[hydrogonian]

Quote:

...? LOL. That is quite the extrapolation from "Obviously it's a very idealistic goal but if we want to be flying around in spaceships and hovercars we will inevitably have to redirect our resources towards working together vs. fighting each other." Get your head out of your ass; nowhere did I say anything about using my country's money to finance random 3rd world shitholes. There are plenty of problems to fix at home. As an example of working together vs. fighting each other: instead of Saudi Arabia and Iran funding opposing sides in a Yemeni proxy war, coming together and promoting broader prosperity at home and throughout the Middle East. But obviously, things are complicated and that wouldn't be an easy feat

I'm forcing you to be congruent with your politics. If you want to have a conversation, you need to "get your head out of your ass" and acknowledge the logical actions and consequences of your proposed politics. When your politics are proposed for the USA and the West, according to you it is only natural that we "work together", ignore so called transient culture, and accept everyone, to include you as a Korean National living in an ethnically nationalist nation and region, as one of us so that we can "all have flying cars like in the video game Mass Effect 3".

However, when I suggest that Korea and Koreans accept large groups of foreign nationals, and materially help other nations to help further your goals, you then switch gears and tell me that no where did you mention using your countries money "to finance random third world shitholes".

Yes, thank you. I know that you did not mention using your countries money. You want to use the money of my country and of others that are not your country. You want everyone else to pay for the consequences of your politics, but not you. You have proven my point in restating what I pointed out, exactly, about your position.

You want the West to civilize the world for you, which is some type of monolithic block made up of non-people whose lives and wealth are tools for your political agenda, while "your country" keeps its money to spend on its perceived problems that you hold to be more pressing than your vision of your future utopia. However, somehow our problems are less important than your perceived utopia.

We are to give up everything for your vision of the future, and your country is to stay sovereign and keep its money.

It doesn't work that way. Furthermore, your uneven politics are self-serving and are thus unethical insofar as you are advocating for their implementation on the world stage.

If you want the result, then your people need to do the work and pay the money. That includes leaving your heritage behind and welcoming millions of foreigners into your nation, and elevating them to places in your government and in the business world.

Insofar as your comments on the middle east are concerned, they make no sense as you admit yourself when you state that the situation is more complicated than your wishes about it acknowledge.

Quote:

Quote:

Just because your people got into the worst family feud known to modern man, and we helped you to leverage you against China, North Korea, and Russia, doesn't make our hand up your collective asses the savior of mankind. I'm glad that you enjoy the benefits of us saving you from your worse half, though. I might too.

I guess we should go back to a time before US military supremacy and US bases everywhere so we can go back to everyone fighting each other (not just the two Koreas) and losing 60 million people (World War II)

Everyone is still fighting each other. Nuclear weapons are what keeps it cold, not USA supremacy. Btw, real USA soldiers are on the ground in every war that you deem that we are required for. Real sons and fathers are lost as a result, to include my own.

But, again, our resources and families are not real to you. We are merely an idea meant to be used as any tool.

Quote:

Quote:

Quickly or slowly, it destroys what it absorbs. I know what is in store. I live it every day. In Korea (where I have also lived) you do not. You live in a hermetic bubble of homogeneous "unity" and think that it will be the same or similar once you are unified with the rest of the world. I can tell you that it will not, and not in a good way.

But, again, be a leader. Let Koreans show us to the future. We have millions of extra refugees that we can donate to the cause, almost immediately. It'll be like gaining a new, extended family and it won't cause any issues; long or short term. They'll be Korean, just like you, in two generations. Or is Korea too "different" for it to work? I know, I know, you want us to do it.

You're right. I don't want it. But you're not getting the point I am trying to make - that hopefully someday there will be something that transcends race, ethnicity, religion, etc that people around the world can unite under (idealistic but I remain hopeful)

Except for you? If you are going to have something that transcends identity, then you have to work for it as well. Thus, you should be advocating fro the people to flood in, and the money to flood out, so that society on the Korean Peninsula can transcend race and identity.

As of now, your wish seems to be limited to the Western amusement park that you can look to for resources (military, economic, vacation, etc) when you want it while keeping your own society very particular.

Quote:

Quote:

Again, you are comparing as analogous what occurred between close cousins of tribes that formed nation states, and what you are proposing for the world. As I carefully explained in my last response, it is not analogous.

You're right. It's not like Cameroon people went over to Scandinavia to mix with the Goths and produced Sweden.

That's right.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Lol stop coming at me with your agenda. Manosphere / hard right is just as stupid as crazy leftists. Keyboard warriors

You mean in response to your post on your agenda? Did you really just ask someone to "stop" in a political discussion that you chimed in on with, for this forum, a contrarian view?

I'll make a deal with you: type "Uncle" and I'll stop.

You're right. It's a forum - for discussion.

Though you did seem overly aggressive in response to something I posted that was not targeting anyone or talking shit in any way. But I guess that is expected on the Internet and its silly faceless keyboard warriors. Instead of starting shit over the internet go and Google "p4p" - I'm sure it will solve a lot of your problems. Besides, that shit will be gone once us communists suppress all free enterprise!

You seem confused about the internet. Political discussions are political. If me giving you a reality check about irresponsibly, and unevenly applied, conceived political opinions is "aggressive" to you, then maybe you should go and speak to family members about your opinions and not post them on the "deep" section of this forum.

You are advocating a large part of the philosophy of early twentieth century psychopaths who threw the entirety of Russia, as well as China, into revolution and that led to widespread ethnic and class based cleansing.

If someone started a thread on a core tenet of Nazism, such as skull measurements being an indication of something and how society should move toward such recognition, than that person should expect an equally spirited response.

