• Crusader Kings III Available Now!

    The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.


    Real Strategy Requires Cunning
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread is more than 5 months old.

It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose. If you feel it is necessary to make a new reply, you can still do so though.

thekonkoe

Captain
15 Badges
Aug 8, 2007
464
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
The Zeal caricatured Lenin and Schlieffen. Lest the Marxist-Leninists forget, Lenin is not the republic. Criticizing a leader and criticizing policy do not weaken the republic, they are part of the discourse that defines the republic, they strengthen it.
 

Tssha

First Lieutenant
130 Badges
Aug 4, 2009
201
1
  • March of the Eagles
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Starvoid
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Deus Vult
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
Independents

We must preserve our republic. Anarchists, please work with us. I have never been prouder to call you brothers than I am now (and that includes when I voted for them).
 

unmerged(140907)

Lord of the Small Things
7 Badges
May 1, 2009
310
0
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Pillars of Eternity
What they should have done is made themselves aware of the facts before overreacting. Instead, without thinking about whether their assumptions might be wrong, they deployed the army of the republic against their own comrades and brothers in arms. The fact remains that the death of two men is appalling, but it was hardly indicative of having enough forces to capture Brussels, let alone march to Cologne and attempt a coup. It was an overreaction and points to the paranoia of Lenin. He sees conspiracies everywhere, every criticism in the press is not just a comradely disagreement, to him it is treason.

Hmm I acknowledge you have a point there, gathering more information would have been wise. But that's more an issue of hindsight then anything. With the very real threat of civil war looming if quick action was taken can you blame the government for not acting quickly? The real people to blame here are the police officers who gave such a sketchy and exaggerated description of the events going on (YOU COULD EVEN SAY THEY WERE GUILTY OF SENSATIONALIZING THE INCIDENT *WINK* *WINK*). And further this was not Lenin's paranoia. The report clearly states it was the belief of the entire government. That at the very least includes all of the Politburo.

Are you perhaps not aware of the definition of the word "scathing"? It may have used the odd rhetorical flourish, but I can assure you it was an entirely rational criticism of the government's geopolitical strategy. They did not call for violence. They did not call for Lenin's overthrow. They criticised one policy of Lenin's. In resopnse our budding Kaiser threw a temper tantrum and sent his goons masquerading as guards to shut down one more paper which does not slavishly flatter him at every turn.

Comrade. Are you not aware of the definition of attack? You can lather on any rhetorical flourish you want, it is never "rational criticism" to attack a government. Its policy yes, the people itself. No. Once again you seek to damage Lenin's image through sensationalism. "Budding Kaiser", "Temper Tantrum", "Goons", "Slavishly Flatter". Can we not discuss this rationally? Do we instead need to place childish insults and name-calling in the forum of the most enlightened nation on Earth? I can respect your criticism of his actions on the press. He deserves it. But please, do it in a respectable manner that's why I started this debate in the first place. Own up to your sides mistakes as you point out those of your opposition.
 

unmerged(140907)

Lord of the Small Things
7 Badges
May 1, 2009
310
0
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Pillars of Eternity
The Zeal caricatured Lenin and Schlieffen. Lest the Marxist-Leninists forget, Lenin is not the republic. Criticizing a leader and criticizing policy do not weaken the republic, they are part of the discourse that defines the republic, they strengthen it.

There are two types of criticism comrade. Constructive and Destructive. Constructive works to better the situation and the person. Destructive works to hurt the person and usually ends up making the situation worst. You tell me where caricature falls in this categorization comrade. You explain to me how slashing a political figures reputation "strengthen"s the Republic.
 

Tssha

First Lieutenant
130 Badges
Aug 4, 2009
201
1
  • March of the Eagles
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Starvoid
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Deus Vult
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
I am loyal to the chairman. I am not loyal to Lenin.

There is a difference between the position and the man who currently occupies it.

It is the citizen's right to call any citizen anything he likes. Criticizm of the people in power is the most valid form of dissent. In reacting to the policies of Lenin and calling them autocratic, we must by definition call Lenin an autocrat.

These are not nice words. They are, in fact, not very nice words at all. They are, however, an opinion. If the Chairman doesn't have a thick enough skin to withstand them, he does not deserve the position.

I may be against certain opinions, I may even discourage people from expressing them, at my best ask them to moderate their words...but I would never remove anyone's right to express them. To do so is to trod on a fundamental human right, and I dare not do that. In fact, I need not do that, not even for the sake of stability. Such comments invariably even out and moderate themselves.

If we are unkind to the Chairman, it is not the business of the state to lash out at us. In fact, the state must remain neutral! There is a difference between the position and the man occupying the position, just as there is a difference between the man in power and the state.


I will say more on this later. Stay tuned Comrades.
 

Communard

Captain
94 Badges
Jan 31, 2009
486
255
  • Surviving Mars
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
Hmm I acknowledge you have a point there, gathering more information would have been wise. But that's more an issue of hindsight then anything. With the very real threat of civil war looming if quick action was taken can you blame the government for not acting quickly? The real people to blame here are the police officers who gave such a sketchy and exaggerated description of the events going on (YOU COULD EVEN SAY THEY WERE GUILTY OF SENSATIONALIZING THE INCIDENT *WINK* *WINK*). And further this was not Lenin's paranoia. The report clearly states it was the belief of the entire government. That at the very least includes all of the Politburo.
Well, I believe the government was rash and I do not want a government that acts rashly. You would agree, no? I doubt the entire government agrees on anything, but the underlying issue is that Lenin and his colleagues did not check their facts before ordering troops to fire on the citizens of the republic. For that alone he cannot be forgiven.

Comrade. Are you not aware of the definition of attack? You can lather on any rhetorical flourish you want, it is never "rational criticism" to attack a government. Its policy yes, the people itself. No. Once again you seek to damage Lenin's image through sensationalism. "Budding Kaiser", "Temper Tantrum", "Goons", "Slavishly Flatter". Can we not discuss this rationally? Do we instead need to place childish insults and name-calling in the forum of the most enlightened nation on Earth? I can respect your criticism of his actions on the press. He deserves it. But please, do it in a respectable manner that's why I started this debate in the first place. Own up to your sides mistakes as you point out those of your opposition.

Attacking a government simply means "I disagree with the Leninist government" dressed up in rhetoric. It is not some abominable crime. I am currently attacking the Marxist-Leninists. Because I disagree with them. As should be my right. My side? I am a Marxist who believes in democratic liberty. I am no Anarchist, I find their economic policies horribly reactionary. If anything I am on the left of the Marxists. But I agree with their right to say whatever they damn well please. I apologise if my rhetoric may seem harsh, but I believe Lenin represents the greatest threat to the revolution since Blanqui, and so you can see why my statements may get somewhat emotionally charged. Some situations call for strong words.
 
Last edited:

thekonkoe

Captain
15 Badges
Aug 8, 2007
464
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
So long as the slashing is targeted at legitimate complaints it spreads legitimate information and opinion. If the Zeal does not state that it thinks Lenin and Schlieffen are acting tyrannically, how will the public know that such opinions exist? What type of constructive criticism do you offer to a person you believe is overextending his mandate, attempting to consolidate power in his person, and going against the revolution? Do you simply ask him to stop? What good does that do, if you believe he already ignores the public when it goes against his desires? Does it not make more sense to attack his support for the next election while elevating that of the party you support? Is this not constructive criticism, it grows support for the anarchists and moderates against Lenin? Such a distinction is entirely a matter of perspective, this is why the press must be free.
 

unmerged(140907)

Lord of the Small Things
7 Badges
May 1, 2009
310
0
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Pillars of Eternity
Well, I believe the government was rash and I do not want a government that acts rashly. You would agree, no? I doubt the entire government agrees on anything, but the underlying issue is that Lenin and his colleagues did not check their facts before ordering troops to fire on the citizens of the republic. For that alone he cannot be forgiven.

Yes I think we can agree on that haha. Rash action is usually ill-advised, but with the threats at hand I think the government may have been justified in sending in troops. Really the situation should have been reported better initially. That's your opinion regarding forgiveness and I'll respect that.

Attacking a government simply means "I disagree with the Leninist government" dressed up in rhetoric. It is not some abominable crime. I am currently attacking the Marxist-Leninists. Because I disagree with them. As should be my right. My side? I am a Marxist who believes in democratic liberty. I am no Anarchist, I find their economic policies horribly reactionary. But I agree with their right to say whatever they damn well please. I apologise if my rhetoric may seem harsh, but I believe Lenin represents the greatest threat to the revolution since Blanqui, and so you can see why my statements may get somewhat emotionally charged. Some situations call for strong words.

No my good friend you are confused in your definition I'm sorry to say. Let me give you an explanation. You express an opinion that Lenin desires to be King.

A. I disagree with you an state Lenin has shown no evidence he wants to be king.
or B. I attack you, I say you are a counterrevolutionary scumbag who doesn't deserve to live in this Republic.

Notice in situation A I present rational reasons that you should reconsider your opinion, I contribute to the betterment of the situation by working towards mutual understanding. Notice in situation B I don't do this, I instead hurt you (or atleast try to) and try to extract some petty satisfaction from my actions, there is no progress towards mutual understanding instead we likely stop being friends. This is exactly what occurred in the earlier newspaper debacles. Did that caricature present a reason Lenin should reconsider his action in Africa? No. It only sought to hurt him and antagonize the situation. Should this kind of discourse be encouraged or even allowed? Should I be able to call my neighbor every word in the book because he disagrees with I policy I favor?

I shouldn't have said side I apologize. Rather we should be able to own up to all mistakes that occur whether they be our own, those of our allies, those of our enemies, or anyone in general.

@Tssha: I disagree with you, but you said you'd say more later so I'll wait :)
 

Viden

Kurt's Best AAR Reader
88 Badges
Jun 25, 2006
8.698
53
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Iron Cross
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Cities in Motion
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
I am not bitter, Comrade, I am angry. A great number of my friends and comrades died to create this republic, died for the ideals and freedoms on which it stands. And I will not stand for their memory to be tarnished, for the liberties to be destroyed, for this republic of the workers to become a tyranny, simply because the tyrant carries a red banner and sings the Internationale. He has shown his true colours.

No, Lenin isn't a tyrant.

No my good friend you are confused in your definition I'm sorry to say. Let me give you an explanation. You express an opinion that Lenin desires to be King.

A. I disagree with you an state Lenin has shown no evidence he wants to be king.
or B. I attack you, I say you are a counterrevolutionary scumbag who doesn't deserve to live in this Republic.

Notice in situation A I present rational reasons that you should reconsider your opinion, I contribute to the betterment of the situation by working towards mutual understanding. Notice in situation B I don't do this, I instead hurt you (or atleast try to) and try to extract some petty satisfaction from my actions, there is no progress towards mutual understanding instead we likely stop being friends. This is exactly what occurred in the earlier newspaper debacles. Did that caricature present a reason Lenin should reconsider his action in Africa? No. It only sought to hurt him and antagonize the situation. Should this kind of discourse be encouraged or even allowed? Should I be able to call my neighbor every word in the book because he disagrees with I policy I favor?

+1. I can only agree with you, comrade!
 

unmerged(140907)

Lord of the Small Things
7 Badges
May 1, 2009
310
0
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Pillars of Eternity
So long as the slashing is targeted at legitimate complaints it spreads legitimate information and opinion. If the Zeal does not state that it thinks Lenin and Schlieffen are acting tyrannically, how will the public know that such opinions exist? What type of constructive criticism do you offer to a person you believe is overextending his mandate, attempting to consolidate power in his person, and going against the revolution? Do you simply ask him to stop? What good does that do, if you believe he already ignores the public when it goes against his desires? Does it not make more sense to attack his support for the next election while elevating that of the party you support? Is this not constructive criticism, it grows support for the anarchists and moderates against Lenin? Such a distinction is entirely a matter of perspective, this is why the press must be free.

A politician expresses that he is a communist and the he would like to see a Union Socialist Soviet States in the U.S. A woman disagrees with this and has a "legitimate complaint". That evening she goes home and posts an image of said politician eating babies. How does this spread "legitimate information"?

Lenin consolidates power by circumventing the will of the Politburo to get a law passed. I don't agree with this. I publish an article listing the ways Lenin has failed his duties as Chairman by upsetting the system as set by our constitution (We have a constitution I assume). I constructively contribute to the situation. I give the people rational reasons to not support Lenin in the next election. Lenin and his supporters are free to respond in kind.

Here lets touch closer to base eh? Lenin establishes a project to bring Socialism to Africa. I don't agree with this. I could draw a picture of Lenin as a Pharaoh, but I choose the path that might actually help the situation and post rational arguments as to why Africa isn't ready for the project and that our resources could be better spent elsewhere.

WOW, that was hard.

You do attack his support, but you do it with FACTS not simple fearmongering.
 

weissbrot

Corporal
78 Badges
Aug 9, 2009
27
0
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Pirates of Black Cove
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler: Cold War
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Ancient Space
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pride of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Prison Architect
  • 500k Club
  • War of the Roses
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Victoria 2
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
After the Militarists huge success I will, of course, vote for them again.

The most important issue at this time, at least for me, is to stop the ongoing infighting. How about we find some nice little island where we let all Anarchists create their little stateless commune. They would even get the same limitless support all our other communist friends in other states receive. That would leave us a chance to concentrate on the important things and, well... I'd be surprised if the anarchist tribes would survive more then five years without setting their whole island aflame about who the better anarchist is.

