User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 41

  1. #21
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ~ReggieRebel~ View Post
    okay im going to agree with the first guy...who said machiavelian. dunno what was going on inside the princes head when he wrote it, but for all we know that it hasnt worked in recent history (because of human nature perhaps) i find it equally hard to believe that folks cant see the beauty in such a system, if it is run exactly as the book points out. lock me up for a war criminal while you have the chance, but i believe too many people focus only on the humor, or the it will never work, or the whatever one aspect you want to ascribe to it, and miss the forest for the tree.
    the prince as a whole is a masterpieve if governship. if a chopstick is used to stab someone instead of picknup a piece of asian food, is it the fault of the chopstick inventor, or the fault of the one who did the stabbing??

    im done my speel. but if i had to pick a world to live in, even if imperfect, i would choose it. if someone isnt willing to fight for something, amd take the consequences of having said so, they shouldnt stand up for it.

    am i condoning mass murders and all the other sorts of evils? no.....but i recognize that every government has its evils, and i dont believe we are qualified to say that, or which, or wheither evils caused by one group are better than or to be prefered over another.


    there has to be some concretes, otherwise there is no meaming.


    i agree with machiavelism as a matter of principle. i dont like democracy because of matters of principle. yet i will accept that for the current moment, democracy is where things are. but careful observations will reveal that the global conciousness of those in power are moving into two camps, possibly three. machiavelism, whether as written in the book, or as acted by the terrors of the past few hundred years, will very much take center stage.
    You know that Machavelli wrote a book called The Discourses in which he endorsed Republican Democracy as the ideal form of government and society?

    You know that Machavelli was not a prince himself but worked for a princely family who he intensely disliked and the book is thought by many to have been an act of Rennaisance era trolling?

  2. #22
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    1,862

    Default

    Anarchy, mofucka.

  3. #23
    Member ~ReggieRebel~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    MBTI
    intj
    Enneagram
    5w0 sx
    Socionics
    duno
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    You know that Machavelli wrote a book called The Discourses in which he endorsed Republican Democracy as the ideal form of government and society?

    You know that Machavelli was not a prince himself but worked for a princely family who he intensely disliked and the book is thought by many to have been an act of Rennaisance era trolling?

    nope lark, cant say as ive read the discources. and i am well famniliar with the traditional arguments about his trolling and about how he wasnt himself a prince.

    nevertheless, i still like the book and the principles in it. it woukd take a very peculiar person who could pull off such a government. and i dont have any illusions about such a situation being impossed on any territorry existing these days. anyone trying to do so would have to pay a high butchers bill from all the dissenters.

    but the question, was not, what kind of government do you think would work these days , or, what government would you like to live in...the question was what kind of government is your favorite.

    i would be the one who lives in a kingdom with a benvelolent king whose prince acts as set in the book. it is assumed that the rulers people are happy to have him and have not been forced under swordpoint to submit. or if they have, it is assumed that their reasons for staying put are to themselves, convincing enough to leave them in their current circumstances, regardless of how loud they may grumble against it. Personally, i try to adopt the ..dont grumble louder then your willingness to do something about it...though ive come to realize im one of the few who do this.

    and as for when the prince goes and tries to convert others, it is not a comfortable situation. but i like it nonetheless bc it is confrontational...it makes people evaluate value. Some will think, and some folks will focus less on thinking and more on acting. it is likely not to be pretty....but i dont recall the question being 'which kind of government is pretiest' either lol.

    my concession is that i know im very singular in this desire. and i dont deny that most would avoid such a situation. but i certianly like the propensity for destroying complacency that his government has. I cant say as i would want to live somewhere that isnt lively, that is full of couch potatoes who dont care what happens to them as long as they are fed. Nothing wrong with a little peace, but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. If there is no recognition of what war is, can its lack be as keenly appriciated?

    not everyone likes confrontation. i get that. but even the fact that some are non confrontational will not in and of itself keep them from living in situations that could be avoided if only they 'grew a bit of backbone' as someone with less tact might put it. But I should expect that the fact that they are being oppressed would speak to persons of other personality types who would fight to defend them.

    not everyone fights the same...some use logic, some use civil disobediance, some beauty and some brawns. i like the system bc it is a unifying one. it makes people passionate. it demands that everyone involved think about their priorities, and what they are and arent willing to do, or change, about the world they live in. the machiavelian system as described in the book, seems to me to be a pretty convincing catalyst for shaking humanity out of its complacency.

    Not that every society is, or that there are entire societies that are 100percent complacent....but we humans can be astoundingly good at ignoring what we dont want to see. if a human stands for everything, said human would really be standing for nothing. And if said human stands for nothing, they are complacent and, but for the hope of becoming noncomplacent, are better off having not lived.
    Last edited by ~ReggieRebel~; 02-26-2015 at 10:50 PM. Reason: changed third paragraph to accuratly reflect the topic thread
    Active, successful natures shun the dictum 'Know Thyself' and follow the commamdment 'Will Thyself' ~nietzsche

    "Willing is the intj's evolutionary consequence of Knowing present and future as the everpresent livestream of yesterminute." ~reg~

  4. #24
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ~ReggieRebel~ View Post
    nope lark, cant say as ive read the discources. and i am well famniliar with the traditional arguments about his trolling and about how he wasnt himself a prince.

    nevertheless, i still like the book and the principles in it. it woukd take a very peculiar person who could pull off such a government. and i dont have any illusions about such a situation being impossed on any territorry existing these days. anyone trying to do so would have to pay a high butchers bill from all the dissenters.

    but the question, was not, what kind of government do you think would work these days , or, what government would you like to live in...the question was what kind of government is your favorite.

    i would be the one who lives in a kingdom with a benvelolent king whose prince acts as set in the book. it is assumed that the rulers people are happy to have him and have not been forced under swordpoint to submit. or if they have, it is assumed that their reasons for staying put are to themselves, convincing enough to leave them in their current circumstances, regardless of how loud they may grumble against it. Personally, i try to adopt the ..dont grumble louder then your willingness to do something about it...though ive come to realize im one of the few who do this.

    and as for when the prince goes and tries to convert others, it is not a comfortable situation. but i like it nonetheless bc it is confrontational...it makes people evaluate value. Some will think, and some folks will focus less on thinking and more on acting. it is likely not to be pretty....but i dont recall the question being 'which kind of government is pretiest' either lol.

    my concession is that i know im very singular in this desire. and i dont deny that most would avoid such a situation. but i certianly like the propensity for destroying complacency that his government has. I cant say as i would want to live somewhere that isnt lively, that is full of couch potatoes who dont care what happens to them as long as they are fed. Nothing wrong with a little peace, but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. If there is no recognition of what war is, can its lack be as keenly appriciated?

    not everyone likes confrontation. i get that. but even the fact that some are non confrontational will not in and of itself keep them from living in situations that could be avoided if only they 'grew a bit of backbone' as someone with less tact might put it. But I should expect that the fact that they are being oppressed would speak to persons of other personality types who would fight to defend them.

    not everyone fights the same...some use logic, some use civil disobediance, some beauty and some brawns. i like the system bc it is a unifying one. it makes people passionate. it demands that everyone involved think about their priorities, and what they are and arent willing to do, or change, about the world they live in. the machiavelian system as described in the book, seems to me to be a pretty convincing catalyst for shaking humanity out of its complacency.

    Not that every society is, or that there are entire societies that are 100percent complacent....but we humans can be astoundingly good at ignoring what we dont want to see. if a human stands for everything, said human would really be standing for nothing. And if said human stands for nothing, they are complacent and, but for the hope of becoming noncomplacent, are better off having not lived.
    OK, well, I hope you're not done thinking about this.

    I'd recommend you read Erich Fromm's Fear of Freedom if you get a chance.
    Likes ~ReggieRebel~ liked this post

  5. #25
    Senior Member Passacaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kullervo View Post
    Firstly to give you some historical background, modern liberalism was actually first theorised by John Locke, an Englishman, and the European Enlightenment was the nexus for democratic ideals. There is so much mythology and romanticising of the Pilgrims and early America, but they didn't invent democracy. Neither did the Athenians, really. I think if you looked at how their system operated, you would find that they didn't have much in common with us.
    So let me get this straight, because I don’t want to be jumping to any conclusions:

    Because an Englishman reinvented democratic philosophy, and because democracy hasn’t worked out well in Africa thus far, this means in your head that black folks are incapable of living democratically. And not just incapable at this point in history due to cultural and logistical baggage like that left over from colonialism; but naturally and genetically incapable of living democratically? Do I have this right, or am I reading into your words?

  6. #26
    Lost in the Multiverse Bknight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    203

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    An anarchy based on moderate Christian values.
    That wouldn't be anarchy, that would be a moralistic democracy of sorts. No true ruler except the people and Biblical principles (so from that perspective, it would be a virtual theocracy, and we all know how those turn out.)

  7. #27
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bknight View Post
    That wouldn't be anarchy, that would be a moralistic democracy of sorts.
    No society can survive without shared moral views (subcultures always exist though).

    No true ruler except the people and Biblical principles (so from that perspective, it would be a virtual theocracy, and we all know how those turn out.)
    Usually much better than areligious societies - those are doomed to fall either to Marxism or Feminism+Islamism.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Passacaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    Usually much better than areligious societies - those are doomed to fall either to Marxism or Feminism+Islamism.
    Poe's Law.jpg

  9. #29
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    I realize the connection isn't evident to an average liberal.

  10. #30
    . Blank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    Progressive Libertarian Free Market Socialism


    So...utopian, I suppose.
    Ti = 19 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Te = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ne = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fi = 15 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Si = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ni = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Se = 11[][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fe = 0

    -----------------
    Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
    Man got to sit and wonder why, why, why;
    Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
    Man got to tell himself he understand

Similar Threads

  1. What is your favorite work of literature?
    By Mychemicalkilljoy in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 05-17-2015, 07:59 PM
  2. [NF] What is your favorite work of literature?
    By Bnova in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-17-2015, 07:52 AM
  3. [NT] What is your favorite work of theoretical literature?
    By Bnova in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-20-2015, 09:50 AM
  4. [NT] Poll: NT's What is Your Favorite Genre of Music??
    By COLORATURA in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-01-2012, 02:51 PM
  5. What is your favorite type of weather?
    By NewEra in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 11-21-2011, 01:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO