Conquer Club

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:51 pm**

I once heard this said by some Islamic dude. At first I thought it was empty rhetoric, but now 5 years later I can see his point. You see, there are many aspects of democracy that encourage "hell on Earth" for the average man... allow me to explain:

1. Democracies have a tendency to focus on the present and never on the future. What politician cares if toxic waste is poured into a river, if the effects aren't immediately noticable? They only care about what gets them votes and what gets them votes is what happens in the present... so that is why politicians only focus on short term benefits for the people like bread and circus, never do they pay heed to looming environmental catastrophe, unsustainable economies, and other such ills that effect the future populance but never the present.

2. Democracy encourages people to lie, betray their principals and to generally be weak men. This is because in order to succeed as a politician, one must do all of these things. If a politician never compromises his principals or morality he will never make it far, and so our society is never run by honest men but instead spineless curs.

3. Democracy is mob rule. If the mob wants to kill all Christians like in Iraq post 9/11 war, then they will strip Christians of their legal protection and proceed to kill them. This is why population of Christians in Iraq has shrunk from 7,000,000 to only 3,000,000 in the past 10-12 years. Similarly all other minorities in Iraq have decreased. Things are not so drastic in first world democracies simply because they live luxurious lives and can't be bothered to kill their neighbhours - but trust me that the moment the good times end they will be at each others throats creating a bloodbath as their demoncracy bendds to the will of the mob.

4. Democracy encourages people to manipulate each other. Look at all the protest groups trying to manipulate the populace into supporting their self-serving ends, or Obama trying to influence the decision of courts. Simply put - manipulating others through show and/or lies is wrong, but that is what democracy is all about.

So have I convinced you yet the democracy is the devil (figuratively speaking)? why or why not.

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:53 pm**

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:58 pm**

Not enough options.

Democracy is poos, but every other option you proposed is much worse.

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:35 pm**

To quote Mr. Churchill on the matter:

No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:42 pm**

"Democracy" just means "rule by the people" which typically can happen wherever there is majority rule.

If we're talking about "liberal democracies," then that's another matter. OP's definition of "democracy" isn't clear because the democracies of today have many different forms.

See Zakaria's Illiberal democracy v. liberal democracy article

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:58 pm**

Winston Churchill wrote: No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

Strictly speaking, he said it, but I think you see the point.

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 11:11 pm**

>not sure if Symmetry read tkr's post or if being dick

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 11:21 pm**

tkr4lf wrote:To quote Mr. Churchill on the matter:

No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

Exactly the right quote. Well done.

Posted: **Mon Jul 16, 2012 11:22 pm**

Symmetry wrote:
Winston Churchill wrote: No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

Strictly speaking, he said it, but I think you see the point.

Um...I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say here.

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:28 pm**

churchhill was an incompetent drunk richboy who failed as an admiral and prime minister. he was worst person you could quote, not even hitler is so bad.

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:57 pm**

BigBallinStalin wrote:just means...

If we're talking about ... then that's another matter. OP's definition of ... isn't clear because ...

Déjàvu.

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:00 pm**

Yes, democracy is the devil, along with school, girls (other than your mother), education, and being the waterboy for your high school's football team.

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:03 pm**

Upgrayedd wrote:churchhill was an incompetent drunk richboy who failed as an admiral and prime minister. he was worst person you could quote, not even hitler is so bad.

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:55 pm**

Upgrayedd wrote:churchhill was an incompetent drunk richboy who failed as an admiral and prime minister. he was worst person you could quote, not even hitler is so bad.

tsk tsk, you were doing so well too, I was rooting for you man !

P.S. you guys see his thread in GD? Very entertaining.

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:32 pm**

You don't think Churchill was incompetent? Research his record during WW1 and you will believe me. WW2 record was to disintigrate British Empire. He's one of the worst rulers ever...

Also he didn't let Jewish refugees go to Britian, so he wasn't even in WW2 for humanitarian reasons. He only wanted to maintain British power, but he failed completely at that by going broke and losing empire. He is delusional, fat man.

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:32 pm**

Ooooh, that'll really get the Brits going. Rustle their jimmies 100%.

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:35 pm**

True story-

Winston Churchill was at a party and he was known to be a bit of a drinker. A snobby woman said to him- "Sir, if my husband drank as much as you, I'd put poison in his drink."
Churchill replied,
"Madam, if you were my wife I'd drink it!"

I like Churchill. He did screw the pooch but good in WWI, with Gallipoli, but war is like that. A brutal mess of carnage, missteps and tragedies.
Don't forget Battle of Hürtgen Forest, an entire American Division got torn to shreds for no good objective at all. The battle is still studied at West Point on how not to fight a battle. You can blame Omar Bradley for that one....

And complaining about Churchill ignoring the Jews? Roosevelt did as well. The American's didn't do anything to help either. Don't forget that it was Roosevelt's State Department that denied entry of the passenger ship St. Louis which was loaded with German Jews requesting asylum. The St. Louis was forced to return to Antwerp and most of the Jews aboard died in the German concentration camps. Look it up. Roosevelt learned conclusively of the Jewish extermination in 1942 but did not a thing to alter immigration laws to help. Not until 1944, after virtually all the Jewish communities in Europe had already been utterly destroyed.

Winston Churchill was of a different breed than we of today are used to. It's easy enough for us to sit on our asses and armchair quarterback and in the end not really understand a damn thing.

Good job, Upgrayedd, you are a great armchair quarterback. Keep up the good work! =D>

Posted: **Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:54 pm**

[COMMUNITY CONFIRMATION REQUIRED]

patches70 wrote:True story-

Winston Churchill was at a party and he was known to be a bit of a drinker. A snobby woman said to him- "Sir, if my husband drank as much as you, I'd put poison in his drink."
Churchill replied,
"Madam, if you were my wife I'd drink it!"

I like Churchill. He did screw the pooch but good in WWI, with Gallipoli, but war is like that. A brutal mess of carnage, missteps and tragedies.
Don't forget Battle of Hürtgen Forest, an entire American Division got torn to shreds for no good objective at all. The battle is still studied at West Point on how not to fight a battle. You can blame Omar Bradley for that one....

And complaining about Churchill ignoring the Jews? Roosevelt did as well. The American's didn't do anything to help either. Don't forget that it was Roosevelt's State Department that denied entry of the passenger ship St. Louis which was loaded with German Jews requesting asylum. The St. Louis was forced to return to Antwerp and most of the Jews aboard died in the German concentration camps. Look it up. Roosevelt learned conclusively of the Jewish extermination in 1942 but did not a thing to alter immigration laws to help. Not until 1944, after virtually all the Jewish communities in Europe had already been utterly destroyed.

Is the underlined true? I've never heard of this before.

Posted: **Wed Jul 18, 2012 12:41 am**

BigBallinStalin wrote:[COMMUNITY CONFIRMATION REQUIRED]

patches70 wrote:True story-

Winston Churchill was at a party and he was known to be a bit of a drinker. A snobby woman said to him- "Sir, if my husband drank as much as you, I'd put poison in his drink."
Churchill replied,
"Madam, if you were my wife I'd drink it!"

I like Churchill. He did screw the pooch but good in WWI, with Gallipoli, but war is like that. A brutal mess of carnage, missteps and tragedies.
Don't forget Battle of Hürtgen Forest, an entire American Division got torn to shreds for no good objective at all. The battle is still studied at West Point on how not to fight a battle. You can blame Omar Bradley for that one....

And complaining about Churchill ignoring the Jews? Roosevelt did as well. The American's didn't do anything to help either. Don't forget that it was Roosevelt's State Department that denied entry of the passenger ship St. Louis which was loaded with German Jews requesting asylum. The St. Louis was forced to return to Antwerp and most of the Jews aboard died in the German concentration camps. Look it up. Roosevelt learned conclusively of the Jewish extermination in 1942 but did not a thing to alter immigration laws to help. Not until 1944, after virtually all the Jewish communities in Europe had already been utterly destroyed.

Is the underlined true? I've never heard of this before.

Here you go-

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php ... d=10005267

Not only just about the St Louis but also the general mood by which Roosevelt decided not to mess with immigration laws at the time to allow more German Jews into the US.

Posted: **Wed Jul 18, 2012 12:42 pm**

Churchill was born into wealthy family and played with toy soldiers as kid - later he plays with real soldiers in his insane power games (which he was incompetent at).

He was just an angry, fat man, who was rude and stupid. The guy before him was better (the gentleman who secured peace for his time). He at least avoided destroying his empire and killing most of his male subjects.

If you want to know someone who was a different breed look towards Khan Timur Leng Conqueror of Asia. He was a strong, intelligent, charismatic man who bended the world to his will and left an eternal legacy of bloodshed. He was the God of War... Churchill on the other hand was a loser with random pointless quotes attributed to him.

Posted: **Wed Jul 18, 2012 3:40 pm**

Upgrayedd wrote:Churchill on the other hand was a loser with random pointless quotes attributed to him.

At least he was the loser that won.

Posted: **Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:54 pm**

He actually stood up to Hitler, unlike that pussy Chamberlain.

Posted: **Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:05 pm**

Haggis_McMutton wrote:
At least he was the loser that won.

USA + USSR won. Britain was just the cheerleader.

He actually stood up to Hitler, unlike that pussy Chamberlain.

He didn't stand up to Hitler for humanitarian reasons, as evidenced by the fact that he turned away Jewish refugees, never cared about Soviet atrocities and entered the war before war crimes were even known.

He didn't stand up to Hitler for the good of his nation, as evidenced by the negative consequences the war brought to Britain (debt, lost colonies, death toll, lower cultural relevance, lost infrastructure...)

So what did he stand up to Hitler for?

The answer: his ego demanded it. He played with toy soldiers as a kid and had no problem throwing away thousands of mens lives in hasty, ill planned ventures. He was always a manchild general playing at war.

Posted: **Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:09 pm**

Upgrayedd wrote:
Haggis_McMutton wrote:
At least he was the loser that won.

USA + USSR won. Britain was just the cheerleader.

And yet wasn't occupied, unlike some other countries I know.

He didn't stand up to Hitler for the good of his nation, as evidenced by the negative consequences the war brought to Britain (debt, lost colonies, death toll, lower cultural relevance, lost infrastructure...)

Uh huh.
So he should have surrendered to the nazis "for the good of the country" ?

Posted: **Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:29 am**

Haggis_McMutton wrote:
Upgrayedd wrote:
Haggis_McMutton wrote:
At least he was the loser that won.

USA + USSR won. Britain was just the cheerleader.

And yet wasn't occupied, unlike some other countries I know.

He didn't stand up to Hitler for the good of his nation, as evidenced by the negative consequences the war brought to Britain (debt, lost colonies, death toll, lower cultural relevance, lost infrastructure...)

Uh huh.
So he should have surrendered to the nazis "for the good of the country" ?

What are you talking about, that Canada was ever occupied or something? That's insane, only foreign troops to invade Canada were AMURIKANS F YEAH who were slaughtered in War 1812. As for surrender to Nazis... hahaha you need to read on history.

Conquer Club

Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?

Re: Is it True that Democracy is the devil?