Only united can we bring communist peace and order to the world!
 

thekonkoe

Captain
15 Badges
Aug 8, 2007
464
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
A political cartoon is a form of art. The Zeal could write an article noting the parallels between Lenin and autocrats and imperialists in Africa, or more elegantly and concisely they can portray him as a Pharaoh in a cartoon. They have no obligation to offer an alternative, they are not a party like the anarchists, just a paper. I would even go so far as to say that much of the substance of their arguments may have been contained in the cartoon or accompanying articles. Much more to the point, what of the Leninist press. The two people that threw a bomb at the police station were terrorists. Can you prove that statement? Can you prove they had a political intent? This is supposition, likely interpreted in part by the aftermath.

More than anything though, why must the press appeal solely to our rational minds? It is a form of expression as much as other media, and should be a legitimate forum to express opinions. If all we desired was facts, there would be no need for multiple papers, after all FACTS are facts are they not? The entire press exists because we choose to dress and report facts differently. In fact the cartoon, is meaningless without its context. The reader must be aware of the facts to understand it. The must be aware of the facts that Lenin is the chairman, that he is advocating and pursuing the colonization of Africa, they must be aware that he has been a forceful leader that has taken some bold steps in his authority. Without this, a caricature of him as a pharaoh is just that, an odd depiction of some guy.

On Africa, there are a multitude of reasons that people may object to it: Africa is not ready, it gets us needlessly tangled with other great powers in a realm of little interest otherwise, it stinks of imperialism, it diverts funds from projects in the homeland, it does not benefit the homeland in the present or foreseeable future, ... Not all people against the policy would agree with all these reasons, if you seek to raise support against the policy, it is better to appeal to peoples emotional objections and remain hazy on reasons, so as to cast the widest net and not alienate anyone.
 

unmerged(140907)

Lord of the Small Things
7 Badges
May 1, 2009
310
0
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Pillars of Eternity
We broke it Tommy. All for you :D.

EDIT:
A political cartoon is a form of art. The Zeal could write an article noting the parallels between Lenin and autocrats and imperialists in Africa, or more elegantly and concisely they can portray him as a Pharaoh in a cartoon. They have no obligation to offer an alternative, they are not a party like the anarchists, just a paper. I would even go so far as to say that much of the substance of their arguments may have been contained in the cartoon or accompanying articles. Much more to the point, what of the Leninist press. The two people that threw a bomb at the police station were terrorists. Can you prove that statement? Can you prove they had a political intent? This is supposition, likely interpreted in part by the aftermath.

More than anything though, why must the press appeal solely to our rational minds? It is a form of expression as much as other media, and should be a legitimate forum to express opinions. If all we desired was facts, there would be no need for multiple papers, after all FACTS are facts are they not? The entire press exists because we choose to dress and report facts differently. In fact the cartoon, is meaningless without its context. The reader must be aware of the facts to understand it. The must be aware of the facts that Lenin is the chairman, that he is advocating and pursuing the colonization of Africa, they must be aware that he has been a forceful leader that has taken some bold steps in his authority. Without this, a caricature of him as a pharaoh is just that, an odd depiction of some guy.



You are missing the point. It doesn't matter if it's a picture or an article. If all its going to scream is "LENIN IS A VILLAINOUS DICTATOR WHO ENSLAVES PEOPLE" what does it contribute to rational discussion? It brings no facts to its claim, its good for nothing but stirring up a confrontation.

Uhh can I prove they were terrorists? " Extremist elements of the mob firebombed a police building and murdered two soldiers." Lets see... that clearly says they were associated with the rally and they were using fear to advance their own agenda. Sounds like terrorists to me. Get your own "supposition" straight before you try to question mine.

"Why must the press appeal solely to our rational minds" What? Because its their job maybe? You know to report FACT so that we can take rational action based on said FACT. You can't say the press and some other media like painting or music are the same. Art is focused on creating a response. That should not be the focus of the press. Its focus should be to report fact not butcher it to elicit the response they want.

"Why multiple papers?" Because a Marxist paper isn't going to report the platform of the Anarchists or all their initiatives to help them win the election. Further, say the Anarchists publish their platform. A Marxist paper would then go on to point out the facts of how one policy or another might not work, the Anarchists obviously aren't going to do this themselves. A paper is simply a voice that talks to many people, it speaks on what it wants to. Should any one person spread lies about another person without proper proof? No. So why should a paper be allowed to do so?

On Africa, there are a multitude of reasons that people may object to it: Africa is not ready, it gets us needlessly tangled with other great powers in a realm of little interest otherwise, it stinks of imperialism, it diverts funds from projects in the homeland, it does not benefit the homeland in the present or foreseeable future, ... Not all people against the policy would agree with all these reasons, if you seek to raise support against the policy, it is better to appeal to peoples emotional objections and remain hazy on reasons, so as to cast the widest net and not alienate anyone.

