Liberal Forum

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 11:14 am » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 11:14 am

It was monarchy vs. the spirit of liberty cloaked in republicanism taken from the recent American revolution but the point is the revolutionaries sat on the left side of the chamber, the monarchists on the right, and that split became the artificial left/right division for the future with all the propaganda and superficiality you mention.

A trace of instinctive awareness emerged.

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 11:14 am » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 11:14 am

It was monarchy vs. the spirit of liberty cloaked in republicanism taken from the recent American revolution but the point is the revolutionaries sat on the left side of the chamber, the monarchists on the right, and that split became the artificial left/right division for the future with all the propaganda and superficiality you mention.

Notice that this term you used....'spirit of liberty' is just a vague and meaningless platitude. 

What it really was is nationalism. The sovereignty of a people rather than dedication to religion. That is also a critical aspect of fascism.

'diversity is our strength' is religion. It is no less religious than christianity. 

Fascism doesn't care what you 'believe'.. it seeks to benefit a people. E.g. the French, in the French revolution. 

And no the French are not black, nor Algerian, nor jews. 

That is a coherent and concrete priority. Rather than meaningless fluff like 'spirit of liberty'.

FOS » 08 Dec 2022, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 11:25 am

Notice that this term you used....'spirit of liberty' is just a vague and meaningless platitude. 

What it really was is nationalism. The sovereignty of a people rather than dedication to religion. That is also a critical aspect of fascism.

'diversity is our strength' is religion. It is no less religious than christianity. 

Fascism doesn't care what you 'believe'.. it seeks to benefit a people. E.g. the French, in the French revolution. 

And no the French are not black, nor Algerian, nor jews. 

That is a coherent and concrete priority. Rather than meaningless fluff like 'spirit of liberty'.

wow, all context is a platitude because intellect is a induced platitude of energy only lasting while a natural brain is processing a body's ability to be individually mobile when mutually evolving now as eternally separated in series parallel displaced when occupying space specifically located in the atmosphere here. Geological DNA, geometrical numbers, geographically residing, socially perform the social identity you do here. Same as I am. Everyone else does.

FOS » 08 Dec 2022, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 11:25 am

Notice that this term you used....'spirit of liberty' is just a vague and meaningless platitude. 

What it really was is nationalism. The sovereignty of a people rather than dedication to religion. That is also a critical aspect of fascism.

'diversity is our strength' is religion. It is no less religious than christianity. 

Fascism doesn't care what you 'believe'.. it seeks to benefit a people. E.g. the French, in the French revolution. 

And no the French are not black, nor Algerian, nor jews. 

That is a coherent and concrete priority. Rather than meaningless fluff like 'spirit of liberty'.

It may be a platitude now. Then it had concrete meaning. Fat cats suspected of being its antagonist “lost their heads over it”.

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 1:52 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 1:52 pm

It may be a platitude now. Then it had concrete meaning. Fat cats suspected of being its antagonist “lost their heads over it”.

Their concrete meaning was nationalism. That is concrete. 

We have obfuscated that fact with platitudes like liberty because nationalism is a dirty word now. 

Because nationalism was supposed to be defeated with the fascists.

It wasnt. 
 
 You must have a very hard time understanding why the very same people who revolted against monarchy were willing to embrace and be loyal to napoleon...and make him a 'fat cat'.

lol well it is easy to understand if you note that napoleon was a nationalist, willing to lead the French in their destiny of building a great French empire. 

Or how do you explain it, young grasshopper? Were the French really just mengsovik communists who forgot that napoleon was a dictator?
 
 
 

FOS » 08 Dec 2022, 1:54 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 1:54 pm

Their concrete meaning was nationalism. That is concrete. 

We have obfuscated that fact with platitudes like liberty because nationalism is a dirty word now. 

Because nationalism was supposed to be defeated with the fascists.

It wasnt. 
 
 You must have a very hard time understanding why the very same people who revoled against monarchy were willing to embrace and be loyal to napoleon...and make him a 'fat cat'.

lol well it is easy to understand if you note that napoleon was a nationalist, willing to lead the French in their destiny of building a great French empire. 