If people contradicting your "Mass Effect 3" utopianism that you want for everyone but Korea marks me as keyboard warrior, then so be it. But you are posting in the wrong forum and on the wrong topic if you want to avoid a response.

Internationalist communism was responsible for 100 million deaths in the 20th century. What you are advocating is much worse than the WWII scenario that you are meaning to avoid; and beyond that it seems to be a War that you little understand anyway. It would make more sense to advocate against banking cartels than it would nationalism if you want to avoid another WWII.

Quote:

Proof that identity is fluid. 100% accurate going back to the 1200s-1300s - I can't remember the exact year. Many Korean families have a record of their family name from the beginning

Well, then, bring the African and Middle Eastern refugees into Korea.

Quote:

Where do you get the idea that I think the USA culture is an improvement. Actually, I think USA culture (as it is today) is a joke. Just saying how things change over time

Okay, so then they can also change in the other direction. Why should we recognize culturally inevitable change as a logical buttress for your world political desires if the result of the change is a "joke"? What you want is either good or it is bad. If the change is bad, the what you want has to also be bad.

Quote:

Quote:

I'll tell you why. Because it isn't really about "unity". It's about destruction of the socially rooted political and economic power of select nations.

Yes, destroying things is exactly what I want to do

Anyway, I guess there is no point in arguing. We are all set on our own views and those color our perception of things. You will take the slightest hint that I am a communist and run with it, whereas I will do the same with you but think you are a bitter PUA loser

Not going to read or respond, save your finger stamina for another online battle

Thanks double standard Korean Nationalist / World Internationalist with 118 posts on a PUA forum. Come back soon.

[whiteknightrises]

(05-16-2016 11:39 AM)Lizard King Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 08:29 AM)whiteknightrises Wrote:  

So I've been thinking about this

-Btw, the one world government or whatever, I don't know whether that's part of communism/socialism. I just associate communism/socialism with welfare state and destroying the economy which is something I'm not about-

But multiculturalism, the Borg, one world government, whatever you want to call it - it seems like it will never work. Or at least hasn't up until now.

I guess it can never work - at least probably not without conflict

Quick google search of "successful multicultural societies" yields results like Australia, Canada, USA, which were all immigrant nations to begin with (the present day success of which is questionable)

Also, I addressed most of the guy's points. He just came at me pretty aggressively after no real provocation in my first post. Though admittedly the post was half-baked/not well thought out and I shouldn't have posted it in the first place

You need to get off Google and get your head in some books. Don't take that personally, it's good advice, not an insult. Books are much better places to get information than google searches.

To date, supra-national organisations have failed miserably.

League of Nations: tried to castrate Germany, germinated Hitler and WW2.

United Nations: essentially the USA's mouthpiece, nothing more. Also created Israel, look at the shit storm that has been creating. What does it(UN) achieve that's good? Not much. (disclaimer: I'm not saying Israel shouldn't exist)

Sykes-Picot: carved up the Levant/Middle East. Impossible to remove this supra-national deal from the causes of current Middle East tension.

Triple Entente/Triple Alliance: Millions dead.

EU: Destroying Europe.



Sometimes it is better to not post on this forum, and let existing discussions take their own path. However, if you have an honest question, no one will rebuke for you asking about something.

Thanks for that response. Definitely better to keep one's head down when not knowledgeable or experienced in a given topic

Will keep my posts to things I can actually speak on moving forward

Would also appreciate any recommendations you or anyone else has on books about supra-national organizations

[cascadecombo]

delete

[cascadecombo]

(11-26-2015 02:30 AM)262 Wrote:  

Will the elites ever be on the chopping block?

Pacifying the global mass of sheep through Facebook/Tinder/video games/porn aside, in the event of a collapse:

1) Will they "divide and conquer" by creating fictitious groups of people to fight each other instead of them, say like how the British created or encouraged the Hutus and the Tutsis, as I understand?

2) Will they merely be replaced by other elites?

Just my thoughts, thinking that we live in a world where the power structure is similar to that in the world of Game of Thrones.

I'm of the mind that they will quickly be replaced by other "elites".

People crave a leader, they do not want to have to make choices nor feel responsible for the outcome of whatever choices were decided upon. They will however, bitch and moan over whatever they can find until they think they have found a replacement; people, a regime or whatever. Only to quickly never realize as more things change the more things stay the same.

(05-16-2016 08:29 AM)whiteknightrises Wrote:  

So I've been thinking about this

-Btw, the one world government or whatever, I don't know whether that's part of communism/socialism. I just associate communism/socialism with welfare state and destroying the economy which is something I'm not about-

But multiculturalism, the Borg, one world government, whatever you want to call it - it seems like it will never work. Or at least hasn't up until now.

I guess it can never work - at least probably not without conflict

Quick google search of "successful multicultural societies" yields results like Australia, Canada, USA, which were all immigrant nations to begin with (the present day success of which is questionable)

Also, I addressed most of the guy's points. He just came at me pretty aggressively after no real provocation in my first post. Though admittedly the post was half-baked/not well thought out and I shouldn't have posted it in the first place

I am willing to wager that even if some utopia were created that all races were viewed as the same and no one gave 2 shits if you were green blue or mahogany colored and all spoke a universal language there would still be a schism between people.

Something similar to corporate division or even as mundane as people who root for X sports team over Y sports time. Even today, people have died due to something as retarded as that.

But it's also in this natural desire for competition and conflict that major scientific breakthroughs have been championed. People need a goal and challenge in order to become great. The untested man is the man who has yet to gaze upon his potential.