USA Is the USA the worst nation to exist since classical times?

[SBD Gonzalez]

Atheists have done fairly well too, when it comes to killing millions. Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin.

Yep. Difference is atheists tend not to lecture others on morality as part of their fundamental shtick, let alone pass judgement them as "sinful". (WTF is "sin"?)

 

[HairyO]

Yep. Difference is atheists tend not to lecture others on morality as part of their fundamental shtick, let alone pass judgement them as "sinful". (WTF is "sin"?)

No references to how people should lead their lives in the little red book?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

No references to how people should lead their lives in the little red book?

True. But there's no denying, over history, religionists have shown a distinct inclination to judge others on how they live, often with murderous results.

I'll admit I have little knowledge of Mao, but I have the impression that his dreadful crimes were not committed in the name of atheism.

Plenty of horrors been inflicted on the world specifically in the name of one god or another; evidence of their actual existence still pending.

 

[Spearman]

True. But there's no denying, over history, religionists have shown a distinct inclination to judge others on how they live, often with murderous results.

I'll admit I have little knowledge of Mao, but I have the impression that his dreadful crimes were not committed in the name of atheism.

Plenty of horrors been inflicted on the world specifically in the name of one god or another; evidence of their actual existence still pending.

totally agree

As to Mao, in a way he tried to supplant the multitude of religious/superstitious beliefs with either communism or himself. Controlling the people required something in that brain folder.

 

[Seeds]

Legalised murder is, ipso facto, humanity-destroying.

Not necessarily. Humanity is everyone. So unless this legalised murder extends to the majority of people then it's not correct to refer to it as humanity destroying.

High mortality wars or Mao level famines is the minimum event that could be defined as humanity destroying. Although middle age black death level pandemics, major asteroid events or nuclear destruction are more fitting.

 

[Seeds]

True. But there's no denying, over history, religionists have shown a distinct inclination to judge others on how they live, often with murderous results.

I'll admit I have little knowledge of Mao, but I have the impression that his dreadful crimes were not committed in the name of atheism.

Plenty of horrors been inflicted on the world specifically in the name of one god or another; evidence of their actual existence still pending.

I'm all on board the religious bashing but mass extermination aint contained to religious ideology. Any ideological divide that separates people into us and thems and greatly dehumanises the thems can lead to mass extermination. Historically this ideological divide has been based off religions, geography, political beliefs, employment or race. But it could be anything. It's the seperation of us and thems that most matters. Not the ideological determinant of us and thems.

 

[Seeds]

True. But there's no denying, over history, religionists have shown a distinct inclination to judge others on how they live, often with murderous results.

I'll admit I have little knowledge of Mao, but I have the impression that his dreadful crimes were not committed in the name of atheism.

Plenty of horrors been inflicted on the world specifically in the name of one god or another; evidence of their actual existence still pending.

I'm all on board the religious bashing but mass extermination aint contained to religious ideology. Any ideological divide that separates people into us and thems and greatly dehumanises the thems can lead to mass extermination. Historically this ideological divide has been based off religions, geography, political beliefs, employment and race. But it could be anything. It's the separation of us and thems that most matters. Not the ideological determinant of us and thems.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Not necessarily. Humanity is everyone. So unless this legalised murder extends to the majority of people then it's not correct to refer to it as humanity destroying.

High mortality wars or Mao level famines is the minimum event that could be defined as humanity destroying. Although middle age black death level pandemics, major asteroid events or nuclear destruction are more fitting.

Again you go with insisting that "humanity" has only one meaning.

If you're not going to make the effort to inform yourself, why should you expect answers?

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

 

[Power Raid]

Like it or not the world has never seen such peace and prosperity, than ever before, under the global domination of the US since post WW2.

More people have been dragged out of poverty than ever before.

The fact we are having a climate change debate highlights where the world is, in its hierarchy of needs.



Has the US run its course? Nup. They have many challenges but an external threat may be exactly what the US needs to raise harmonise the national politics and consider the needs of the middle class.

 

[Seeds]

Again you go with insisting that "humanity" has only one meaning.

If you're not going to make the effort to inform yourself, why should you expect answers?

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

fair enough. while i personally only believe we should use the primary meaning of words because knowledge transfer through language becomes deeply inefficient to almost useless if we dont. I shouldnt assume that the primary meaning is the one being used in all cases.

 

[Taylor]

How did they succeed in the face of such sheer magnanimity?

This was because the rest of the developed world had just had all its production bombed to dust and the US ramped up production to supply the war going on elsewhere.

