Jump to content
270soft Forum

Patine

Members +
  • Posts

    15,682
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    56

Everything posted by Patine

  1. A matter of complete and total subjective opinion - and one I - and a lot of others - don't agree with, but another matter of opinion - especially with strong partisan viewpoints and tensions - you state as absolute, irrefutable, objective fact that you feel "annoyed," or, "angered," when people call out as, "opinion," and, "partisan." This, too, is typical of the degenerating and crumbling in any integrity political atmosphere and zeitgeist, and is NOT a good thing at all. And this moreso cements my point, and doesn't at all refute it. And, not to fast on not responding to me. You have work to do as a moderator, that you've been neglecting for several days. I insist on responses to - and action on - the other two parts I've addressed in my post, which deal with your job as a site moderator and administrator - two issues you've been avoiding for days, and has been deliterious on your reputation and integrity to do so
  2. I don't tend to watch videos by YouTube hacks and third tier pundits of any sort at the best of times - I find them irritating - and I'm highly doubting such individuals would convince me such inappropriate zeitgeist neologisms that water down the credibility of the discourse, should "magically," gain validity and respectability - especially if it's Jordan Peterson, and especially if he's commenting on such a neologism with, "Marxist," in it. Also, a certain poster who he and I are supposed to be avoiding conflict has once again made a laugh emote on a post of yours that's obviously once again laughing at the post of mine you're responding. This is the third or fourth times I've brought this up, and you seem to have done nothing, despite originally asked him sternly to end the laugh emotes - most of which been not only "not funny," but in many case inappropriate, unacceptable, and even disturbing to make a laugh emote at. As I have honoured my side for a while now, I am asking you again to make a stern - and be willing to apply consequences - if this keeps happening. Which brings me to the question - the very important and pivotal question - I made in the Game Feedback sub-forum you have been consistently IGNORING, whose answer is vitally to the future of this forum and moving forward, and the tenor thereof, and leaving old fights and baggage, and not having, "permanent scars," of past mistakes, biases, and abuses (or, in other cases, and other posters, undeserved graces by bias) built in by forum mechanisms into perpetuity. You're silence on the issue SEEMS to make your intentions here only seem bleak and untrustworthy, just so you know.
  3. You are correct, in retrospect. I was basing on an assumption that you were building on the idea of the thread-starter, which was more in line with what I was criticizing. It's an easy mistake to make, but still a mistake, and I apologize.
  4. Actually, not exactly the same. First, these national changes occur in a timeline 20 years from now - not in the immediate future. Also, the Western North American Federation is NOT the U.S. annexing Western Canada - both Western Canada and the Northwestern U.S. have EACH left, shortly prior, their parent nation centred in the wealthy, heavily-populated, highly-urbanized East, and formed a new nation together, with a mixture of Prairie/Heartland/Alaska Conservativism evolved in a new form from either's parent nation's brand with West Coast Progressivism/ Social Democracy and a Neo-Pioneer Libertarianism as the three main party lines, with some smaller ones. And, I don't recall addressing Australia or New Zealand in talking about your scenario. But I commend you in bringing this up, even though I already have a retort. It's a much more engaging and productive form of debate than a lot of what I, personally, deal with here, and is quite refreshing. Thank-you!
  5. Game or not, it seems more unlikely of an event than you seem to be insisting - and I live in Alberta, and that seems to be as nothing to you in standing in this discussion. Plus, the Canadian Conservative Party is more different, by a significant margin, than you might be led to believe. There are further-right-wing parties in Canada that are very close to the U.S. Republican Party - but they tend to be about as successful, electorally, as the Constitution Party is in the U.S. It may be a game, but it's the sort of game where at least of a veneer of real research and realism is highly respected - like the Age of Empires and Civilization series and their custom scenario communities are, as well. That is where I will leave it, and hope that parting argument has some impact on your further proceeding in this scenario design.
  6. Identity politics and a mixed economy are part of a, "Marxist culture?" This sounds like one of those ridiculous, disingenuous, derisive, nonsensical socio-political neologisms kicking around of late rather than a, "genuine," term. I'd rather avoid discussion descending into such superficial, zeitgeist-driven, unproductive, "quasi-terms," of dubious use or value at best.
