Dystopian Europe

[Shipmaster Sane]

Honestly, sounds like self-loathing to me.

Yes it's easy to confuse responsibility with self loathing.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Yes it's easy to confuse responsibility with self-loathing.

I have to accept that anything I haven't died over so far, I've accepted.

Same as everyone else, Moral Weakness. I'm just conscious of my role in supporting the system I disdain.

You may want to clarify because you seem to be indicating here, that because you're still alive and haven't died in the name of fighting the system, you're morallly weak...unless you mean something else when you say "Moral weakness" What you're essentially saying is you're a bad person for still breathing. That's not accepting responsibility, that's being suicidal.

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

You may want to clarify because you seem to be indicating here, that because you're still alive and haven't died in the name of fighting the system, you're morallly weak...unless you mean something else when you say "Moral weakness" What you're essentially saying is you're a bad person for still breathing. That's not accepting responsibility, that's being suicidal.

You're conflating terms of relative scale with binaries.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

You're conflating terms of relative scale with binaries.

*sigh* we're going to be at this all night at this rate. Have a good day.

 

[Terthna]

And here you are again, blaming God for the evils mankind commits.

And you still have not even attempted to explain away how those who were, who could, who had clear opportunities, refused to stop these evils when they did not have the massive costs that stopping them involved later.

Europe is ultimately dystopian because of the decisions the Europeans themselves have made.

Ultimately, they did nothing to stop it because they failed to recognize the evil for what it was; partly because they were duped, but also because most weren't capable of comprehending it's full scope.

 

[LordsFire]

Ultimately, they did nothing to stop it because they failed to recognize the evil for what it was; partly because they were duped, but also because most weren't capable of comprehending it's full scope.

One does not need to be even above-average to develop the discernment to know a political bad actor when they see them.

In 1930's Germany, it wasn't even subtle. The fascists were blaming 'the jews' for things which clearly were not their fault, pandering to people's egos by calling them the 'superior race,' etc, etc.

A teenager who makes a decent effort to learn some wisdom would be able to smell the BS.


Similarly in the modern day, every city and state the Democrats run rapidly starts to decline, becomes corrupt, inefficient, overly-controlling, etc. They break almost every campaign promise they make, the few they keep are all destructive, etc, etc.

Let's use abortion as an example. Up until at least the 90's, the catchphrase Democrats used was 'safe, legal, and rare.' Abortion was not remotely rare; something like a million abortions every year, and they relentlessly pushed for abortion on-demand, for any reason, up to and even past the moment of birth. They repeatedly funneled government money to Planned Parenthood in spite of how morally execrable it was, and repeatedly pushed to cover up PP violating all kinds of laws about things like not selling baby parts.

Again, any amount of willingness to look into what was actually going on would show the falsehood over time, but people willingly allowed themselves to be deceived, because it suited what they wanted.


There are some fringe cases that you can argue are hard to discern truth on, I am sure, but by and large political evil is not subtle, it does not take advanced study or understanding to see it for what it is, just a refusal to accept convenient lies.

 

[King Krávoka]

Only paranoid martyr complexes are going to pass this shit-test, Sane.

Yes, that's always, exactly, what moral fiber looks like from the perspective of people that have accepted evil into their world.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

One does not need to be even above-average to develop the discernment to know a political bad actor when they see them.

In 1930's Germany, it wasn't even subtle. The fascists were blaming 'the jews' for things which clearly were not their fault, pandering to people's egos by calling them the 'superior race,' etc, etc.

A teenager who makes a decent effort to learn some wisdom would be able to smell the BS.


Similarly in the modern day, every city and state the Democrats run rapidly starts to decline, becomes corrupt, inefficient, overly-controlling, etc. They break almost every campaign promise they make, the few they keep are all destructive, etc, etc.

Let's use abortion as an example. Up until at least the 90's, the catchphrase Democrats used was 'safe, legal, and rare.' Abortion was not remotely rare; something like a million abortions every year, and they relentlessly pushed for abortion on-demand, for any reason, up to and even past the moment of birth. They repeatedly funneled government money to Planned Parenthood in spite of how morally execrable it was, and repeatedly pushed to cover up PP violating all kinds of laws about things like not selling baby parts.

Again, any amount of willingness to look into what was actually going on would show the falsehood over time, but people willingly allowed themselves to be deceived, because it suited what they wanted.


There are some fringe cases that you can argue are hard to discern truth on, I am sure, but by and large political evil is not subtle, it does not take advanced study or understanding to see it for what it is, just a refusal to accept convenient lies.

so how do us sane people break away from the crazies? Especialy when the crazies are moving everywhere?

 

[LordsFire]

so how do us sane people break away from the crazies? Especialy when the crazies are moving everywhere?

There is no perfect solution to this. It's the nature of living in a fallen world.

