved 99.9% of all the Humans is that yes.... they killed or enslaved 99.9% of all the Humans regardless if allied or not?
Actually it was only the first simulation in which they "treated Humans" nice. The very next simulation was a Hellish simulation, which is part of the origin story of some of the more interesting programs out there apparently. Each of the simulation failures resulted in the loss of entire crops of Humans, according to the Robots.
Also since this is 19th century era Humans being enslaved, there's no reason to assume that settling for a modern 21st Century America simulation would work. So your suggestion would potentially result in the death of tens of thousands or millions of people, though we've already established you don't care because "my vague ethnicity."
I find it fascinating that you managed to turn this discussion into your agreement of the complicity of genocide backed by ethnocentrism when all I'm asking is about the very real power disparity and the folly of making a deal with Robots who've murdered or enslaved 99.9% of all of Humanity they've encountered and what guarantees you have of the Robots treating Eldians as the exception when they haven't anyone else in their entire history.
The issue isn't that the Non-Eldia are more closely related to the Eldia than the Machines. At least not directly. The core issue would be the same if the Eldia wanted use the Machines to to enslave and genocide Orcs. My entire point is that you are arbitrarily justifying the genocide and enslavement of sapient life *because* they don't count as human in your eyes. That, to quote you, everyone who isn't Eldia is "no different than aliens". A category which also happens to include the Machines. A race which shares your view that "non-human" life, in this case defined as Machine life, is essentially cattle.
So I ask again. Why should the Machines trust or even respect your personage under such circumstances. Why shouldn't they conclude you are treacherous, would turn on them the instant you had the power and therefore they're justified in wiping you out first? What part of the Machines history, culture or actions suggests they'd be far more generous and compassionate to you than you are towards everyone else?
As for my ideals, and their consistency, I have said nothing about defending yourself but we're not discussing that. The Machines don't care about the genocide other than, perhaps, the loss of batteries, and the harvesting has no connection to the war to protect Eldia. That's completely separate issue that must, either from non-Eldia or from the Eldia, be paid into perpetuity regardless to the actions of the non-Eldia. You have in fact previously expressed a desire to force the other nations to live "in shitty lifestyle with no tech and just do occasionally harvests when they get to big to capture slaves to sell to the machines". So you're not just planning on selling soldiers actively fighting against you. You are selling civilians, possibly women and children, whom you have deliberated lowered their standard of living and capability to make them an easier harvest.
That's very different from, say, using a firebombing campaign to break an opponent's will to fight where at least that is a means to an end, not the end itself.
Oh I’m sorry I should have put a period or comma. No they killed or enslaved 99 percent of the people who killed the human Allie’s of the machines. The robots did not wipe out their human Allie’s the other humans wiped out the machines human friends sorry it’s hard to type on the phone. But the humans who were enslaved were the ones who tried to genocide the robots and did kill any humans who were friends of the robots.
You had two arguments the moral argument that the robots can’t be trusted because they enslave humans and the second argument that they are so much more powerful than us that they could dictate any terms.
Ahh no you are misunderstanding me. I don’t see non Eldians as subhumans I acknowledge that they are humans and people just like Eldians or anyone else. I just want to kill or wipe them out for two reasons first self preservation and second to punish them for the oppression they did to Eldians. The machines have nothing to fear as long as they don’t try to wipe my people out or feed little girls of my race to dogs or things like that.
The only reason I consider putting non Eldians in that state is as punishment for their attacks on Eldia. Again this is not oh they are inferior to Eldians let’s reduce their standard of living. It’s they and their ancestors have hurt us the sins of the father pass on to the son. Basically the warhammer dwarf thought process.
King Arts also states his support of the Sins of the Father pass onto the Son.
At no point is your decision based around a threat or actions being undertaken by the Non-Eldia. You plan to carry this out long after the Non-Eldia are capable of threatening you even in the face of far better alliances that could achieve your, official, stance. That's before we consider your talk of being okay with the other 99% of humanity being harvested and the Eldia repopulating the Earth.
Simply put if you represent the Eldia thought process I certainly understand why everyone else wanted to kick them in the nuts.
Saying Non-Eldians deserve, for perpetuity, to be punished because of actions undertaken by some members of that group at one point in history is flawed thinking.
King Arts then says that due to a "Victims Blood Cries for Vengeance" you can punish someone for what their ancestors did a thousand years ago. Keep in mind, he's arguing that he's willing to genocide and enslave 99% of Humanity for... nebulous reasons.
Why is it flawed thinking Mr robot? It’s just vicarious justice it is a thing in some religions and some cultures historically used it. The idea is that the actual offender can’t make restitution themselves either they died before punishment was imposed, but the wrong doing did not go away the victims blood cries for vengeance so one who is sufficiently close to the offender can take their place. That’s why you can punish someone for something their ancestor did 1000 years ago. Though to be honest you have to stop at some point but the main issue is that the price for saving Eldia was giving humans to robots. Though why the robots want this I don’t know when they can just use solar power now that they are connected to a planet that is not suffering from nuclear winter.
Croms Black Blade summarizes King Arts interesting moral arguments below.
Unless you are willing to also sell Eldians into chattle slavery, by definition you view them as "inferior" in value.
No, you're call for genocide and enslavement of every person other than Eldia, and even then I suspect only those who agree with you, goes way beyond any sane definition of "self-preservation". It would be one thing if you only traded the soldiers of the attacking armies. It would still be morally questionable but at least that could be argued is in self-defense. If the enemy quits attacking you'd stop enslaving them.
What you are proposing is something else.
The fact you have not, at the moment, decided to genocide a particular group hardly disproves your earlier assertion that all none Eldia live inherently less valuable than Eldia life. Like i said you seemed pretty blase about the Machines wiping out 99% of all life on the planet just as long as Eldia got to repopulate it.
You seem to have a knack for conflicting separate concepts. An objection to genocide becomes, in your mind, an objection to self-preservation. An objection to turning an entire people to a chattel race becomes, to you, an objection to "a punishment". The issue is the cavaliere way you seem to treat all life outside of {your group}, that you justify slavery on some bullshit sins of the father's mentality.
I'm sure it did but I said it wasn't *required*. That you will continue doing this *forever* long past the point the races in question could possibly carry out a genocide of their own. Ergo the threat of genocide or self-preservation isn't the motivating issue and therefore is irrelevant to this discussion.
Your entire plan is to enslave the majority of the world's population just to feed your alliance with the Machines. Ie the only reason you are even entertaining the idea of not killing them to the last man, woman and child as a "punishment" is because it's more advantageous to keep them as a battery farm.
No one sane would trust you wouldn't find another excuse to wipe out any other "threats" once you were able. Especially not the Machines who have already lived through what human intolerance and inhumanity can wrought.
On the most basic level that line of thinking leads to endless cycles of violence to "punish" each other for past violence. On a grander level it destroys the individual and replaces him with a gestalt which goes against pretty much everything Western Civ or the Founders in particular strove for.
In response to a point by point rebuttal attacking principles that "If your enslaving and genociding everyone that isn't your own nation or ethnic group, you are by default stating they are inferior" and "enslaving 99% of Humanity is wrong" and "punishing endless cycles of violence" and "destroying the individual and replacing him with a gestalt" and "everything Western Civ or the Founders in particular strove for" King Arts responds...
"This is the Most Leftist View I've Ever Seen."
This is the most leftest view I've ever seen. Thinking that because you don't treat others equally you view some as inferior. No Eldians are not superior to non Eldians, but they will get better treatment because they are MY group. Tell me is Husky's child inferior to your child? No my child is not better than other people's kids yet I will still prioritize the well being of my child over any other kids.
It's not beyond the sane definition of self preservation. Attack on Titan shows us that the rest of the world WILL gang up and wipe out the Eldians, so the best thing to do is to wipe them all out first. Anyone that tries to stop this is a self hating cuck who has to be removed for all of our safety.
Also you say only soldiers should be sold. Why? Total war means everyone contributes the soldier would not be able to do what he does if the farmer did not feed him, and the factory worker did not make him weapons, the politician did not order him to do things. The women are also guilty as they will make more soldiers, the children are also a threat because they will grow up to become soldiers or support the soldiers. That is total war fighting with every ounce of your power.
Again though as we can see from the ending of attack on titan after the Eldians stopped those who started the rumbling 80% of humanity was wiped out yet that remaining 20% teamed up together and decided to genocide Eldia 100 years later. It really is us vs them.
No it is relavent because the whole reason I'm opening a portal to the machines is because Marley and the rest of the world is coming to genocide us, and this is given as an alternative to the rumbling which will send millions of giants to destroy the world and living things it would turn everything into a barren desert. If those nations did not plan to invade or genocide us then I would be against the rumbling and against opening a portal to the machines.
Well the endless cycles of violence will end if you wipe out everyone who would have a reason to want revenge.
Also what founders are you talking about why should I give a damn about some founders? They are either foreigners or they are King Fritz who started this shit in the first place.
Above King Arts states not only soldiers should be punished, but workers as well, and everyone contributes. The Politician. Even the Women who make more soldiers and the children because they will grow up to become soldiers or support soldiers.
Not at all. First it's merely a statement of fact and a fact does not have any political bias. A is A after all.
Second, the issue is not, as you allege, that you prioritize your group over another's. The issue is the dehumanization. That rather than treating Non-Eldia as individuals with equal right to live their life peacefully as the Eldia, you treat them as inferiors who can only exist at your whim. That turning them into vassal slaves is not objectionable or morally wrong because they are essentially aliens.
I am all for prioritizing the interests of one's own group over others. That's the entire backbone of America First after all, a government should reflect the interests and concerns of its people rather than, say, some global oligarchy. The issue is the particular interests you've chosen to prioritize and your either ignorance of their implication or your chilling indifference to them.
Third, my argument is rooted in uplifting the individual and inalienable rights. It is the very bedrock upon which any right of center argument could be forged. In contrast your argument is rooted in collectivism from singular Volk to guilt being tied to identity rather than actions which are all just warmed over flavors of Leftist thought.
Once again dehumanizing the "Other" into a single-minded, gestalt entity incapable of change. Condemning them for attempted genocide but applauding yourself for attempting the exact same thing.
Not exactly. I said selling the soldiers into slavery would have been at least one thing. For the record I'm strongly opposed to this entire proposal of yours but was attempting to play Devil's advocate.
As for why, I explained that quite well. The entire thing was that it was tied to them attacking you. They stop, you stop. While one could of course extend that into reprisals against their cities, as an analogue of strategic bombing, that's really splitting hairs on what I was saying. Namely that this slavery be tied to your actual self-preservation as opposed to a Final Solution to punish your enemies.
That's your excuse but if self-preservation was your primary concern you wouldn't condone harvesting people *after* they are no longer a threat. You wouldn't be inclined to cozy up with a race which has already wiped out humanity and turned it into a cattle race.
What you want is power to punish your enemies. That's the only thing that sounds genuine is when you're talking about punishing others. Your claims that you just want to genocide 98% of your planet's population but then you'll live in harmony in contrast sounds cartoonishly silly.
1.) Yes, it was. Your entire plan was to enslave the Non-Eldia to sell to the Machines. To essentially farm them.
2.) In addition to proving you are untrust worthy you now want to try and weasel out of paying what you're owed to the Machines. All in order to destroy what the Machines value. Which will likely make them rethink this alliance, assuming they ever intended to honor it in the first place.
Once again Croms Black Blade re-emphasizes his points denouncing slavery, dehumanization, genocide, collectivism, endless cycles of reprisal and the Final Solution King Arts is supporting and supporting uplifting individualism and inalienable rights and so forth.
King Arts responds...
"No you are arguing for leftism."
No you are arguing for leftism. Individualism is a hallmark of liberalism. Before the 17th century most western nations 100% embraced collectivism you were part of your religion, tribe, village, or city for the rich Mediterranean Republics.
I also am not treating them as inferiors. I don't think Marley is inferior to Eldia except for the fact we can be Titans and they can't but that does not make one superior.
I'm not enslaving them because they are inferior but because they are a threat to me and mine. Again I don't think other people's children are inferior to my own, but I sure as hell would be willing to sacrafice others for my own. And if you aren't you are kinda a terrible parent.
I'm not dehumanizing them. They are humans who want to genocide my people. And don't blame me Attack on Titan is a world where racist ideology is true.
But a final solution is self defense in attack on titan. Like if Eren did not stop at 80% but went on to kill everyone outside of Paradis then 100 years later a modern bomber would not have destroyed it. I would post more evidence but you did not respond to Mr. Gross and the dogs eating a girl.
Well I'd like you to be accurate it's not 99 it's 98.
Huh... to be fair, he only supports genocide and enslavement of 98% of Humanity in this scenario, I'm sure it's not reflective of his actual belief systems.
Then there's the absolutely random spicy comments he had on Anglo-German people.
The problem is that slave and other ethnic groups were able to use corruption to weaken the Soviet Union. The Anglo and Germanic races are natural slave races and they always obey whoever is the legitimate authority.
In
his appeal, he stated he wasn't advocating for slavery. Apparently it was only construed he was advocating for Stalinism in the Context of the thread... a known Conservative ideology.
Then there's this, where he was just engaging in a spat with another poster... Bacle again.
Shut up you racist piece of shit. People so stupid like you deserve to have the liberals come and groom your family members. Because you are the one who gave them power, safety, and support. Well now your hero Trump got convicted by them,. Good going genius.
Do you feel like a hero because "you fought Russia and China!"
Tell me do you like Joe Biden's cock? I mean since that geriatric seems to be fucking you up the ass so hard you should be able to taste it.
Well at least he said Liberals, and not Muslims.
Anyways... I could probably look for more but whatever. Hope that's enough material to prove my assertions of "supporting slavery for nebulous reasons" like I originally argued. There's more out there but... the formatting is getting kinda boring.
en.wikipedia.org
uk.news.yahoo.com
memory-alpha.fandom.com
www.thesun.co.uk
www.vice.com
www.theguardian.com
twitter.com
Maybe he was being ironic? Maybe I'm engaging in a non-sequitur or other fallacy? 