all 8 comments

[–]Optimus85 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Literal translation: "And his hands would twist the priest's entrails like a makeshift rope to strangle the kings.".

[–]it_talk_like_that 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

And is this call for violence legal on Saidit because we're misquoting a philosophe?

And you're the guy /u/magnora7 thanked for helping him

The Pyramid of Debate has been updated. Thanks to u/JasonCarswell for the graphics work. An additional lowest level has been added of "Advocating violence against groups or individuals."

Fucking incredible.

Here's my rendering of Diderot:

And the admins will choke their users with the entrails of their hypocrisy.

Let's just let everyone call for violence against everyone, and be done with it.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Is it a call for violence, or an absurdist observation, like "when hell freezes over", if there even is a hell?

So historical quotes should be banned? "Give me liberty or give me death!" should go in the censored bin?

Sure you could argue that recent events and figures are historical. But who are they targeting?

Are they asking for violence against innocents of a different faith or race or sex or country or under a different economic system?

Or are they challenging the powers that manipulate, deceive, divide, exploit and exterminate?

Would banning you be violent enough? Or are you asking for more?

What is your game?

[–]FormosaOolong 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

misquoting a philosophe?

I guess you don't speak french, then?

[–]mongoose 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Absurd because a good king is much better than a bad democracy. Democracy only works if you have a knowledgeable base of voters not a mob of idiots.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

True.

And no rulers and masters is better than all of the above.

[–]mongoose 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't agree with that. Think of all the dumb people in the world. Law and order is needed, this can't be the wild west.

I think the best system is a like form of constitutional monarchy where the king will actually have power.

If you look at history, you have weak and stupid kings but also great ones once every few generations. When the king is stupid and weak, the parliament or senate takes over and protects the country from his stupidity. When the king is strong, he should take power.

The current US legislature is no more than a bunch of self serving nobles, just not in name. The president is no more than a more powerful noble. This country doesn't have hereditary kings but if it did, a strong one would just kick out the most corrupt nobles/politicians from both sides.

The current system is a balance of power between different elected officials. But the best system should be a balance of power between elected officials against one who isn't elected and doesn't have to pander to lobbyists.