An at least decent strategy for right now, is to move to/concentrate in states and cities that are more conservative.

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

so how do us sane people break away from the crazies? Especialy when the crazies are moving everywhere?

In no particular order

1. Physically isolate yourself from them to whatever degree is possible, i.e. move to whatever area is accessible to you that most concentrates your beliefs
2. Acquire land when possible
3. Stockpile weapons and combat equipment to the extent such a thing is legal in your country
4. Stockpile imperishable foodstuffs
5. Teach yourself as many practical physical skills as possible
6. Network relentlessly with other conservatives. Make friends with local conservatives even if you have to misrepresent your beliefs. Join church groups, join political groups that hold actual meetings with actual people.


The stronger you are, and the more of you there are, the less likely anyone is to attack you for any reason.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

In no particular order

1. Physically isolate yourself from them to whatever degree is possible, i.e. move to whatever area is accessible to you that most concentrates your beliefs
2. Acquire land when possible
3. Stockpile weapons and combat equipment to the extent such a thing is legal in your country
4. Stockpile imperishable foodstuffs
5. Teach yourself as many practical physical skills as possible
6. Network relentlessly with other conservatives. Make friends with local conservatives even if you have to misrepresent your beliefs. Join church groups, join political groups that hold actual meetings with actual people.


The stronger you are, and the more of you there are, the less likely anyone is to attack you for any reason.

thanks.

 

[Morphic Tide]

Yes, everyone who thinks like that is free to continue to writhe in the muck pretending it's not their fault, screaming as they drown themselves ignoring every opportunity to avoid their fate.

And the people dragged into the muck by them, who actively objected to the band's formation? We've rather conclusively proven the Bystander Effect, as well as mob mentalities, and a number of other vital-to-society-working factors of human nature that greatly counter-indicate the reasonableness of the behavior being called for here.

"A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, 'You are mad; you are not like us."

So you're saying it's perfectly reasonable for somebody to look at the state of 1935 Germany, where things were on drastic upswing, with no access to the exceptionally odious affairs of the party, and decide to go to work organizing a sweeping conspiracy to initiate a civil war as was by then necessary to unseat the Nazi party?

And here you are again, blaming God for the evils mankind commits.

He stepped in for Sodom and Gomorrah. He stepped in for the Egyptian captivity. He stepped in for Babalon's hubris. He stepped in for the assorted horrors of the Antedeluvian period. According to the Bible, He has repeatedly stepped in to stop the evils men commit upon eachother when it reaches scales vastly lesser than the madness of modernity.

And you still have not even attempted to explain away how those who were, who could, who had clear opportunities, refused to stop these evils when they did not have the massive costs that stopping them involved later.

Propaganda, censorship, and social leverage are very real things things. Morale is a thing. Every single step of the way, the people getting up to this bullshit exploited human nature to make the people with relevant choices as few and in their pocket as possible, while denying information that would give reason to oppose them to the public and not hesitating to plug leaks lethally.

"Free Will" is not a good excuse when you have systematic disinformation making reasonable execution of it produce garbage outcomes.

Those are the stages where it would have been easy and low-cost to stop the building evil. As they repeatedly failed to do so, the price became higher and higher.

And in 1935 most Germans had very good reason to think the Nazis were the solution to the evils that had been building during the Weimar Republic, owing to a drastic reduction in Communist agitators, massive economic recovery, and the eradication of child prostitution. Hitler did not come into power for no reason, the Nazis had plenty of successes going into the 1933 election.

In 1930's Germany, it wasn't even subtle. The fascists were blaming 'the jews' for things which clearly were not their fault, pandering to people's egos by calling them the 'superior race,' etc, etc.

Insert "kicked out of 103 countries" rants, and probably half the shit the Kaisserreich put in WW1 propaganda. Nothing new, nothing that had gone catastrophically wrong like this in the past, little that wasn't routine in other European countries. In the former case it has been a qualifier to be a Good Christian over things like the friction over usury taboos.

Again, any amount of willingness to look into what was actually going on would show the falsehood over time, but people willingly allowed themselves to be deceived, because it suited what they wanted.

Comparing what's being done today to what was being done five years ago is demonstrably a rarity. Almost everything you say is "well then there should have been Saints there", increasingly moreso as studies of human nature advance.

Yes, that's always, exactly, what moral fiber looks like from the perspective of people that have accepted evil into their world.

Tearing down 1935 Germany over the rather routine and consistently publicly supported across centuries of history malfeasance is, in fact, quite unreasonable. I'll take accepting "evil" in a heartbeat when the alternative is tearing your own country apart over what has nearly always been niche theological minutia in practice for how comprehensively the lay-parishioner has not given a fuck.

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

And the people dragged into the muck by them, who actively objected

Oh you objected?
Oh, well that's different. Thank goodness, you Objected. That's doing your best after all. Couldn't have done any more than that, after all, no one ever has.

We've rather conclusively proven the Bystander Effect, as well as mob mentalities, and a number of other vital-to-society-working factors of human nature that greatly counter-indicate the reasonableness of the behavior being called for here.

The fact that weakness and cowardice have a pattern does not actually absolve anyone of anything, nor does renaming that pattern something more clinical.

Yes there are bystanders.
Yes there is low morale.
Yes it's a testable psychological phenomenon.
Yes they get what they deserve.

 

[Morphic Tide]

Oh you objected?
Oh, well that's different. Thank goodness, you Objected. That's doing your best after all. Couldn't have done any more than that, after all, no one ever has.

Do you expect organized violence as the basic standard? One good man trying to fistfight them is just another person getting their legs sawn off. Fifty good men doing so one by one is much the same. Ten good men getting together might take out one or two, but are hardly going to stop it.

The fact that weakness and cowardice have a pattern does not actually absolve anyone of anything, nor does renaming that pattern something more clinical.

Immense improbability and demand for numerous incredibly unusual men for reasons actually independent of moral character does strongly indicate that your expectation is irrational due to being at odds with how people actually work. There's too many for one or even a thousand to stop the Nazis by the time of the election, and the Nazis very much went through a crucible of violence before that. Which doubtlessly made forgotten martyrs of many good men, some of them clueless members of the party itself.

Yes there are bystanders.
Yes there is low morale.
Yes it's a testable psychological phenomenon.
Yes they get what they deserve.

...So you're saying that the millions of dead Poles deserve it for not launching a pre-emptive attack on Germany? Can you even identify a point in time that had the remotest expectation of working? I can understand the French being blamed for appeasement and even Belgium for not keeping up its end of the deal, but what the fuck were the Poles supposed to do?

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

Do you expect organized violence as the basic standard?

Only among those who claim to have done their best. If you want to accept cruelty and evil, don't pretend it wasn't a choice you made.

One good man trying to fistfight them is just another person getting their legs sawn off.

And he can now claim to be blameless in his own subjugation, unless he gave up opportunities in the past to arm himself or organize (he did, unless he's been locked in an oubliette).

Immense improbability and demand for numerous incredibly unusual men for reasons actually independent of moral character does strongly indicate that your expectation is irrational due to being at odds with how people actually work.

I'm not interested in the Morality of the Lowest Common Denominator. Morality is not Democratic. If 1% of a population are failures, or 99% are, it doesn't change the definition of Failure.

Which doubtlessly made forgotten martyrs of many good men, some of them clueless members of the party itself.

And definitionally they aren't subject to the state they rejected. They died. If it is right that you should die, it is hateful that you should live.

what the fuck were the Poles supposed to do?

You either fight something or you accept it, definitionally. I never said they had to win.

 

[LordsFire]

Immense improbability and demand for numerous incredibly unusual men for reasons actually independent of moral character does strongly indicate that your expectation is irrational due to being at odds with how people actually work. There's too many for one or even a thousand to stop the Nazis by the time of the election, and the Nazis very much went through a crucible of violence before that. Which doubtlessly made forgotten martyrs of many good men, some of them clueless members of the party itself.

So your argument is basically "It's too hard to resist evil, so people don't have any responsibility to do so"?

 

[Captain X]

You guys are getting kinda off topic.

 

[LordsFire]

You guys are getting kinda off topic.

Not really.

Theological, philosophical, and moral failure of society is what brings dystopia.

 

[Captain X]

Nah, that's just an excuse to turn yet another thread into a religious discussion thread. Y'all have plenty of those already, so I'd appreciate it if this didn't get turned into yet another one.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

So your argument is basically "It's too hard to resist evil, so people don't have any responsibility to do so"?

I think what he's saying is that it's incredibly easy for people to preach martyrdom and viva la revolution from behind the safety of a shelter but untill the people shouting it lead by example all it is going to do is lead to a handful of corpses with no results

That leaves behind the families to fend for themselves and others to suffer the consequences.there is another half of that sentence "they don't have to win.... being a corpse is good enough.

I'll jump off by saying that there is also the issue that a revolution more often than not brings about longer lasting evil than it stops we are still feeling the effects of both the French and Red revolution to this very day.

Here is my question: not fighting openly phisically fighting against evil=accepting it= moral weakness. Does that mean Christ himself was a morally weak man? He was falsely accused for a crime he did not commit yet even unto death on the cross he did not lay s finger on any of his accusers nor did he even protest. When he could have easily split his cross in two and summoned 10,000 angels to vanquish all of the evil powers and brought about the ultimate revolution he instead surrendered Himself and prayed "forgive them for they know not what they do." And many Christians even to this day try to follow that example to the letter. Is Christ and his followers morally weak?