We know they are out there and they hate us and our freedom. Should we not do unto them what they would do unto us? Or are they too few and too weak so that we can safely ignore them?
The solution to 1984 is 1973!
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
SolarCross wrote:Should We Put All the Totalitarians in Gulags?
SolarCross wrote:A fair question deserves an honest answer:
totalitarian, noun: an advocate or practitioner of totalitarianism
1 : centralized control by an autocratic authority
2 : the political concept that the citizen should be totally subject to an absolute state authority
https://www.merriam-webster.com/diction ... itarianism
I am going with the standard definitions.
Fabians are literally worse than hitler
Victoribus Spolia wrote:We should always be leery of becoming what we despise in the effort to combat it.
Pants-of-dog wrote:Now, that you have defined the word, please answer the question:
Who do you consider a totalitarian?
SolarCross wrote:Those who fit the standard definitions, obviously. Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Pol Pot etc. Luckily there aren't too many anymore, Kim Jong Il and that Chinese one whose name I can't be bothered to look up is all that is left of that perverse strain. Actually there probably are a few others.
Pants-of-dog wrote:So, excluding dead people, you can only think of one person?
Why not send everyone who, for example, calls for gulags?
Pants-of-dog wrote:Do you think people who advocate for gulags are totalitarian?
Do you think that people who dehumanize whole groups of people are totalitarian?
Promises are being kept even he lost reelection. […]
[Nope, and I don't remember the network nor the an[…]
When I was in elementary school, I saw some child[…]
From what I am reading, the hurdle is ten years of[…]