  7. Karl Marx was a hard revolutionary economist and political iconoclast and gave culture a glancing side-note, at best, so I'm not sure what you mean, exactly.
  8. This was already done in the 1956 Winnipeg Declaration. You've long missed the memo. Or perhaps you're defining, "Marxist culture," by the standards of McCarthyist, corporate shill media pundit talking heads in the U.S. and their emulators in Canada, in which case you're almost certainly misusing the term grossly.
  9. The PPC and NDP are like oil and water, ideologically. And since, "nationalism," and, "populism," as I've pointed out several times in earlier threads, are not actually truly ideological, in and of themselves, but more, "frames," for any ideology other than the most moderate, establishment, or uninspired of stances on the political spectrum, and not tied to actual such stances or ideologies on the spectrum - left-to-right - themselves, these two elements wouldn't be enough at all to bond such clashing viewpoints and platforms.
  10. Sorry, exactly WHAT you're saying the NDP are a better fit for than the Conservatives isn't quite clear. And, have you read my very pivotal query in the Game Feedback sub-forum?
  11. @Anthony_270could you please answer this question? It actually ties into the sincerity and genuinity by you, and on the tenor of the site, when you say things like, "let's move forward," and imply old fights and old baggage should be left behind, in terms of discussion and conduct and such. This question is very much a more practical view of whether you're truly willing to ante up to that in a way - and a VERY important way - that can be judged in the very short-term. Please answer? Will "warning points that never expire," continue to hold such a hyperbolic, vindictive, and unproductive status, or will they, too, be moved on from?
  12. Or a very important part of George W. Bush's resume in 2000, unfortunately...
  13. Trudeau's far better of an alternative than soulless, snake of cold-hearted, disingenuous technocrat he replaced in 2015 (but perhaps just a friendlier, personal face - even if his facial grooming is not as high a priority), and better than the Harper 2.0 wannabe Scheer or the detached, out-of-touch, elitist, aristocratic plutocrat (sounds kind of like Romney's description) O'Toole, but I'm all for Singh Federally, and Notley Provincially, anyways. And Layton was the greatest PM Canada (sadly) never had. But, hey, at least in Canada, we get a choice other than the, "Partido Conservator," and, "Partido Liberal," (the name of the two beneficiary parties in the hard-rigged two-party electoral systems of the, "Turno Pacifico," in late 19th Century Spain, and the, "Pacto de Caballeros," in late 19th/early 20th Century Argentina and Columbia, which the Republican Party of the United States and the Democratic Party of the United States, respectively, pretty much also fill the role of.
  14. As unfortunate and depressing, and a bleak sign of the degenerating, vapidly sensationalist, and more-and-more without substance, American political zeitgeist, a likelihood as that may be, I still think my core complaint is the monomania of the main political topic. I think my big suggestion would be to vary political discussion significant, and not focus so monotonously on Trump and those directly in his circle and shadow.
  15. I think it's very obvious the "laugh," emote put on your post I'm quoting is not laughing at you, but at me, which has been a habit of that poster several times in the last few days, including at posts that are in no way, shape, or form "funny," and highly inappropriate and unacceptable to be laughing at. And since you have asked him to stop directing "laugh," emotes at me, and he has blatantly refused, I'd like you to consider this a formal complaint and deal with it SERIOUSLY. As for the issue at hand, I will re-address it when my patience has reset.
  16. See, this exact cycle has happened quite a few times before. I bring up issue with some obtuse thing you're doing, and you outright refuse to stop on a simple request, and, in fact, you demand to know what you're even doing that's at all objectionable, you deny things that can actually be seen in past posts, you make evasive answers, only partially (and selectively) quote, and respond to my posts, make diversionary, tangential questions, then declare this "back-and-forth is causing <insert negative quality>" and I have to cease and desist, or oblique threats of bans are made, and the issue is not resolve, and just bubbles under the surface until something brings it up again.