Or how do you explain it, young grasshopper? Were the French really just mengsovik communists who forgot that napoleon was a dictator?

Nope. It was freedom from the tyranny of a monarch. French nationalism already was in the bank. Again though, the point is the brainless legacy of the two sided, left/right political split we live with, derived from how people arranged themselves in a chamber.
 
i think I understand the sidetrack with Napoleon. The Revolution got back on the main track for a while in 1848. Revolutions often yield unintended results, of course. Russia in 1917 for one, Cuba in 195...8 was it?, getting Castro but not the Castro they bargained for. p.s. I doubt I’m as much of a grasshopper as you imagine,

 
 

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 3:03 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 3:03 pm

Nope. It was freedom from the tyranny of a monarch. French nationalism already was in the bank. Again though, the point is the brainless legacy of the two sided, left/right political split we live with, derived from how people arranged themselves in a chamber.
 
i think I understand the sidetrack with Napoleon. The Revolution got back on the main track for a while in 1848. Revolutions often yield unintended results, of course. Russia in 1917 for one, Cuba in 195...8 was it?, getting Castro but not the Castro they bargained for. p.s. I doubt I’m as much of a grasshopper as you imagine,

monarchy was fundamentally a religious institution. 

Their revolt was against the first estate. That was both royalty and priests. 

Napoleon is exactly the sort of ruler they wanted. He was a general of the scientific revolution, and was good buddies with the quasi atheist Laplace. 

A man cannot serve 2 masters. Nationalism and religion are therefore natural adversaries. 

FOS » 08 Dec 2022, 7:14 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 7:14 pm

monarchy was fundamentally a religious institution. 

Their revolt was against the first estate. That was both royalty and priests. 

Napoleon is exactly the sort of ruler they wanted. He was a general of the scientific revolution, and was good buddies with the quasi atheist Laplace. 

A man cannot serve 2 masters. Nationalism and religion are therefore natural adversaries.

Well, nationalism and religion went hand in hand from the time of the ancient world into the modern world. They were constant bonds except when things occasionally went awry, as happened in the Roman Empire after Constantine made Christianity the official religion. In the main, however, religion was the foundation of a monarchy, as you suggested before calling them adversaries. I’m not familiar with with what happened with the church in France when Napoleon was venturing into power years later. I believe the Revolution before then was driven by other causes, however. The economy failed, people couldn’t buy food, the monarchy was deemed incapable of governing.


.


 

FOS » 08 Dec 2022, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 11:25 am

Notice that this term you used....'spirit of liberty' is just a vague and meaningless platitude. 

What it really was is nationalism. The sovereignty of a people rather than dedication to religion. That is also a critical aspect of fascism.

'diversity is our strength' is religion. It is no less religious than christianity. 

Fascism doesn't care what you 'believe'.. it seeks to benefit a people. E.g. the French, in the French revolution. 

And no the French are not black, nor Algerian, nor jews. 

That is a coherent and concrete priority. Rather than meaningless fluff like 'spirit of liberty'.

He's also gay.
 
Sorry - he exhibits the spirit of dick suck.

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 9:47 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 9:47 pm

Well, nationalism and religion went hand in hand from the time of the ancient world into the modern world. They were constant bonds except when things occasionally went awry, as happened in the Roman Empire after Constantine made Christianity the official religion. In the main, however, religion was the foundation of a monarchy, as you suggested before calling them adversaries. I’m not familiar with with what happened with the church in France when Napoleon was venturing into power years later. I believe the Revolution before then was driven by other causes, however. The economy failed, people couldn’t buy food, the monarchy was deemed incapable of governing.

.

Nappi went to Spain and took a big ****, pissing off the roman poop, for whom nappi had not much regard. 

I believe the fraunch revolution can be deemed generally secularist - and nationalist. You can google "gallicanism" for a deep dive.

The Swiss are secular nationalists. So are the jappos. 

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 3:03 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 3:03 pm

Nope. It was freedom from the tyranny of a monarch. French nationalism already was in the bank. Again though, the point is the brainless legacy of the two sided, left/right political split we live with, derived from how people arranged themselves in a chamber.
 

No.

How they arranged themselves in the chamber derived from the split. You have it precisely backwards, apropos to your retardation.
 

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 3:03 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 3:03 pm

Nope. It was freedom from the tyranny of a monarch.

That's just stewpid.

Monarchs are constrained by parliaments. Napoleon was an actual tyrant - not that being a tyrant is necessarily a "bad" thing.

Hell, arguably, even Hitler, noted animal rights activist and savior of Germany from its Plague of Jews, was a tyrant. Even though he was generally unsympathetic to jews, Hitler "the tyrant" actually gave them their very own ghettoes. King Louis was no Hitler, in terms of looking out for the ordinary man- but I wouldn't call him a tyrant. 

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 9:47 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 9:47 pm

Well, nationalism and religion went hand in hand from the time of the ancient world into the modern world. They were constant bonds except when things occasionally went awry, as happened in the Roman Empire after Constantine made Christianity the official religion. In the main, however, religion was the foundation of a monarchy, as you suggested before calling them adversaries. I’m not familiar with with what happened with the church in France when Napoleon was venturing into power years later. I believe the Revolution before then was driven by other causes, however. The economy failed, people couldn’t buy food, the monarchy was deemed incapable of governing.

.

i do not agree at all. religion and nationalism were always at odds. And they still are.


in fact this has been ESPECIALLY true ever since charles darwin.

Cannonpointer » 08 Dec 2022, 10:28 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 10:28 pm

No.

How they arranged themselves in the chamber derived from the split. You have it precisely backwards, apropos to your retardation.

You must not realize the complete stupidity of that.

FOS » 08 Dec 2022, 7:14 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 7:14 pm

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 3:03 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 3:03 pm

Nope. It was freedom from the tyranny of a monarch. French nationalism already was in the bank. Again though, the point is the brainless legacy of the two sided, left/right political split we live with, derived from how people arranged themselves in a chamber.
 
i think I understand the sidetrack with Napoleon. The Revolution got back on the main track for a while in 1848. Revolutions often yield unintended results, of course. Russia in 1917 for one, Cuba in 195...8 was it?, getting Castro but not the Castro they bargained for. p.s. I doubt I’m as much of a grasshopper as you imagine,

monarchy was fundamentally a religious institution. 

Their revolt was against the first estate. That was both royalty and priests. 

Napoleon is exactly the sort of ruler they wanted. He was a general of the scientific revolution, and was good buddies with the quasi atheist Laplace. 

A man cannot serve 2 masters. Nationalism and religion are therefore natural adversaries. 

jack » 08 Dec 2022, 9:47 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 9:47 pm

FOS » 08 Dec 2022, 7:14 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 7:14 pm

monarchy was fundamentally a religious institution. 

Their revolt was against the first estate. That was both royalty and priests. 

Napoleon is exactly the sort of ruler they wanted. He was a general of the scientific revolution, and was good buddies with the quasi atheist Laplace. 

A man cannot serve 2 masters. Nationalism and religion are therefore natural adversaries.

Well, nationalism and religion went hand in hand from the time of the ancient world into the modern world. They were constant bonds except when things occasionally went awry, as happened in the Roman Empire after Constantine made Christianity the official religion. In the main, however, religion was the foundation of a monarchy, as you suggested before calling them adversaries. I’m not familiar with with what happened with the church in France when Napoleon was venturing into power years later. I believe the Revolution before then was driven by other causes, however. The economy failed, people couldn’t buy food, the monarchy was deemed incapable of governing.


.


 

Political state of mind is nationalism rationalizing conquest of space(Geography to be governed by symbolism over substance).
Religion is treating intellect as a supernatural entity to control time logistically figuratively suggesting eternity is anywhere else but the moment here perpetually balancing outcomes of incoming reproductions replacing 4 previous generation gaps alive already lived, devil in the details of laws ordering compliance to social narratives now cannot be eternity because everyone believes it isn't possible.

