Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 43 of 43

Thread: I agree with one part of Kim Jong Un's speech

  1. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    I agree to some extent. Would you agree that most dictators have been given a bad name by the establishment? They bash leaders like Hitler and say "see, this is what happens when you have a dictator." You can see this effect just be reading this thread. Everyone assumes that because someone is a dictator, they must have been a divine leader and hold their power forever. This is not what I want. I want one leader who is accountable for everything, and is held accountable by another department.
    The last person who praised Hitler around here was banned, so be careful. I don't doubt that he may have had some good ideas and likely helped a great many people, but putting non-violent people in internment camps because of their heritage is wrong and cannot be defended.

    Hitler was popular because he helped bring Germany out of a depression. I believe he was helped by the big bankers. They loaned him money and increased their money supply and Germany experience an economic "boom" that would eventually have lead to a collapse. When the bankers started cutting off his money supply and he realized how much power they held, I believe this helped fuel his hatred of the bankers which he wrongly associated with Judaism.

    The bankers, however, continued to help him throughout the war. But bankers always decide who wins the war because they control the money supply.

    I would like to see an example of a Dictator who gave their population long-term economic growth as well as freedom to associate, freedom of speech, etc.

    The world banking cartel has created a monopoly throughout the world, they setup central banks everywhere. Where they cannot setup shop, they have enemies. These enemies might speak some truth at times about the empire, but they also can be brutal and very anti-free market. They associate stealing with capitalism, and so they use that to justify more stealing.

    The government's job is to ensure our freedom, not to set things up a certain way.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    The government's job is to ensure our freedom, not to set things up a certain way.
    +rep

  4. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    You're missing the point, I understand that putting one person in charge of something that they specialize in and can be held accountable for is often superior to putting a bunch of people in charge of something that would be more difficult to hold them all accountable for in a business environment.

    But if you had one person making the decision to make one grocery store for everyone then we'd have shitmart. The products you want would not be available.

    The government is not a business, I don't want them making decisions for me. At most, I would like them to defend the borders from actual enemies (not immigrants who are coming here to work), defend my person and property and uphold contracts. Very simple.

    Instead in the free market we would let all of the businesses open their doors and operate and let the 600 million individuals in this country decide which store they thought was best. If we didn't have government subsidizing bad factory farming methods, then we would have less of it because the price would be more comparable to better methods.
    You are missing the point. A competent leader would recognize the free market, and would try to maximize it to the best of his ability. The dictator would not be deciding what stores to open. He'd create an environment that is friendly to all stores.

    There's nothing different between a business and the government. It all comes down to management.

    You seem to be brainwashed on this topic like everyone else. Just because our establishment has propped up some bad dictators, that doesn't mean all dictators are bad. And to date, no country has every established a controlled dictatorship like the one I suggest.

  5. #34

    Default

    Related threads:

    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...me-good-points
    Interview: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ud-Ahmadinejad

    Search: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/search....archid=5968582

    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...madinejad-hoax


    I have seen a documentary where the CIA tried some shenanigans to get Hugo Chavez out of office. The US imperialists go into his country to steal land, oil and precious resources from the people. After they are already looting them, they get someone like Chavez in there to stop the looting.. So they might say that some oil company needs to pay taxes to the people whose land they stole. I don't see that as completely unreasonable, they should pay the people who were kicked off of their land, who are usually the poor people in inner cities. That sounds like a free-market correction to me. Then the CIA might try and sway an election and Chavez then tries to thwart it, and you get a bunch of people claiming that Chavez is trying to hold onto power forever when he's merely reacting to the cheating. I understand where you're coming from..

    The problem is he doesn't know how free market capitalism could be very good for his country, he just needs to protect people's property land and rights. So it is hard for me to support him, he seems more like a reactionary, even though he does seem to actually care about the people.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  6. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    You are missing the point. A competent leader would recognize the free market, and would try to maximize it to the best of his ability. The dictator would not be deciding what stores to open. He'd create an environment that is friendly to all stores.

    There's nothing different between a business and the government. It all comes down to management.

    You seem to be brainwashed on this topic like everyone else. Just because our establishment has propped up some bad dictators, that doesn't mean all dictators are bad. And to date, no country has every established a controlled dictatorship like the one I suggest.
    Can we not use the term "dictator" then?

    What's wrong with President?
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  7. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    The last person who praised Hitler around here was banned, so be careful. I don't doubt that he may have had some good ideas and likely helped a great many people, but putting non-violent people in internment camps because of their heritage is wrong and cannot be defended.

    Hitler was popular because he helped bring Germany out of a depression. I believe he was helped by the big bankers. They loaned him money and increased their money supply and Germany experience an economic "boom" that would eventually have lead to a collapse. When the bankers started cutting off his money supply and he realized how much power they held, I believe this helped fuel his hatred of the bankers which he wrongly associated with Judaism.