  17. Great, "politician response," as we call it here in Canada (but our neighbours to the south are far too sharply divided in a partisan way to cynically lampoon or criticize the WHOLE poliical profession - all political commentary, humour, idioms, and insults down there are definitely down party lines). But, that aside, with a response as evasive as Chretien, and annoyed you aren't getting a Harper press gallery, you avoid the issue that you know EXACTLY what I'm referring to.
  18. But I think it's still getting far too much (read, almost all, of late) of your bandwidth, and you have made efforts to exclude from meaningful discussion those who do not enthusiastically and personally support Trump.
  19. 1. I think we actually agree that Fascist and Nazi, in most cases outside the '20's to '40's, is a political slur and slander. 2.I'm not a rallying voice for the concept of, "Communism only hasn't worked because it hasn't been right." But, the fact is, Communism and Socialism, like many political ideologies - especially the high-minded, and including, very much so, the American Constitutional Republic - almost never turn out like they were meant to, but often become monstrosities and enormities, deviating highly from their original doctrines if their founding ideologues could see the ultimate fruit that emerged therefrom. 3. I think you're reading too much into the word, "Conservative," in polling. Conservativism, generically speaking, is an ideology that varies far more by nation, culture, region, and time period than most. Modern American Conservatism, Pre-WW2 American Conservativism, Antebellum Northern and Southern (separately) American Conservativism, Modern British Conservatism (with Northern Irish Unionism being a bit distinct), Disrealian British "New Conservativism," Old British Toryism, Canadian Red Tory Conservatives, Canadian Blue Conservatives, the former Social Credit Party of Canada Conservativism, ADQ/CAQ Conservativism in Quebec, Modern Japanese Conservatism (Liberal Democratic and New Komeito Party), Meiji/Taisho/Showa Empire of Japan Conservatism, Kuomintang Nationalist Chinese Conservatism, BJP Conservativism in India, Revisionist Zionist (Herut, and then Likud) Conservativism, Islamic Conservativism (divided into Shi'a Sect, Obadhi Sect, Wahabbi Sunni Al Saud Monarchial, Muslim Brotherhood, Deodandi/Hizb ut-Tahrir/Al Qaeda/Taliban/ISIS/Boko Haram/Al Shabab, etc., and Pakistani and Indonesian non-denominational, all as separate divisions), Modern United Russia Conservativism, Old Guard Tsarist/White Army Russian Conservatism, Establishment Conservative Party in each European Country, newer Eurosceptic/Ant-Immigration/Islamaphobic/New Nationalist Party in each European Nation, African Nationalist Parties (as opposed to left-leaning Pan-African Revolutionary and African Socialist Parties), and many other examples, are all VERY - in some case, RADICALLY - different from each other in beliefs, ideologies and core tenets, it's not even comparable, direct. And, to say that a high polling for A Conservative Party, and for Independence (with no statement on "annexation," to the U.S. afterwards, AT ALL) shows a, as I said, very bad and misinformed stereotype about joining a neighbouring nation with a notably different take on Conservatism and whose main party advocating it can't even, itself, muster over the 50% popular support margin, nationwide. Plus, the polls about supporting Trump were purely semantic, and there's extremely few Albertans who'd really want him at the helm of power, HERE...
  20. You know damn well what I'm talking about. The monomania of your discussions on the forums of late is very wearying - and not just to me, I can ascertain - and displays a sharp personal bias that has been plaguing discussion on this forum years - because it's held by the ONLY moderator, who should have realized quite a while ago that you were too biased, fickle, and tempermental to be a reliable or trustworthy moderator, and have made several notable abuses of your moderation for self-interest you still will not fess up to or apologize for, and that you should have delegated moderation to a more even-handed, balanced individual quite some time ago, instead of clinging to it and doing a disservice to your forum community - where your customers and your livelihood - are. This endless yapping about Trump for several weeks, and little else of real note, shows your bias has not receded, but only gotten worse. And, you have also effectively tried to exclude myself, @Hestia11, and others not of the, "Orange Kool-Aid Cult," from these discussions through various means because our criticisms and questions are not readily answered or stood up to, nor is any real dissenting voice to, "rah, rah, Trump, we'll win a landslide in 2024," chanting, because the usual tropes and cliches don't stand well to real scrutiny or question - only when preaching to the choir. Thus, I ask you again, to please change the monotonous subject.
  21. He hasn't been active for quite a while.
  22. I think, with all due respect, it's time to put away the endless rounds of Orange Kool-Aid and talk about about something else other than endless praise and beating a dead horse for the prophesied glories of a failed and loser President who was in it for his ego alone, and accomplished very little in real value, and a lot of harm and damage, for his nation in his long-term, and the fact that people are still hoodwinked by him and his lies and incendiary and hyperbolic, but empty, rants, is actually just a depressing sign of the degenerating thoughtlessness and sensationalism over any real substance U.S. Politics has descended into, certainly for the detriment of all in the long term. I think it's time to change the subject. I'm am almost there are others here also tired of the ritual chants at the cult alter, constantly.
  23. First of all, not all authoritarian warmongers who like big goverment and goverment control over nearly everything are actually Fascists or Nazis - not even Bush, whom I personally regard as the absolute worst holder of the office of U.S. President, and who should be tried, along with his whole Administration, all of the Congressional leaders who had enthusiastically backed him - including Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, among others - his military brass, the largest, most prolific, best-funded terrorist group in the world (ironically), the CIA, his four illegal and Unconstitutional secret police agencies, the NSA, the CSC, the FBI, and his own creation, the DHS, and his horrid, staunch allies, Blair, Netanyahu, the Persian Gulf Monarchs, and the rest, and their governments, should all face mass tribunal for war crimes, crimes against humanity, abuse of power, use of torture, and (other than the absolute monarchs, unfortunately), gross breach of their national Constitutions and the rights, protections, and due process guaranteed their people, and high treason and sedition against their nations and people, and being no better than the "terrorists," they were fighting (who I still wouldn't give a by or absolution on their crimes, however - just pointing out the lack of higher ground of those fighting them) but NOT Fascists or Nazis (and neither are Trump or Cruz) - who are, all mudslinging aside, very specific and contextual things. Since you brought up Josef Stalin, while he does make a good boogeyman for McCarthyist types, he's probably (along with Ceausescu, Ulbricht, and other strict, "Stalinist," emulators) is actually a REALY BAD example of what a Communist leader is supposed to be - kind of far off from the "guiding figure of the decentralized, self-determining workers' and farmers' state run by collective councils in a upward pyramidal structure based on equality and democratic centralism." In fact, Stalin and his emulators are probably the worst examples period who gained true power, considering the Workers' Party of Korea and the Khmer Rouge so deviated from the Communism and Socialism in so many ways - and ways utterly anathema to Marxist thinking - that you could not call them Communist or Socialist remotely, anymore. And, as for the last line in your post, as living in Alberta, I think it shows a gross, superficial, and uninformed view of Alberta and social and political sentiments here (the UCP is NOT pro-U.S. Annexation, nor is any other party, or political lobby group or group foundation of any significance or visibility, here, and full independence or a Western Provinces Federation, or re-negotiated autonomy in Confederation are the considered options - no one of note is seriously talking about U.S. Annexation, and it is as distasteful a topic in Alberta as any other Canadian Province), so, please, I ask you in all reasonability, not to default to bad and incorrect stereotypes and include such a thing.
  24. @Anthony_270Any response here? Your response will actually be a bit of a broader litmus test, by the way...
  25. I still don't know why anyone wants an old geezer of a failed President and loser whose only done a VERY few things in office of actual good for the nation in the longer term, and a LOT of damage, botches, failings, and increased division - and embarassment - like Donald Trump to be an old mistake to go back to against a new mistake - and old geezer - like Biden instead of embracing of new candidates with new visions and new ideas. I can't fathom this braindead mentality of clinging to failure rather than moving on to better things. Anyone who supports a Trump vs. Biden re-match should have their priorities examined - and could be said as not having any betterment and improvement of the U.S. in mind, at all. I gobsmacks me that people still want these relics and dinosaurs, and their inner circles of cronies, to stay in the centre of political power.
×
×
  • Create New...