Jump to content

Ireland


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Tommy Callahan said:

 

The left supports dudes that start stabbing kids?  That's how this works now?

 

Btw.  If that heroic teacher, then unarmed civilians didn't stop him.  What would have stopped him from stabbing more?  

 

 

 

He would have felt constrained by societal norms?

 

That's what I keep hearing from the (clueless) Biden Administration about just about everything

 

The Pacification of America has spread to Europe (or, more likely, they've adopted the same view)

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, OrangeBills said:

 

He would have felt constrained by societal norms?

 

That's what I keep hearing from the (clueless) Biden Administration about just about everything

 

The Pacification of America has spread to Europe (or, more likely, they've adopted the same view)

Didn't Biden go over to Ireland a little while back and fell asleep there too?  Biden botches another promoting this bull####.  Has blood on his hands all over the planet due to his incompetence.  What a mess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we're taking away freedoms for the common good!

 

Well in that case.......no need to explain anything else..

 

:lol:

 

We're now at the stage where commies tell you out in the open that they're gonna commie things up.

 

Useful idiots still nod along, blissfully unaware that they too will soon be eaten by their comrades in power.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

But we're taking away freedoms for the common good!

 

Well in that case.......no need to explain anything else..

 

:lol:

 

We're now at the stage where commies tell you out in the open that they're gonna commie things up.

 

Useful idiots still nod along, blissfully unaware that they too will soon be eaten by their comrades in power.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So she is referencing the terrorist that just started stabbing kids as not being for the common good?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

"Restricting freedom for the common good." What a radical notion. Radical when Thomas Hobbes thought of it in 1651, that is. Hobbes would be quite surprised to find that he is now a Marxist, at least according to some of the usual suspects right here.

 

Taking away freedoms so government can lie is not a new concept. It has been done for at least several hundred years, and the same dolts keep supporting it. I think you thought this post was clever but it shows either a complete ignorance of history or complete ignorance of what Ireland is proposing. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Orlando Tim said:

Taking away freedoms so government can lie is not a new concept. It has been done for at least several hundred years, and the same dolts keep supporting it. I think you thought this post was clever but it shows either a complete ignorance of history or complete ignorance of what Ireland is proposing. 

There is nothing here about "lying." In fact, our commenters were shocked (shocked!) by the very concept of restricting freedoms for the common good. I'm just pointing out that that is the core of the idea of government. The devil is in the details of course - which freedoms, and in what way, and for what sense of the common good? Hobbes in the 17th century thought you needed an absolute monarch to restrict freedoms and impose order. Needless to say, he was not in favor of a dictatorship of the proletariat; he was no Marxist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

There is nothing here about "lying." In fact, our commenters were shocked (shocked!) by the very concept of restricting freedoms for the common good. I'm just pointing out that that is the core of the idea of government. The devil is in the details of course - which freedoms, and in what way, and for what sense of the common good? Hobbes in the 17th century thought you needed an absolute monarch to restrict freedoms and impose order. Needless to say, he was not in favor of a dictatorship of the proletariat; he was no Marxist.

Are you trying to be clever or are you simply unaware of the Nazi and Communist destruction of any other messaging? Your history lesson is bizarre and completely off point, what Hobbes believed is unrelated to this topic except for in the most vague sense. Irelands government is trying to arrest people for nothing more than being pissed off over children being stabbed, what would Hobbes think of the government? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2023 at 9:19 PM, Irv said:

Didn't Biden go over to Ireland a little while back and fell asleep there too?  Biden botches another promoting this bull####.  Has blood on his hands all over the planet due to his incompetence.  What a mess. 

 

It's not "Biden" 

 

He's merely a symptom.

 

Unfortunately, as predicted by historians (because it happens throughout history), civilizations eventually become soft, forget what "got them there", then succumb to a Leftist slide into self-destruction (that is categorized miscorrectly as being conquered but that's not right).

 

Biden is a symptom.  The American and Global Left are the problem.  Unequivocally.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Orlando Tim said:

or are you simply unaware of the Nazi and Communist destruction of any other messaging

I don't even know what this means. People here seemed all hot and bothered about the general notion that governments restrict freedoms in service of the common good. I pointed out that that's what having a government is all about. It's the opposite of anarchy. You want to make it a crime for drag shows to allow teenagers to attend, even if it's with their parents express permission.

In other words, you want to restrict the liberty of people to do what they damn well please in service of your idea of the common good.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I don't even know what this means. People here seemed all hot and bothered about the general notion that governments restrict freedoms in service of the common good. I pointed out that that's what having a government is all about. It's the opposite of anarchy. You want to make it a crime for drag shows to allow teenagers to attend, even if it's with their parents express permission.

In other words, you want to restrict the liberty of people to do what they damn well please in service of your idea of the common good.

 

 

 

Perhaps if you showed me one of these comments in this thread you are arguing against I might understand your point. Every comment in this thread I have read is pointing out how the laws about to be pushed for the "common good' are for the good of government, not common good. As for your comments right here, bashing me for getting upset about sexualizing children is not quite the win you think it is, in fact it makes you seem very creepy.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I don't even know what this means. People here seemed all hot and bothered about the general notion that governments restrict freedoms in service of the common good. I pointed out that that's what having a government is all about. It's the opposite of anarchy. You want to make it a crime for drag shows to allow teenagers to attend, even if it's with their parents express permission.

In other words, you want to restrict the liberty of people to do what they damn well please in service of your idea of the common good.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes, you don't need to get dragged into the details.

 

The American Left is a destructionary device.  It's as simple as that.  Not build, destroy.

 

You don't understand that becuase you subscribe to this or that little pedantic issue that fills your mind/day, and aren't able to conjure a realistic picture, but that's what's happening and what's further planned.  

