Topic: The Fascists That Surround You - page 7. (Read 9740 times)

Yes there is: your claim that what I am saying is that fascism = sociopaths. since that's clearly false, and I never claimed that, That is a straw man, that you set up so you could knock down with definitions. Unless you are just a fucking moron, and can't understand an analogy. So which is it, Straw man, or moron?
 
I'm leaning toward you not understanding an analogy...
 
This, right here, your very first premise, is where you go wrong. The Roses are the Sociopaths, the political leaders are the "centerpiece" of the government. Where roses are in a garden, they are the centerpiece. Where they are not present, other things, such as a fountain, or fruit tree are the centerpiece. Where Sociopaths exist in a government, you can be assured you find them in leadership roles... the "centerpiece."

Heh. You actually got one right.

Nope... You can have a political structure without sociopaths, but sociopaths are drawn to political structures.

No, I translated it for you. You even quoted it. Sociopaths tend to take over any fascistic power structure they are introduced to.

No, One DOES NOT care for other individuals, the other PRETENDS TO care for other individuals.

No, sociopathy does not, itself, cause them to seek political leadership. However, political leadership is a very comfortable place for a sociopath to exercise his sociopathy.

Well, let's run down the list, shall we?
To borrow a page from FirstAscent: http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828/
Here's a quick run-down: www.bookbrowse.com/author_interviews/full/index.cfm/author_number/1097/martha-stout

This is a false question.
AnCap societies do not exist and cannot exist without using force.
I always ask AnCap people one question:

How will you convince russia and china to cooperate ?

I can see you ringing the russians doorbell:

You: 'Hey Putin, how about sharing your natural resources with the rest of the world?'
Putin: 'Go away'.
The End

The whole AnCap thing is complete nonsense and comes down to one religious believe: "Techology will automatically safe us from all bad things".
It's a fantasy. An ideology that is simply unexecutable.

This.
I havent heared an argument and we're already on page 5.

Don't you think that by the time you have the technology to force the world into this ideal society that there will also be technology to make autonomous weapons?

There is no straw man, you are confused.


Let's review your poor analogy:


This does not contain any coherent explanation of how FASCISM relates to SOCIOPATHY. You indeed produced false premises in 'great detail', but you completely failed to identify the parts compared. Therefore, your analogy DID NOT explained what is the relationship of the two definitions in question. Moreover, you committed serious misconceptions...

You initiated the analogy in this way:


This show how delusional you are. You seen to believe that by posting few words without an explanation implies that you have already explained what is your argument. That is exactly what did not happened. You did not explained anything at all. You indeed build your own failure.

In your analogy, you affirms:

'Roses exist inside a garden, they are the centerpiece (leadership, in our analogy)'

This imply the 'roses' are the political leaders.

'Roses exist inside a garden, they the entire theme of the garden (the entire power structure, in our example).'

This imply the 'garden' is the political structure.

'You can have a garden without roses,  but the temptation to add a rosebush is constant (Fascistic governments attract sociopaths)'

Translating: 'You can have a political structure without political leaders, but the temptation to add a political leader is constant (political regime attract psychological disorder).

'Once you have one rosebush, you're well on your way to having a rose garden (sociopaths tend to take over any fascistic power structure they are introduced to).'

Translating: 'Once you have one group of political leaders, you're well on your way to having political structure with political leaders (psychological disorder tend to take over any political regime power structure they are introduced to).'

In accordance with the above analogy, which is not 'ours', but only yours and solely yours, any group of political leaders are sociopaths and they tend to take over any political regime. Moreover, you affirmed that political structures are influenced by an unidentified subject, which causes the political structure to attract psychological disorder. This beg the question: who is the subject under the 'temptation' to add political leaders to the political structure? Where this 'temptation' come from?

Finally, when your analogy is compared with the appropriate definitions of fascism and sociopathy, it completely fails:

'Once you have one...'


I argue that they would seek political power as anyone which is not a diagnosed as sociopath. It is not the affliction of a sociopath which causes them to seek political leadership.


You are implying that soldiers are trained to lose they 'soul'. What is 'soul' and what relation have with psychological disorders?


Following your deceitful logic, all politicians are individuals with:

http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html


This is not evidence. This is your assumption with no evidence. Please, provide a diagnosis produced by a qualified person which indicates that any of the above names cited were afflicted by SOCIOPATHY. Otherwise, your statement is false.

Yes, and until you put those implications into a statement, I can't refute them, since they're only nebulous implications. Very clever, but typically dishonest of you.

Put up or shut up. I have outlined a system. You say it is flawed, yet you will not explain exactly how. I suspect because you know your explanation will reveal the weakness of your argument.

Yes I do. And you know I do. I'm not going to waste my time linking to the countless examples. Regardless, does your asking of such questions negate the possibilities that exist within your dream society that I have implied? Absolutely not.

Do you ever do anything but list concepts? Do you ever combine those concepts? Ever put them in an order that makes sense? Or is life just one big word cloud for you?

I don't have it planned out. I'm not really interested in power. I don't think you have it planned out either.

Consider these terms though: economics, wealth, inequality, disenchantment, minimal laws, complacency, cults, charisma, takeovers, buyouts, rallies, speeches, terrorism, sabotage, propaganda, influence, mob, poverty, etc.

Those all exist in your society. I see no difference from any other society where a tyrant, dictator or criminal rises to power. There's nothing special about AnCap.

EDIT: added mob and poverty to the list.

Since you clearly have this well-planned out, if you were making a power grab in an AnCap society, just how would you go about it?

I think you need to read history and learn how rulers rise to power. It's amazing how you apply such a lack of imagination to ideas which challenge your dream society. Regarding AnCap, I can't think of a more optimal playground for a power grab.

Yes, an automobile manufacturer could switch to making tanks. or bombs. But who will drive those tanks? Who will drop those bombs?

What I am saying that workers in industry do not, and cannot, become soldiers overnight simply because their employer wishes it. Defense agencies are geared and staffed for defense, not offense. He would have to build, with his own money - or an external bankroll - a private army comprised solely of thugs and criminals. He would then have to take that private army, and set it against not only the defense agencies - businesses built around stopping exactly this sort of thing - but also every armed citizen in the region, who will be fighting to defend their homes.

Who do you think is going to win that fight?

What nonsense. Is AnCap only composed of automobile production companies? Does not AnCap also have people, weapons manufacturers, money, external suppliers, recessions, disenchanted individuals, criminals, defense companies, hatred, sociopaths, influential people, wealthy people, etc., etc., etc?

And besides, who do you think built tanks and airplanes in the U.S. during WWII?

Everything in AnCap, however, precludes the use of those resources for conquest.

A business built on producing high-quality automobiles will have a hard time turning into a military force.

Except in the strawman you made up in your mind. Do try and keep up.

Yes it does. I've explained the analogy and how it explains the relationship in great detail earlier in the thread. Go back and read it.

So, then you argue that sociopaths would not seek political power?

Never claimed it did.

Uh huh. And then trains them to be soulless killers. 

No? They're not uniquely suited?
They can't lie convincingly?
They can't present an outward appearance of benevolence, regardless of what is behind the mask?
They can't convince people to like them?

These are the defining characteristics of sociopaths, and also, you'll note, politicians.

Adolph Hitler. Benito Mussolini. Kim Jong-il. Joseph Stalin. Do I really need to continue?

I suspect Saddam Hussein was a little reticent when it came to sitting the sociopath test, though by his behavior it would be hard not to diagnose him as a little anti-social. Maybe he was just being histrionic.

Provide evidence that any diagnosed SOCIOPATH has 'access to armies, nuclear weapons, police forces and taxation'.

Otherwise, your statement is false.

What you mean, then, is they could never be worse than, say, someone like Hitler, as they gain wealth and power and a following? Nothing in AnCap precludes the accumulation of wealth, weapons, leverage through business, influence and followers. Good try, though.

Except what?


That is not a relationship, it is an analogy. Your analogy does not explain how both definitions relates to each other.


Yes, I have answered your questions.


Sociopaths are individuals with a PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDER, not individuals conspiring to overthrow POLITICAL REGIMES.


Not exclusively for SOCIOPATHS.


Western military institutions does not accept individual with PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDER. Western military institutions selects the most physically and mentally health individuals.


A claim of false premises. SOCIOPATHS are not suited to achieve government offices, they are individuals with PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDER.

In a free society the damage sociopaths can cause to society will finally be limited to what they can accomplish via their own efforts instead of amplified by access to armies, nuclear weapons, police forces and taxation.