PDA

View Full Version : Is Man Capable of Living in Peace?


Rohirrim
08-18-2014, 11:26 AM
In other words, can you see any possibility in the future, some day far away, when man will actually learn to live in peace? And more importantly, will there be football? No, I kid. But really... :puff:

Rohirrim
08-18-2014, 11:28 AM
I vote no. I think we'll go extinct first.

cutthemdown
08-18-2014, 11:56 AM
I live in peace right now. Do you mean peace everywhere all the time? Well then no that is a utopia and a grown man should know better.

NorthernistCaliforneeway7
08-18-2014, 12:07 PM
Complete peace and harmony......no. There will always be evil, crazy and ignorant people.

Arkie
08-18-2014, 12:14 PM
We are still in the early stages of civilization.

Rohirrim
08-18-2014, 01:47 PM
We are still in the early stages of civilization.

That's true. When you think about it, we've only been working on this for about 5,000 years. Hell, it took us 250,000 years to evolve beyond the first pounding stone. Ha!

Requiem
08-18-2014, 03:08 PM
Not everybody.

cutthemdown
08-18-2014, 03:12 PM
We are still in the early stages of civilization.

too bad global warming is going to kill us off before we all evolve to be perfect little animals.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-18-2014, 06:26 PM
Theoretically, yes.

You can't get rid of aggression (or the "reptilian brain") but you can learn to channel it constructively.

And there are plenty of examples of individuals and subgroups within societies who resolve conflicts in non-violent and mutually respectful ways (although none of these examples are likely to make headlines.)

At the very least, I can envision a humanity where violence is rare and always the last resort when dealing with individuals who infringe upon the rights of others.

Humans would have to evolve to a level where self-respect and respect for others (the latter follows from the former) become "hard wired," if you will.

As mentioned earlier, it remains to be seen whether we destroy the planet/go extinct before any of these changes can take place.

nyuk nyuk
08-19-2014, 03:42 PM
Peace being a socialist Utopia in which there is income equality, equality of outcomes, and equal representation in jail in spite of lopsided crime data?

nyuk nyuk
08-19-2014, 03:42 PM
And there are plenty of examples of individuals and subgroups within societies who resolve conflicts in non-violent and mutually respectful ways

I think they should follow your lead here.

BroncoBeavis
08-19-2014, 04:07 PM
Theoretically, yes.

You can't get rid of aggression (or the "reptilian brain") but you can learn to channel it constructively.

Otherwise known as The Matrix. :)

DenverBrit
08-19-2014, 05:03 PM
So far, no!

Rohirrim
08-19-2014, 05:04 PM
Peace being a socialist Utopia in which there is income equality, equality of outcomes, and equal representation in jail in spite of lopsided crime data?

Mark of the ideologue: They never stop.

W*GS
08-19-2014, 06:12 PM
Peace being a socialist Utopia in which there is income equality, equality of outcomes, and equal representation in jail in spite of lopsided crime data?

Then and only then would you have a chance of not being an impotent tiny prick.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-19-2014, 06:18 PM
I think they should follow your lead here.

Speaking of people who infringe upon the rights of others (and the women who love them...)

:wave:

Arkie
08-19-2014, 06:37 PM
Peace being a socialist Utopia in which there is income equality, equality of outcomes, and equal representation in jail in spite of lopsided crime data?

epicSocialism4tw!

nyuk nyuk
08-22-2014, 07:01 PM
Mark of the ideologue: They never stop.

That explains the Left. Thanks.

nyuk nyuk
08-22-2014, 07:02 PM
epicSocialism4tw!

I take it you don't own ****.

People who own **** and worked for it don't like Socialism, realizing some loser will take it away from them.

nyuk nyuk
08-22-2014, 07:03 PM
Speaking of people who infringe upon the rights of others (and the women who love them...)

:wave:

Do tell!!!

W*GS
08-22-2014, 07:03 PM
I take it you don't own ****.

He owns your sorry ass.

Arkie
08-22-2014, 07:32 PM
I take it you don't own ****.

People who own **** and worked for it don't like Socialism, realizing some loser will take it away from them.

Your obsession with socialism brought it up in this thread. I'm for individual rights and responsibilities. You're for a police state. I'm also for peace and tolerance. Those last two confuse you into thinking I'm a socialist liberal or something. ???

Rohirrim
08-22-2014, 09:53 PM
Your obsession with socialism brought it up in this thread. I'm for individual rights and responsibilities. You're for a police state. I'm also for peace and tolerance. Those last two confuse you into thinking I'm a socialist liberal or something. ???

You're for peace on Earth!?



Goddamn socialist!

Guess Who
08-22-2014, 10:10 PM
Man is smart enough to know greed, envy and jealousy but too stupid to get over it.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-23-2014, 12:09 AM
Man is smart enough to know greed, envy and jealousy but too stupid to get over it.

But greed is good!

Saint Ron and his worshippers told me so.

broncocalijohn
08-23-2014, 12:25 AM
I vote no. I think we'll go extinct first.

Can you expand? Seems you think no but real destruction wont happen because we will be extinct by non man destruction ie. War.

I think the problem is countries are easier to say yes there will be peace. What we have now are individual groups that cross borders and are not attached to one country. It will be harder to to revenge on these groups as many will co tine as individuals or smaller pockets of the same ideology. Sad to say this but something will happen horribly and I wonder if I should live on an island away from these dangers.

baja
08-23-2014, 12:48 AM
Ever? Yes of course.

B-Large
08-23-2014, 06:40 AM
Human history suggests no.

And not as long as brown people sit on our light sweet crude.

TailgateNut
08-23-2014, 07:03 AM
Not as long as there is any semblance of organized religion.

B-Large
08-23-2014, 09:06 AM
Not as long as there is any semblance of organized religion.

Or need to access natural resources, or ingrained human self interest, or our inherent drive towards self destruction...

We're designed to destruct if you think about it. We poor survivors as compared to other animals, our existence of tens depends on manipulation natural conditions to our favor... At so e point, you can't Tech your way out of inevitability....

TailgateNut
08-23-2014, 09:17 AM
Or need to access natural resources, or ingrained human self interest, or our inherent drive towards self destruction...

We're designed to destruct if you think about it. We poor survivors as compared to other animals, our existence of tens depends on manipulation natural conditions to our favor... At so e point, you can't Tech your way out of inevitability....

True----we are to smart for our own good. Half the country , if not more couldn't survive for a month if our food supply were disrupted. Half has no arms to protect themselves from civil unrest or in the event of a civil war. A good portion of the citizens put to much trust into their goverment to protect them. Hell, that same portion actually trusts the goverment to make the right decisions.:spit:

Rohirrim
08-23-2014, 09:21 AM
Can you expand? Seems you think no but real destruction wont happen because we will be extinct by non man destruction ie. War.

I think the problem is countries are easier to say yes there will be peace. What we have now are individual groups that cross borders and are not attached to one country. It will be harder to to revenge on these groups as many will co tine as individuals or smaller pockets of the same ideology. Sad to say this but something will happen horribly and I wonder if I should live on an island away from these dangers.

The average survival rate for a mammalian species is about a million years. Since human beings can't seem to evolve beyond their crazy ape selves (and in some cases, even their reptilian brain stem) while being capable of creating nuclear weapons and spewing enough **** into the atmosphere to change the climate, I would say the odds are not good. Just pop up the nearest news site and read the headlines. Do you think that species has any hope of lasting long? Hell, just one facet of their craziness, religion, is probably enough to do them in all by itself. Think of it: We're free to destroy this world because the afterlife will be so much better? That's some crazy ****.

nyuk nyuk
08-23-2014, 12:16 PM
Not as long as there is any semblance of organized religion.

The regional distribution of needed resources means conflict. It's built into nature, not counting human nature such as territorialism, etc.

nyuk nyuk
08-23-2014, 12:18 PM
Not as long as there is any semblance of organized religion.

Yet atheists killed far more, so....

Also to draw a false equivalence between all organized religions as if they are all equally problematic in promoting divisiveness and violence is totally wrong, too.

Requiem
08-23-2014, 12:21 PM
But what color of underwear did those killers wear?

baja
08-23-2014, 12:26 PM
Yet atheists killed far more, so....

Also to draw a false equivalence between all organized religions as if they are all equally problematic in promoting divisiveness and violence is totally wrong, too.

I assume you have proof of that?

TailgateNut
08-23-2014, 12:30 PM
Yet atheists killed far more, so....

Also to draw a false equivalence between all organized religions as if they are all equally problematic in promoting divisiveness and violence is totally wrong, too.

Riiiiight?

If there really was a GOD (all-knowing/ all powerful)wouldn't he have all his "creations" follow the same belief?

TailgateNut
08-23-2014, 12:31 PM
I assume you have proof of that?


No, "IT" doesn't

baja
08-23-2014, 12:31 PM
free will

DenverBrit
08-23-2014, 12:35 PM
Yet atheists killed far more, so....

Also to draw a false equivalence between all organized religions as if they are all equally problematic in promoting divisiveness and violence is totally wrong, too.

In the name of 'atheism'?? Ha!

TailgateNut
08-23-2014, 12:36 PM
In the name of 'atheism'?? Ha!

^5:thumbsup::thanku:

nyuk nyuk
08-23-2014, 02:11 PM
In the name of 'atheism'?? Ha!

In part of stamping out religion which they saw evil. It was one of a number of traditions of societies they wanted to get rid of, seeing that they were "bourgeois" relations.

nyuk nyuk
08-23-2014, 02:12 PM
Riiiiight?

If there really was a GOD (all-knowing/ all powerful)wouldn't he have all his "creations" follow the same belief?

Not if you believe in the concept of free will.

Would you rather have robots? If a God exists, must be we be robots in lockstep? Is this your idea of a deity?

nyuk nyuk
08-23-2014, 02:13 PM
^5:thumbsup::thanku:

:clown::clown::clown::clown::clown:

nyuk nyuk
08-23-2014, 02:13 PM
I assume you have proof of that?

USSR and China alone were tens of millions.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-23-2014, 10:08 PM
USSR and China alone were tens of millions.

China?

I didn't know bible thumpers like you considered Buddhism a legitimate religion.

Only when it bolsters your "argument," apparently.

nyuk nyuk
08-24-2014, 02:49 PM
China?

I didn't know bible thumpers like you considered Buddhism a legitimate religion.

Only when it bolsters your "argument," apparently.

Hey dork, the topic was atheist murderers.

Do you read the thread and respond in kind on topic, or do you see a post by someone you hate, fixate on it with some hate-blurred tunnel vision, and make completely off the wall straw man comments like this?

All I can say is...

thafuq?!

P.S. ****head, I'm agnostic.

/facepalm

DenverBrit
08-24-2014, 07:06 PM
USSR and China alone were tens of millions.

In the name of atheism, or in the name of your former ideology?

W*GS
08-24-2014, 07:16 PM
In the name of atheism, or in the name of your former ideology?

Psst - the argument is too subtle for the nyuk.

nyuk nyuk
08-24-2014, 07:44 PM
In the name of atheism, or in the name of your former ideology?

Atheism and Marxism are joined at the hip. You can't separate them, even if you wish to rescue the reputation of militant atheism.

DenverBrit
08-24-2014, 09:04 PM
Atheism and Marxism are joined at the hip. You can't separate them, even if you wish to rescue the reputation of militant atheism.

Explain.

W*GS
08-24-2014, 09:10 PM
Atheism and Marxism are joined at the hip. You can't separate them, even if you wish to rescue the reputation of militant atheism.

Rand was an atheist.

That "pop" was your brain cell bursting.

BroncoBeavis
08-25-2014, 08:35 AM
In the name of 'atheism'?? Ha!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union

Marxism-Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and the elimination of religious beliefs.[1]
The state was committed to the destruction of religion,[2][3] and destroyed churches, mosques and temples, ridiculed, harassed and executed religious leaders, flooded the schools and media with atheistic teachings, and generally promoted atheism as the truth that society should accept.[4][5] The total number of Christian victims of Soviet state atheist policies, has been estimated to range between 12-20 millions.

The League of the Militant Godless (LMG), under Yemelyan Yaroslavsky, was the main instrument of the anti-religious campaign and it was given special powers that allowed it to dictate to public institutions throughout the country what they needed to do for the campaign.[41]
After 1929 and through the 1930s, the closing of churches, mass arrests of the clergy and religiously active laity, and persecution of people for attending church reached unprecedented proportions.[2][62] The LMG employed terror tactics against believers in order to further the campaign, while employing the guise of protecting the state or prosecuting law-breakers. The clergy were attacked as foreign spies and trials of bishops were conducted with their clergy as well as lay adherents who were reported as 'subversive terroristic gangs' that had been unmasked.[65] Official propaganda at the time called for the banishment of the very concept of God from the Soviet Union.[66] These persecutions were meant to assist the ultimate socialist goal of eliminating religion.[66][67] From 1932 to 1937 Joseph Stalin declared the 'five-year plans of atheism' and the LMG was charged with completely eliminating all religious expression in the country.[66] Many of these same methods and terror tactics were also imposed against others that the regime considered to be its ideological enemies.

In 1934 the persecution of the Renovationist sect began to reach the proportions of the persecution of the old Orthodox church.[70]
During the purges of 1937 and 1938, church documents record that 168,300 Russian Orthodox clergy were arrested. Of these, over 100,000 were shot.[71] Many thousands of victims of persecution became recognized in a special canon of saints known as the "new martyrs and confessors of Russia".

Rohirrim
08-25-2014, 09:01 AM
I don't know how a thread about peace devolved into an argument about Marxism. Oh yeah, that's right. Because the drama llama high-jacked the thread with her Marxism obsession. BTW, "Marxism-Leninism" has little to do with Marx-Engels and a whole lot more to do with Lenin. Just as Stalinism was not communism. It was totalitarian, authoritarian and hierarchical, with the state being all-powerful. Same with Castroism, which is a leader cult (a little Stalinism thrown in), like Hugoism. Then, you've got China, although China has a weird set-up; An all powerful, authoritarian state that allows limited capitalism in order to build a nationalist army.

Nobody has ever actually tried communism. And a I doubt anybody ever will. Why? Because it requires the relinquishing of ego, something man will never do. This is why communism is a failed concept: It relies on humans to act in a way that is not human. Marx's utopia would be stateless, leaderless, have no form of money and all production would be owned in common. No private property. It's like the Eloi in H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds. Anyway, to blame any of the craziness carried out in Marx's name on Marx is like blaming Jesus for the modern insanity called Christianity. Nyuk doesn't know the difference between communism and authoritarianism, or democracy, for that matter, given that as an adherent to Right Wing neoliberalism, she/he favors the oligarchical/corporate totalitarian state.

DenverBrit
08-25-2014, 09:13 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union

Marxism-Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and the elimination of religious beliefs

To my point, thanks.

BroncoBeavis
08-25-2014, 09:25 AM
Look, we can all play this game of marking distinctions.

"Oh, those mass murderers weren't REAL Atheists. They had other motives!"

The same can be said of just about any persecution ever laid at the feet of any belief system.

The Spanish Inquisition was also terrible religious persecution (though unlike anything on the Communists' Scale) But it was really just a politically convenient Monarchical power grab.

As was the English 'reformation'

The real point is that it's a slippery slope to blame whatever convenient rationale a man uses for his own evil. Because a man in power and bent on evil will always grab whatever's handy. But to blame whatever ideology he coats himself in to justify his dirty work is pure fallacy.

And just more proof that evil will never truly leave us. Regardless of how hard we work to force everyone to believe our own narrow-sighted version of the truth.

Rohirrim
08-25-2014, 09:54 AM
Someday, if mankind is able to survive, he will evolve himself out of religion which, honestly speaking, is nothing more than codified superstition.

gyldenlove
08-25-2014, 10:14 AM
With a sufficiently dangerous non-human enemy - yes.

Bronco Yoda
08-25-2014, 10:21 AM
<iframe width="640" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/RsUscVoZcMQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Meck77
08-25-2014, 10:30 AM
No way. Putin is close to shaking up all of Europe in what has been a relatively peaceful region for decades. US is entangled in a holy war that has lasted centuries. It's not getting better. I'd argue it's getting much worse as dictators smell the weakness from our foreign policy. I know it's a popular opinion that the United States shouldn't be the world's police but if not us then who? Russia? China? Israel? Muslims?

Obama thought Romney was nuts when he said Putin was the world's greatest threat to peace. To be continued..................

Arkie
08-25-2014, 11:56 AM
Someday, if mankind is able to survive, he will evolve himself out of religion which, honestly speaking, is nothing more than codified superstition.

Yes, we're talking thousands of years, not just little peaks and valleys measured by centuries. Humans are more peaceful now than in the middle ages. They were more peaceful in the middle ages than during the stone age. We are still not at the height of civilization. It's an ongoing process. If humans are still alive in 10,000 years, it will be because we evolved into a more peaceful species.