 

Stop worrying about the little stuff.  There should be LESS government, in most all instances 

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, OrangeBills said:

There should be LESS government, in most all instances 

Except in those instances where you think there should be more.

11 hours ago, Orlando Tim said:

As for your comments right here, bashing me for getting upset about sexualizing children is not quite the win you think it is

In other words: there should be more government restrictions on freedom when it fits your idea of the common good.

 

Stop. I won this argument.

  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

People here seemed all hot and bothered about the general notion that governments restrict freedoms in service of the common good. I pointed out that that's what having a government is all about.

 

 

 

 

Indeed.

 

Modern conservatives have this erroneous notion that the general idea of liberty plus the Constitution can hold a nation together until the sun dies. The fact is that liberty can only exist in the context of shared vision of the common good. This concept was noted repeatedly by the founders. The less common the vision of "good" is, the less liberty your society (and therefore your government) may tolerate before it ceases to be functional.

 

In other words, you may pick two of the following: a free society, a functional society, a society in which two or more sizable factions have divergent and incompatible visions of "good."

Edited by LeviF
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

IRELAND GOES FASCIST

 

An Irish author has just won the Booker prize:

 

Irish author Paul Lynch won the Booker Prize on Sunday. His novel, Prophet Song, imagines an Ireland that has fallen under Right-wing totalitarian control, and begins with members of the new secret police rapping on the door of a union leader to interrogate him for “sowing discord and unrest” against the government.

 

The reality, of course, is precisely the opposite:

 

The irony is that this is the exact opposite of what is happening in Ireland right now. The government in Dublin is indeed introducing extraordinary new legislation to restrict freedom of speech. But it’s not horrid Right-wingers conspiring to suppress nice, decent liberals. It’s nice, decent liberals scrambling to stamp out the opinions of what they call the “far-Right”. And far from being alarmed by this assault on basic freedoms, the broad swathe of progressive opinion in Ireland is fully behind it, including most voices in the broadcast and print media, and every major party.

 

So the entire elite class, then. Urgency to pass the anti-free speech bill increased after a Muslim immigrant stabbed three children in Dublin, and fed-up working-class Irishmen rioted.

 

 

More at the link:  https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/11/ireland-goes-fascist.php

 

 

.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

IRELAND GOES FASCIST

 

An Irish author has just won the Booker prize:

 

Irish author Paul Lynch won the Booker Prize on Sunday. His novel, Prophet Song, imagines an Ireland that has fallen under Right-wing totalitarian control, and begins with members of the new secret police rapping on the door of a union leader to interrogate him for “sowing discord and unrest” against the government.

 

The reality, of course, is precisely the opposite:

 

The irony is that this is the exact opposite of what is happening in Ireland right now. The government in Dublin is indeed introducing extraordinary new legislation to restrict freedom of speech. But it’s not horrid Right-wingers conspiring to suppress nice, decent liberals. It’s nice, decent liberals scrambling to stamp out the opinions of what they call the “far-Right”. And far from being alarmed by this assault on basic freedoms, the broad swathe of progressive opinion in Ireland is fully behind it, including most voices in the broadcast and print media, and every major party.

 

So the entire elite class, then. Urgency to pass the anti-free speech bill increased after a Muslim immigrant stabbed three children in Dublin, and fed-up working-class Irishmen rioted.

 

 

More at the link:  https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/11/ireland-goes-fascist.php

 

 

.

Its not hate speech these governments are concerned about addressing because the target of citizen anger is directed at the government.  Officials want to define hate speech as any expression of criticism of their actions and policies along with calls for them to be held accountable. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Except in those instances where you think there should be more.

In other words: there should be more government restrictions on freedom when it fits your idea of the common good.

 

Stop. I won this argument.

You truly think children being sexualized is not an issue that government should be involved in? You are creepy and pathetic. Also believing government is too involved in general is not the same thing as stating that it does not  have an obligation to protect children. I will explain it to like you are a 5 year old: once someone is legally an adult if they want to do just about anything, so long as it does not directly impede someone else's right to live free, they should be allowed, but children need to be limited in what they can see and participate in. You seriously are the first person who argued that my being upset about 8 year old being sexualized makes me the problem. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Orlando Tim said:

You truly think children being sexualized is not an issue that government should be involved in? You are creepy and pathetic. Also believing government is too involved in general is not the same thing as stating that it does not  have an obligation to protect children. I will explain it to like you are a 5 year old: once someone is legally an adult if they want to do just about anything, so long as it does not directly impede someone else's right to live free, they should be allowed, but children need to be limited in what they can see and participate in. You seriously are the first person who argued that my being upset about 8 year old being sexualized makes me the problem. 

You sound like that Moms For Liberty menage a trois lady. 
https://flcga.org/florida-gop-chair-christian-ziegler-husband-of-a-moms-for-liberty-cofounder-accused-of-battery-by-alleged-menage-a-trois-lover/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

You linked to the wrong article, the one you posted stated in the 6 weeks since the allegation were initially made that none of the allegation have been substantiated. But back to your original comments, what other reasons besides "common good" do you think laws have been passed? 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

This shouldn't be all that surprising. A lot of the Irish have identified with the Palestinian people as sharing a similar plight. While I don't agree, I also don't think this is comparable to what's being discussed in this thread relative to immigration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.

– George Orwell

 

The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible.

– George Orwell

1984. Appendix.

 

Global society rests ultimately on the belief that Big Brother is omnipotent and that the Party is infallible. But since in reality Big Brother is not omnipotent and the party is not infallible, there is need for an unwearying, moment-to-moment flexibility in the treatment of facts. The keyword here is BLACKWHITE. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to BELIEVE that black is white, and more, to KNOW that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary.

– George Orwell

 


 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...