"It is better to appeal to peoples emotional objections and remain hazy on reasons" WOW let me see. How many historical tragedies do you think I could cite on this belief? Hmm lets see. Invasion of Poland, Holocaust, Spanish-American War, Mexican-American War, Invasion of Iraq, etc etc. I mean really now?

EDIT #2: Do you know why people resort to emotions and remain hazy on reasons? Its because they know they can't give a valid reason for their policy. If all your reasons are great, solid, and convincing why the heck would you need to resort to emotion?
 
Last edited:

thekonkoe

Captain
15 Badges
Aug 8, 2007
464
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
"It is better to appeal to peoples emotional objections and remain hazy on reasons" WOW let me see. How many historical tragedies do you think I could cite on this belief? Hmm lets see. Invasion of Poland, Holocaust, Spanish-American War, Mexican-American War, Invasion of Iraq, etc etc. I mean really now?

Precisely my point, the people who sold these ideas thought they were operating the interest of those they led. They successfully used emotion to more easily sell an idea that would be more contentious and difficult to sell otherwise. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the vast majority of people have beliefs based primarily on emotional considerations rather than rational ones.
 

unmerged(140907)

Lord of the Small Things
7 Badges
May 1, 2009
310
0
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Pillars of Eternity
Precisely my point, the people who sold these ideas thought they were operating the interest of those they led. They successfully used emotion to more easily sell an idea that would be more contentious and difficult to sell otherwise. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the vast majority of people have beliefs based primarily on emotional considerations rather than rational ones.

Ok, so let me get this straight. Having cited the NUMEROUS instances where the greatest acts of EVIL ever committed by humanity were undertaken following this belief. You still intend to advocate for it?

"The vast majority of people have beliefs based primarily on emotional considerations rather than rational ones." *Looks around for Utopian society where putting beliefs on emotional consideration has led people to enlightenment.* There's a reason we started this Revolution.
 

thekonkoe

Captain
15 Badges
Aug 8, 2007
464
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
What about all the good decisions we've made, weren't they made the same way: Humanitarian Aid, most defensive wars, the emancipation of slaves. From the perspective of proponents, these have alternative motivations that are more rational as do those above. Also, in choosing your examples, I do believe you are resorting to emotionally charged ones.

EDIT: To clarify, the last sentence is meant to draw attention to the fact that while you dislike the press saying that Lenin is an autocrat, you make the claim that the above acts are unquestionably evil. I would say both assertions have grounds to be considered.
 

Rav3nous_waffle

Major
50 Badges
Jan 15, 2008
570
0
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Prison Architect
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Victoria 2
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Imperator: Rome
Marxist-Leninist
 

unmerged(140907)

Lord of the Small Things
7 Badges
May 1, 2009
310
0
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Pillars of Eternity
What about all the good decisions we've made, weren't they made the same way: Humanitarian Aid, most defensive wars, the emancipation of slaves. From the perspective of proponents, these have alternative motivations that are more rational as do those above. Also, in choosing your examples, I do believe you are resorting to emotionally charged ones.

EDIT: To clarify, the last sentence is meant to draw attention to the fact that while you dislike the press saying that Lenin is an autocrat, you make the claim that the above acts are unquestionably evil. I would say both assertions have grounds to be considered.

I can respect that comrade. Good decisions have been made in moments of emotional charge. Heck, I'll even admit there have been times where emotionally charged events were the only way the rational thing was done. But still you have to acknowledge the facts of reality. When it all pans out has throwing away reasons for doing things and instead trusting in emotion gotten humanity where it is today? Does the good outweigh the bad? [Aside: Since you seemed to question which moral code we're basing these actions relative to(When you said "From the perspective of proponents, these have alternative motivations ...) I'd like to clarify I'm basing morality around the ideals of this Revolution (Equality, Fraternity, God-given Rights, etc.).]

In response to your edit, I don't like the press saying Lenin is an autocrat because they have little to no fact to back up these claims, instead they publish slurs they know are false in the hopes of starting a confrontation. Morality is a tricky issue. You can only say something is good or evil relative to a certain moral code (If I follow moral code A it might be perfectly fine to kill someone but horribly evil if I follow moral code B). The majority of us follow similar morality codes concerning the events I listed before and there are entire volumes devoted to information on said events so I have the fact to back up my claim that they are evil.

In hindsight, using the word "evil" wasn't very smart for the reasons I already gave concerning moral relativism. You can take evil to liberally mean that it hurt the betterment of the human race.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.