One thing that bugs me about totalitarian system's symbols.

How would you explain the fact that you'd get banned in an instant for having a nazi swastika in your sig, but it's acceptable to have a hammer and a sickle in it. As a reminder: total count of WWII Victims is estimated to exceed 55 000 000 human lives, while the amount of people killed during Stalin's rule alone is estimated as 60 000 000 lives.

I wonder what's the OT take on this matter. For me both of the symbols should be equally banned.

How would you explain the fact that you'd get banned in an instant for having a nazi swastika in your sig, but it's acceptable to have a hammer and a sickle in it. As a reminder: total count of WWII Victims is estimated to exceed 55 000 000 human lives, while the amount of people killed during Stalin's rule alone is estimated as 60 000 000 lives.

I wonder what's the OT take on this matter. For me both of the symbols should be equally banned.

shinian

Simple: russia was never truly communist. even stalin didnt preach racism

Free_Marxet

It should be illegal to have American flags are avatars/sigs, because of all the Native Americans killed in order for this country to exist. (note: not my real opinion)

National socialism is an inherently racist and anti-Semitic political stance, whereas communism is detached from such concepts. That is why you cannot display an inverted Swastika (important distinction), but you can display a hammer and sickle.

Simple: russia was never truly communist. even stalin didnt preach racism

Free_Marxet

That's correct. He didn't murder people because of the racial background. He slaughtered half of Russia population based on their political views and economical welfare. How exactly is that better?

[QUOTE="Free_Marxet"]

Simple: russia was never truly communist. even stalin didnt preach racism

LJS9502_basic

Because communism is a party and even GS loves parties.

Banning symbols doesn't help.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Free_Marxet"]

Simple: russia was never truly communist. even stalin didnt preach racism

Free_Marxet

Banning certain symbols sound a bit totalitarian to me... Think about that for a second.. you want to ban totalitarian system's smybols. and in effect you're practicing totalitarianism. Great idea.

Banning certain symbols sound a bit totalitarian to me... Think about that for a second.. you want to ban totalitarian system's smybols. and in effect you're practicing totalitarianism. Great idea.

EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]

Banning certain symbols sound a bit totalitarian to me... Think about that for a second.. you want to ban totalitarian system's smybols. and in effect you're practicing totalitarianism. Great idea.

jimmyjammer69

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"][QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]

Banning certain symbols sound a bit totalitarian to me... Think about that for a second.. you want to ban totalitarian system's smybols. and in effect you're practicing totalitarianism. Great idea.

EMOEVOLUTION

Banning certain symbols sound a bit totalitarian to me... Think about that for a second.. you want to ban totalitarian system's smybols. and in effect you're practicing totalitarianism. Great idea.

EMOEVOLUTION

Baning only in case when they work as a propaganda symbols. Not everywhere. I love WWII movies/games and I wouldn't like to see those symbols erased or censored.

[QUOTE="Free_Marxet"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Yet it was part of the flag of the Soviet Union. And Stalin was....you got it the leader of the Soviet Union. Thus the connection....

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"][QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]

Banning certain symbols sound a bit totalitarian to me... Think about that for a second.. you want to ban totalitarian system's smybols. and in effect you're practicing totalitarianism. Great idea.

EMOEVOLUTION

This is a typical argument I see.. but it really never excuses the behavior it's attempting to defend. EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] Irrelevant. You can still use totalitarian practices even in a business/private organization.EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]This is a typical argument I see.. but it really never excuses the behavior it's attempting to defend. Greatgone12

This is a typical argument I see.. but it really never excuses the behavior it's attempting to defend. EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]No. You aren't forced to post on a site that bans such symbols.LJS9502_basic

Did you even read my I post? It had nothing to do with GS. I'm talking to the guy who proposed such symbols be banned.. he's proposing a totalitarian practice in order to combat totalitarianism.. EMOEVOLUTION

Posting on gamespot is not a right, if you don't abide by the rules you can be rightfully B&. You can't compare breaking the rules of a private institution with a totalitarian goverment practice.

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"][QUOTE="Greatgone12"]Nobody is trying to excuse anybody's behavior. Gamespot is not a child. We are not going to put it in time out for not allowing certain imagery on its forums.

jimmyjammer69

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] Did you even read my I post? It had nothing to do with GS. I'm talking to the guy who proposed such symbols be banned.. he's proposing a totalitarian practice in order to combat totalitarianism.. Dystopian-X

Posting on gamespot is not a right, if you don't abide by the rules you can be rightfully B&. You can't compare breaking the rules of a private institution with a totalitarian goverment practice.

See now.. I understand most Americans believe this.. they're taught to believe this from a very early age. But the fact is people are no individuals.. and organizations are not private.. They're all apart of something bigger then themselves. And majority of people don't have a choice but to participate in certain private organizations or they suffer dire consequences.. of course thats not true for something as simple as GS. I see many people go to work each day who don't believe in their companies policies or what their company stands for.. but they go anyways because if they didnt they'd have no place else to work. IT's really a pathetic excuse for control. IF you don't like it leave.. really? Tell that to 50 million workers that if they dont like their job they should just leave.. where would they work? What would they do. Anyways, don't confuse my problems with private business in America with GS.. because honestly. I wasn't even talking about GS to begin with. I was talking about the posters proposal to imply totalitarianism tactics in order to eliminate what he thinks represents totalitarianism.EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]See now.. I understand most Americans believe this.. they're taught to believe this from a very early age. But the fact is people are no individuals.. and organizations are not private.. They're all apart of something bigger then themselves. And majority of people don't have a choice but to participate in certain private organizations or they suffer dire consequences.. of course thats not true for something as simple as GS. I see many people go to work each day who don't believe in their companies policies or what their company stands for.. but they go anyways because if they didnt they'd have no place else to work. IT's really a pathetic excuse for control. IF you don't like it leave.. really? Tell that to 50 million workers that if they dont like their job they should just leave.. where would they work? What would they do. Anyways, don't confuse my problems with private business in America with GS.. because honestly. I wasn't even talking about GS to begin with. I was talking about the posters proposal to imply totalitarianism tactics in order to eliminate what he thinks represents totalitarianism.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] This is a typical argument I see.. but it really never excuses the behavior it's attempting to defend. EMOEVOLUTION

[ No, the perception of private is a entirely flawed.. concept. the concept of ownership is also just as flawed. All organizations are part of a larger community.. to separate them and seclude them as self serving and free of this larger community.. is just an absurd concept. People like the ilusion of control so they toss out words like private.. so they think they should have the right to do whatever they want with something even if it effects billons of people.. and they private organizations do effect that many people with their choices.

EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]See now.. I understand most Americans believe this.. they're taught to believe this from a very early age. But the fact is people are no individuals.. and organizations are not private.. They're all apart of something bigger then themselves. And majority of people don't have a choice but to participate in certain private organizations or they suffer dire consequences.. of course thats not true for something as simple as GS. I see many people go to work each day who don't believe in their companies policies or what their company stands for.. but they go anyways because if they didnt they'd have no place else to work. IT's really a pathetic excuse for control. IF you don't like it leave.. really? Tell that to 50 million workers that if they dont like their job they should just leave.. where would they work? What would they do. Anyways, don't confuse my problems with private business in America with GS.. because honestly. I wasn't even talking about GS to begin with. I was talking about the posters proposal to imply totalitarianism tactics in order to eliminate what he thinks represents totalitarianism.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]

[ No, the perception of private is a entirely flawed.. concept. the concept of ownership is also just as flawed. All organizations are part of a larger community.. to separate them and seclude them as self serving and free of this larger community.. is just an absurd concept. People like the ilusion of control so they toss out words like private.. so they think they should have the right to do whatever they want with something even if it effects billons of people.. and they private organizations do effect that many people with their choices.

LJS9502_basic

The posters proposal to imply totalitarianism tactics in order to eliminate what he thinks represents totalitarianism was strictly about GS. I know You were making a more general statement but LJS thinks very curiously (that's a compliment LJS :D) and in a very exact manner. If You don't state Exactly when You are implying what and in what context, etc, he can argue on and on and on thinking You meant something else. Then he gets annoyed that You weren't precise enough. I have that too, to a lesser extend. I'm just telling You in the hope that You and others don't get all angry again like i've seen happen so many times before with other discussions.KungfuKitten

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"][QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] I'm starting to wonder if anybody is even reading my posts.. they're jumping to such wild conclusions..EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]

[ No, the perception of private is a entirely flawed.. concept. the concept of ownership is also just as flawed. All organizations are part of a larger community.. to separate them and seclude them as self serving and free of this larger community.. is just an absurd concept. People like the ilusion of control so they toss out words like private.. so they think they should have the right to do whatever they want with something even if it effects billons of people.. and they private organizations do effect that many people with their choices.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"] Look... if a government or organisation came to your house and told you what rules you could and couldn't set, you'd probably accuse them of being totalitarian, no? Then suggesting that GS should be forbidden from forbidding certain imagery is as totalitarian as forbidding it in the first place. These arguments could spiral on indefinitely.jimmyjammer69

I was born and raised in the United States of America.. I'm 25 years old. I've been to college. I completed college. I've done everything most Americans do.. except the one thing I refuse to do is believe that a private organization has no influence on other groups of people. They may call themselves private, but everything they do is connected to the society around them. Of course we're getting off topic now. All I was saying is what he's proposing is something a totalitarianism government would propose to deal with influences it felt unappealing.EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="KungfuKitten"]The posters proposal to imply totalitarianism tactics in order to eliminate what he thinks represents totalitarianism was strictly about GS. I know You were making a more general statement but LJS thinks very curiously (that's a compliment LJS :D) and in a very exact manner. If You don't state Exactly when You are implying what and in what context, etc, he can argue on and on and on thinking You meant something else. Then he gets annoyed that You weren't precise enough. I have that too, to a lesser extend. I'm just telling You in the hope that You and others don't get all angry again like i've seen happen so many times before with other discussions.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"][QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] I'm confused.. are you saying it is or isn't a practice of totalitarianism to eliminate outside symbols from being represented in your population? Because I'm pretty certain it is.

EMOEVOLUTION

I'm not making any comment on what I, personally, think totalitarianism consists in. All rules are restrictions on freedom, but as "totalitarian" is about excessive control, whether or not a government banning certain images would be totalitarian is subjective. I've never heard the term applied to any non-political organisation, so I'd say no, GS cannot be totalitarian.

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] I was born and raised in the United States of America.. I'm 25 years old. I've been to college. I completed college. I've done everything most Americans do.. except the one thing I refuse to do is believe that a private organization has no influence on other groups of people. They may call themselves private, but everything they do is connected to the society around them. Of course we're getting off topic now. All I was saying is what he's proposing is something a totalitarianism government would propose to deal with influences it felt unappealing.LJS9502_basic

Yes you can.. when they both imploy the same strategies for control. One of those strategies includes out lawing outside influences from symbols you dont' believe in yourself. The poster suggested all symbols from certain places that represent ideology he didnt agree with be banned. That's a practice of totalitarianism.. no matter where it is used. I don't get why people are so up in arms over this.. about me pointing out the obivous.

EMOEVOLUTION

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"]

Yes you can.. when they both imploy the same strategies for control. One of those strategies includes out lawing outside influences from symbols you dont' believe in yourself. The poster suggested all symbols from certain places that represent ideology he didnt agree with be banned. That's a practice of totalitarianism.. no matter where it is used. I don't get why people are so up in arms over this.. about me pointing out the obivous.

Dystopian-X

I've not once suggest what I'm saying should be applied to GS current set of rules.

Hmm... just thought, TC, that you might be interested in this article. It's about a law that looks set to pass in Poland (I actually thought it already had).

Many people agree to a certain set of rules they don't agree with.. out of necessity.. And if you show up to work drunk, yes, of course you'd be punished. I'm not making an argument that suggests rules are unnecessary. I think my argument is pretty clear cut. IT'S PERFECTLY possible to be apart of a "private" organization even if you dont' agree with the rules... not because you want to be there.. but because it's the only viable way for you to provide for your family.

I've not once suggest what I'm saying should be applied to GS current set of rules.

EMOEVOLUTION

PS: The GS example would still apply to any other private organization.

Heh. I figured You might not have noticed that Yourself. It's very easy to miss. Yes it happens very often when You enter a discussion. You are very strict and precise. So much that it can really annoy people as they have a hard time getting across their point while You dissect it. I have that too, a bit. It used to be way worse though. (And it's not necessarily a bad thing btw.) I don't know what it is. Sometimes i think it's that i'm missing some part of the communication process. You know, people say one thing and mean another. Then they expect You to understand that. I think You would agree with me that this seems silly. It's much better if people just state their arguments the way they mean it, and not be so vague about it. I've even considered that i might be somewhat autistic. But it's very easy to miss. First i thought people were all just very stupid. The moment i realized something was 'off' was when i heard my mom tell me that one of my first teachers got fired, because she went insane. And apparently that had to do with her not understanding any of my answers and how i thought. I consistently 'misinterpreted' their questions. Do You have problems with making schooltests or whatever You call them in english? Exams?KungfuKitten