God, Country, Community theaters of doubt keeping last generation loyal to previous 4 generations gaps. The simplicity of compounding denial. It is as simple to solve as this https://i.postimg.cc/pd378s5m/pic.png.

Nobody pays attention to what isn't in there already, the integer 0. 23 circles all single digit integers some used several times, couple used once, one not at all. the one never used is 0 the 10th space as 1-9 are the pearly gates of Eternal Hell socially induced into societal evolution where few humans create delusional realities life exceeds only evolving when occupying the moment here conceived to decomposed cycle of reproduction present. Changing ancestral form from arrived great great grandchild to those became 1 of 16 dead great great grandparents. the rest just became extinct at death.

Cannonpointer » 08 Dec 2022, 10:38 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 10:38 pm

That's just stewpid.

Monarchs are constrained by parliaments. Napoleon was an actual tyrant - not that being a tyrant is necessarily a "bad" thing.

Hell, arguably, even Hitler, noted animal rights activist and savior of Germany from its Plague of Jews, was a tyrant. Even though he was generally unsympathetic to jews, Hitler "the tyrant" actually gave them their very own ghettoes. King Louis was no Hitler, in terms of looking out for the ordinary man- but I wouldn't call him a tyrant.

 A guy who calls himself Cannonpointer and 98% macho man and accuses guys he knows nothing about of being gay, gets a *** comment of some kind in every other thing he posts, is probably a repressed *** himself. Unless he's making fun of himself. He doesn't seem like an intentional clown though - it’s unintentional, so will let that one go.  In your case, you have enough dumbness along with *** to say, "monarchs are constrained by parliaments" in reference to 1792 France. Not a good package, pal.

 
 

jack » 09 Dec 2022, 6:24 am » wrote: ↑

09 Dec 2022, 6:24 am

 A guy who calls himself Cannonpointer and 98% macho man and accuses guys he knows nothing about of being gay, gets a *** comment of some kind in every other thing he posts, is probably a repressed *** himself. Unless he's making fun of himself. He doesn't seem like an intentional clown though - it’s unintentional, so will let that one go.  In your case, you have enough dumbness along with *** to say, "monarchs are constrained by parliaments" in reference to 1792 France. Not a good package, pal.

 
 

When accused of role playing a social typecast caricature defined by rule of law, just explain kinetic evolving in real time. Don't get drawn into the debate about space time reality is more significant than adapting to the moment living is a spontaneously alive experience as a reproduction added to replace current 4 generation gaps already cycled as specific reproductions populating the atmosphere now.

Self evident evolving to specific reproductive cycles geographically present. Covers the entire food chain, no exceptions.
Now defend your reality by ignoring me or typecasting me as subhuman.

Nostradamus'omh » 09 Dec 2022, 7:57 am » wrote: ↑

09 Dec 2022, 7:57 am

When accused of role playing a social typecast caricature defined by rule of law, just explain kinetic evolving in real time. Don't get drawn into the debate about space time reality is more significant than adapting to the moment living is a spontaneously alive experience as a reproduction added to replace current 4 generation gaps already cycled as specific reproductions populating the atmosphere now.

Self evident evolving to specific reproductive cycles geographically present. Covers the entire food chain, no exceptions.
Now defend your reality by ignoring me or typecasting me as subhuman.

Don't typecast or ignore you as "subhuman". When I don't respond it's because I have no idea what your point is.

jack » 09 Dec 2022, 8:03 am » wrote: ↑

09 Dec 2022, 8:03 am

Don't typecast or ignore you as "subhuman". When I don't respond it's because I have no idea what your point is.

now you go for literal interpretations of vernacular tribalism. There is no magic in making believe now isn't eternity, just mayhem, madness, misery demanding all 5 generations ignore it is or else.

Cannonpointer » 08 Dec 2022, 1:43 am » wrote: ↑

08 Dec 2022, 1:43 am

Do you have any thoughts on Franco?

What a stupid **** question.  FUZ has opinions on everything.