    The bankers, however, continued to help him throughout the war. But bankers always decide who wins the war because they control the money supply.

    I would like to see an example of a Dictator who gave their population long-term economic growth as well as freedom to associate, freedom of speech, etc.

    The world banking cartel has created a monopoly throughout the world, they setup central banks everywhere. Where they cannot setup shop, they have enemies. These enemies might speak some truth at times about the empire, but they also can be brutal and very anti-free market. They associate stealing with capitalism, and so they use that to justify more stealing.

    The government's job is to ensure our freedom, not to set things up a certain way.
    I'm not saying Hitler used his power for good. I'm just saying he did some things smarter than us. I saw a documentary on how they automated the building of highways. To this day, that is still more advanced than us. Also, he got the ball rolling on the development of rockets.

    Like you said, the establishment determines who's going to be in charge and how it will work. They don't want to see a dictatorship work, so they set it up to fail, not succeed.

  8. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Can we not use the term "dictator" then?

    What's wrong with President?
    Maybe its best to call him CEO, since its structure is most similar to a company. President is not a good term because everyone assumes there would be a congress second guessing him. Dictator is not a good term either because everyone assume that he would have control over the election process and would not be held accountable for anything. Which is the opposite of my intention. I want one person in charge to be held completely accountable.

  9. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    You are missing the point. A competent leader would recognize the free market, and would try to maximize it to the best of his ability. The dictator would not be deciding what stores to open. He'd create an environment that is friendly to all stores.

    There's nothing different between a business and the government. It all comes down to management.

    You seem to be brainwashed on this topic like everyone else. Just because our establishment has propped up some bad dictators, that doesn't mean all dictators are bad. And to date, no country has every established a controlled dictatorship like the one I suggest.
    Who is to say we will have a competent leader? Who picks the "Supreme Court" you have proposed? Furthermore, it is a oxymoron to say "controlled dictatorship." Unless you are stating the control is in the hands of the dictator. Who controls the media? Who controls the military? There are many flaws in your statements.

  10. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    Who is to say we will have a competent leader? Who picks the "Supreme Court" you have proposed? Furthermore, it is a oxymoron to say "controlled dictatorship." Unless you are stating the control is in the hands of the dictator. Who controls the media? Who controls the military? There are many flaws in your statements.
    Under my system, the law would be so simple they wouldn't need the media to translate it for them. They could just read it themselves. If he made a law that contradicted the constitution or whatever we have, then he could be impeached.

    Thats much better than what we have today. Obama makes laws that contradict the constitution and nobody even knows about it.

    I have to think through who picks the supreme court.

    The dictator controls the military. Same as now.

    Please note, if this was 100% complete, I'd be running for president now (if I was old enough). Its not a requirement to have a perfect system for the country and every detail nailed down, to post in this forum.
    Last edited by tttppp; 04-16-2012 at 10:03 PM.

  11. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lishy View Post
    Lots. I have little to no respect for Un unless he does something really extraordinary for his people!
    His name is Mr. Kim, not Mr. Un.
    " Anyone can become angry. That is easy. But to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose and in the right way - that is not easy." --Aristotle

  12. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    I agree to some extent. Would you agree that most dictators have been given a bad name by the establishment? They bash leaders like Hitler and say "see, this is what happens when you have a dictator." You can see this effect just be reading this thread. Everyone assumes that because someone is a dictator, they must have been a divine leader and hold their power forever. This is not what I want. I want one leader who is accountable for everything, and is held accountable by another department.
    A dictator can be malevolent or benevolent. However, a dictatorship is always evil because it usurps self-ownership.

    Tito of Yugoslavia is a fantastic case in point.
    Sign up, Log in:
    http://forums.officer.com/
    Surviving
    http://www.themodernsurvivalist.com/

    • Libertarians need to stop deluding themselves that people WANT them. They don't. They want free healthcare, free soc sec, free meds, free education,...at anyone but themselves expense.
    • Fiat Banking - Your supply of capital is limited to whatever arbitrary limit those who have limitless currency resources allow.
    • If you don't want the mafia, don't disgrace yourself by paying the mafia.

  13. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibForestPaul View Post
    A dictator can be malevolent or benevolent. However, a dictatorship is always evil because it usurps self-ownership.

    Tito of Yugoslavia is a fantastic case in point.
    How can someone be benevolent and evil at the same time?

  14. #43

    Default

    The leader of NK isn't the first to say that Nuclear weapons can be just used where ever, after world war 2 military personel knew that the world cannot be dominated by a power as it was in the past with a possession of a weapon of mass destruction.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •