On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 16:57:30 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> > Says the person who compares giving a vaccine to someone to a
>> > totalitarian regime.
> 
>> It is if you go out, grab them, stick them with a needle and pump
>> something in them that they only have your word on being good for them.
> 
> You clearly don't even understand what a "totalitarian regime" is.
> 
> Or rather, you know what it means, but you are using it in the
> completely wrong way just to attack some idea. Same thing as, for
> example, people calling the occupy wallstreet protesters "anarchists"
> (even though the movement couldn't possibly be more the opposite of
> anarchy.)
> 
> By your logic someone robbing someone else is "a totalitarian regime".
> Which makes absolutely no sense.

A totalitarian regime is a regime where the leadership says "you will 
submit to us".  That's not /my/ definition, that's the definition from 
the Oxford English Dictionary.

So I'll be trusting that definition rather than any bullshit definition 
you decide to use.

If you tell someone "we're doing this for your own good", you are talking 
down to them and are treating them like a child.  Adults don't do that to 
each other.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 23:52:31 +0200, andrel wrote:

> On 9-8-2013 22:57, Warp wrote:
> 
>> By your logic someone robbing someone else is "a totalitarian regime".
>> Which makes absolutely no sense.
> 
> Ah, it is good to see the great strawman-master at work again.
> Well done.

Indeed.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 16:57:30 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> > Says the person who compares giving a vaccine to someone to a
>> > totalitarian regime.
> 
>> It is if you go out, grab them, stick them with a needle and pump
>> something in them that they only have your word on being good for them.
> 
> You clearly don't even understand what a "totalitarian regime" is.
> 
> Or rather, you know what it means, but you are using it in the
> completely wrong way just to attack some idea. Same thing as, for
> example, people calling the occupy wallstreet protesters "anarchists"
> (even though the movement couldn't possibly be more the opposite of
> anarchy.)
> 
> By your logic someone robbing someone else is "a totalitarian regime".
> Which makes absolutely no sense.

Your logic here is "the ends justify the means".  That's a pretty 
dangerous ideology, and has been used to justify a /lot/ of pretty bad 
behaviour over the years.

So I'll ask the question:  Do you believe that "the ends justify the  
means" is always a good argument?  Under what circumstances would you say 
that it's a bad argument (assuming the "ends" are always intended to be 
good - since you're talking about intent, whether the ends in hindsight 
are good or not is irrelevant; you can't predict the ends will always be 
good, so we have to go with the "predicted outcome", not the "actual 
outcome")?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 9-8-2013 22:57, Warp wrote:

> > By your logic someone robbing someone else is "a totalitarian regime".
> > Which makes absolutely no sense.

> Ah, it is good to see the great strawman-master at work again.
> Well done.

Yes, because comparing saving people's lives to a totalitarian regime
is in no way a straw man argument.

Do *you* understand what a totalitarian regime is? Do you understand
why going somewhere, saving people's lives (even if by force), and
leaving, is *not* a "totalitarian regime"?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Shay <non### [at] nonecom> wrote:
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message 
> news:520557ba@news.povray.org...
> >
> > You clearly don't even understand what a "totalitarian regime" is.

> Any regime with the power to forcibly inject people is a totalitarian 
> regime.

No, it isn't. A totalitarian regime is a form of government. Going
somewhere, doing something to people, and leaving, has absolutely
nothing to do with imposing a "totalitarian regime" on them. This even
if it were something negative, like stealing their property. And here
we are talking about saving people's lives.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> A totalitarian regime is a regime

And that's the point. It's a regime, a form of government.

Going somewhere, doing something, and then leaving, is not a form of
government and has absolutely nothing to do with totalitarianism. Not
even if that something were a negative thing.

> If you tell someone "we're doing this for your own good", you are talking 
> down to them and are treating them like a child.  Adults don't do that to 
> each other.

Do you disagree with the notion that eradicating smallpox from the world,
saving millions of lives, was a good thing?

Or would you rather sacrifice those millions of lives to your altar of
political correctness?

If you agree that those millions of lives were worth the worldwide smallpox
vaccination program, then you have not business in criticizing the
worldwide polio vaccination program, or else you are just a hypocrite.

If you don't agree that the millions of lives were worth the vaccination
program, then I don't even want to write the words that come to mind to
describe what you are, because it's nauseating to even think.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> Your logic here is "the ends justify the means".

The millions of saved lives justified the means. Yes.

> So I'll ask the question:  Do you believe that "the ends justify the  
> means" is always a good argument?

Always? Of course not.

When it has been scientifically and empirically proven with absolute
certainty that the program will save millions of lives, then it is
perfectly justified.

Sacrificing millions of innocent lives just to not offend some people
is sickening.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 10-8-2013 1:28, Warp wrote:
> andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> On 9-8-2013 22:57, Warp wrote:
>
>>> By your logic someone robbing someone else is "a totalitarian regime".
>>> Which makes absolutely no sense.
>
>> Ah, it is good to see the great strawman-master at work again.
>> Well done.
>
> Yes,

Indeed so stop with that.

And everything below is totally irrelevant to my remark.
Learn how to debate and stick to the subject.


> because comparing saving people's lives to a totalitarian regime
> is in no way a straw man argument.
>
> Do *you* understand what a totalitarian regime is? Do you understand
> why going somewhere, saving people's lives (even if by force), and
> leaving, is *not* a "totalitarian regime"?
>


-- 
Everytime the IT department forbids something that a researcher deems
necessary for her work there will be another hole in the firewall.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:28:26 -0400, Warp wrote:

> andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> On 9-8-2013 22:57, Warp wrote:
> 
>> > By your logic someone robbing someone else is "a totalitarian
>> > regime".
>> > Which makes absolutely no sense.
> 
>> Ah, it is good to see the great strawman-master at work again.
>> Well done.
> 
> Yes, because comparing saving people's lives to a totalitarian regime is
> in no way a straw man argument.
> 
> Do *you* understand what a totalitarian regime is? Do you understand why
> going somewhere, saving people's lives (even if by force), and leaving,
> is *not* a "totalitarian regime"?

You don't seem to understand what totalitarianism is.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message 
news:52057bb3@news.povray.org...
> Shay <non### [at] nonecom> wrote:
>> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
>> news:520557ba@news.povray.org...
>> >
>> > You clearly don't even understand what a "totalitarian regime" is.
>
>> Any regime with the power to forcibly inject people is a totalitarian
>> regime.
>
> No, it isn't. A totalitarian regime is a form of government. Going
> somewhere, doing something to people, and leaving, has absolutely
> nothing to do with imposing a "totalitarian regime" on them. This even
> if it were something negative, like stealing their property. And here
> we are talking about saving people's lives.
>

You'll need power to do that, near-absolute (total) power. Genie ... Bottle 
... Forced Vaccinations ... Eugenics ... Greater Good

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message