Know history [W:37]

[Guy Incognito]

Oppressive dictators rise before disarmament. So you're right. But disarmament is a symptom of a oppressive regime. And more than that video shows that. After all, dictators do not want the people to rise against them as they know that the shear numbers of armed common people can always overwhelm any army.

This video shows, at best, that SOMETIMES oppressive dictatorships arise after disarmament. So, it doesn't really mean anything. It's worthless.

 

[Kal'Stang]

syrian islamists are more important to them than bosnian muslims

To whom are you referring to? Who is "them"?

 

[Kal'Stang]

you think nato saved you but you also know there were jihadists

anyway

thank you

l can see kal's video sucks

forgetting teh bosnians but attacking turks

just a typical westerner behavior

too disgusting

Instead of claiming things that you know nothing about why don't you watch it? At least that way you won't be arguing from ignorance on what is in the video.

 

[Kal'Stang]

mother****er democrats.......

It doesn't matter on what side of the aisle a person is. Our WHOLE government cannot be trusted. Be it Republicans or Democrats. They all want power.

 

[Kal'Stang]

It's pretty disappointing to see how many people oppose peaceful resistance. Pathetic really. Attachment to violence is counterproductive and foolish; symptomatic of a childlike mind in a state of arrested development.

A little pop gun is no good against an oppressive government, I assure you. But if a person is able to set aside his hateful, juveniles attitudes he might actually make a difference with nonviolent resistance.

No one here opposes peaceful resistance. But no one here (at least those you are talking about anyways) will also not going down without a fight. We will not be the first to initiate aggression unless the government goes to far and other peaceful solutions fail. Until such time it is quite obvious that we ARE trying for the peaceful route. After all, we're not in a civil war are we?

 

[Kal'Stang]

This video shows, at best, that SOMETIMES oppressive dictatorships arise after disarmament. So, it doesn't really mean anything. It's worthless.

I think you didn't read what I stated. Dictatorships do not arrise after disarmament. They arise before disarmament. These people don't just decide one day to take peoples guns away. They plan to do it far in advance because they know that what they are attempting to do (whatever it may be that they ultimately want to accomplish) will be met with resistance otherwise.

And it doesn't matter if it does not happen all the time. The very fact that it does and is a very real reality is enough to be wary enough to not want it to happen to us. Anyone that wants to be disarmed is asking for a dictatorship imo.

 

[Guy Incognito]

No one here opposes peaceful resistance. But no one here (at least those you are talking about anyways) will also not going down without a fight. We will not be the first to initiate aggression unless the government goes to far and other peaceful solutions fail. Until such time it is quite obvious that we ARE trying for the peaceful route. After all, we're not in a civil war are we?

What you fail to comprehend is that peaceful resistance is fighting. If you resort to violence you've already lost.

So you've essentially got it completely backwards. Advocacy of violent resistance is foolish and equivalent to waving the white flag.

 

[Kal'Stang]

What you fail to comprehend is that peaceful resistance is fighting. If you resort to violence you've already lost.

So you've essentially got it completely backwards. Advocacy of violent resistance is foolish and equivalent to waving the white flag.

And what you do not realize is that passive resistance can also lose.

Tiananmen Square protests of 1989

 

[Guy Incognito]

I think you didn't read what I stated. Dictatorships do not arrise after disarmament. They arise before disarmament. These people don't just decide one day to take peoples guns away. They plan to do it far in advance because they know that what they are attempting to do (whatever it may be that they ultimately want to accomplish) will be met with resistance otherwise.

And it doesn't matter if it does not happen all the time. The very fact that it does and is a very real reality is enough to be wary enough to not want it to happen to us. Anyone that wants to be disarmed is asking for a dictatorship imo.

I don't think you have any idea what the connection is between dictatorships and disarmament. The video certainly doesn't show that all dictatorships result in disarmament, that all disarmament stems from dictatorships, or that disarmament and genocide are connected in any way. It is merely a collection of correlation equals causation fallacies. It is a sloppy argument, and it is a waste of time for anybody to watch it. It is just a hack job put out by gun nuts.

 

[Guy Incognito]

And what you do not realize is that passive resistance can also lose.

Tiananmen Square protests of 1989

I can't think of a more ridiculous thing that you could possibly say:lol: don't you realize that the capitalist reforms China has seen over the last twenty five years are a direct result of Tianamen square?

You reveal your profound ignorance thinking that this is an example in support of your argument. Too funny! Keep trying, man, you'll learn something someday.

 

[Henrin]

Only a fool wold deny the massive successes of Gandhi and Dr. King.

If you're my enemy and you decide to kill yourself then frankly all I have to do is sit back and watch. So does this show have popcorn or what?

MLK did empower the state and if you ever actually bothered to look at the legislation that came about because of his movement you would see many different power grabs taken by the government.

 

[Guy Incognito]

If you're my enemy and you decide to kill yourself then frankly all I have to do is sit back and watch. So does this show have popcorn or what?

MLK did empower the state and if you ever actually bothered to look at the legislation that came about because of his movement you would see many different power grabs taken by the government.

Ok, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I approve of Martin Luther King, you disapprove of Martin Luther King.

You are committed to looking bad on this one, aren't you?

 

[Viv]

So those people were not first disarmed before those atrocities were committed?

An armed populace doesn't automatically have sufficient power to control government, any more than an unarmed populace isn't automatically oppressed by government.

It's entirely variable depending on other factors. Many countries dislike guns and live without them in liberated societies.

 

[Kal'Stang]

An armed populace doesn't automatically have sufficient power to control government, any more than an unarmed populace isn't automatically oppressed by government.

It's entirely variable depending on other factors. Many countries dislike guns and live without them in liberated societies.

Never said otherwise. But an armed populace is still better and more resistant to oppression than an unarmed one.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Never said otherwise. But an armed populace is still better and more resistant to oppression than an unarmed one.

You have no basis for that statement. There is certainly no evidence to support that conclusion in the video.

 

[Kal'Stang]

You have no basis for that statement. There is certainly no evidence to support that conclusion in the video.

Umm...lets see here.....Scenario 1: a thug (government) goes up to an unarmed person (citizens) and demands his wallet. Scenario 2: a thug (government) goes up to an armed person (citizen) and demands his wallet.

Who's going to have a better chance of resisting? Person in Scenario 1 or 2?

Common sense is common sense.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Umm...lets see here.....Scenario 1: a thug (government) goes up to an unarmed person (citizens) and demands his wallet. Scenario 2: a thug (government) goes up to an armed person (citizen) and demands his wallet.

Who's going to have a better chance of resisting? Person in Scenario 1 or 2?

Common sense is common sense.

Once upon a time Aristotle applied common sense to prove that heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects.

You keep your unsupported common sense. I want empirical evidence.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Once upon a time Aristotle applied common sense to prove that heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects.

You keep your unsupported common sense. I want empirical evidence.

Common sense also gave us things like the horse drawn carriage. Common sense works just fine when applied appropriately. You want empirical evidence? Go into an area where thugs hang out armed. Then afterwards go into an area where thugs hang out when you are not armed and see what peaceful resistance does for ya. You will see the difference for yourself.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Common sense also gave us things like the horse drawn carriage. Common sense works just fine when applied appropriately. You want empirical evidence? Go into an area where thugs hang out armed. Then afterwards go into an area where thugs hang out when you are not armed and see what peaceful resistance does for ya. You will see the difference for yourself.

No, empirical evidence gave us the horse drawn carriage. First it was a two wheeled chariot, then direct experience gave somebody the idea to add a second axel.

Sitting back and guessing without gathering data is just pissing in the wind.