They were in a position to capitalise.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

fair enough. while i personally only believe we should use the primary meaning of words because knowledge transfer through language becomes deeply inefficient to almost useless if we dont. I shouldnt assume that the primary meaning is the one being used in all cases.

All good, play on, (though I can’t help but ask, if you believe we should only use the primary meanings of words, what do you think secondary meanings of words are for then?)

 

[madmug]

Atheists have done fairly well too, when it comes to killing millions. Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin.

The church preached love & forgiveness. the other reprobates didn't.

 

[Seeds]

All good, play on, (though I can’t help but ask, if you believe we should only use the primary meanings of words, what do you think secondary meanings of words are for then?)

We shouldnt have them unless they mean something completely different and couldnt be confused for the primary meaning when in use. where they can be confused then we should just come up with new words.

In my view it would make others arguments so much easier to understand and lead to much less disagreement.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

We shouldnt have them unless they mean something completely different and couldnt be confused for the primary meaning when in use. where they can be confused then we should just come up with new words.

In my view it would make others arguments so much easier to understand and lead to much less disagreement.

Well language is complex and maddeningly inconsistent, but consequently it is also nuanced and flexible and adaptable.

 

[Saint]

Like it or not the world has never seen such peace and prosperity, than ever before, under the global domination of the US since post WW2.

More people have been dragged out of poverty than ever before.

The fact we are having a climate change debate highlights where the world is, in its hierarchy of needs.



Has the US run its course? Nup. They have many challenges but an external threat may be exactly what the US needs to raise harmonise the national politics and consider the needs of the middle class.

I'm not sure it's the most peace and prosperity people have known on an individual level.

For example, a peasant farmer under ancient Chinese rule could (and probably would) have lived their entire life never knowing what a war was except for in songs/tales told to them by passing entertainers. Battles would have been hundreds of miles away and for many periods law and order was very well kept in Imperial Chinese dynasties.

It's only been 50 years of US hegemony and a lot of people have suffered because of them. We shouldn't ignore the impact of global capitalism on poorer countries and people in Africa, Latin America. There's about to be starvation in Africa (immediately because of Russia) but also because the way the world is set up is that poor countries can't even feed themselves any more.

There's certainly less war, but I'm not sure there's a lot less suffering in 2022 than in 1952 at the individual level. There probably is less suffering overall, but not on a huge individual scale. There are a lot of losers in the winners and losers economic settings.

 

[Power Raid]

I'm not sure it's the most peace and prosperity people have known on an individual level.

For example, a peasant farmer under ancient Chinese rule could (and probably would) have lived their entire life never knowing what a war was except for in songs/tales told to them by passing entertainers. Battles would have been hundreds of miles away and for many periods law and order was very well kept in Imperial Chinese dynasties.

It's only been 50 years of US hegemony and a lot of people have suffered because of them. We shouldn't ignore the impact of global capitalism on poorer countries and people in Africa, Latin America. There's about to be starvation in Africa (immediately because of Russia) but also because the way the world is set up is that poor countries can't even feed themselves any more.

There's certainly less war, but I'm not sure there's a lot less suffering in 2022 than in 1952 at the individual level. There probably is less suffering overall, but not on a huge individual scale. There are a lot of losers in the winners and losers economic settings.

china was a warring state with one power battle and vaccum after another. China at War – From Ancient times to the Modern Day | Welcome To China


I don't think there is a single person on the planet that couldn't finger point issues both today and throughout the period where the US has been the number 1 power globally. However I don't think it is possible to to see the massive positive change. Never before have we seen so many people emerge into middle class. Just travelling around the world, we have seen once busted arse nations blossom into amazing societies.

If we want to dismiss the US' responsibility of this great achievement and events (positives or negatives), we can identify technology, energy and fertiliser as having played a massive role. but ignoring the achievements is not fair to history.

 

[Saint]

china was a warring state with one power battle and vaccum after another. China at War – From Ancient times to the Modern Day | Welcome To China


I don't think there is a single person on the planet that couldn't finger point issues both today and throughout the period where the US has been the number 1 power globally. However I don't think it is possible to to see the massive positive change. Never before have we seen so many people emerge into middle class. Just travelling around the world, we have seen once busted arse nations blossom into amazing societies.

If we want to dismiss the US' responsibility of this great achievement and events (positives or negatives), we can identify technology, energy and fertiliser as having played a massive role. but ignoring the achievements is not fair to history.

I agree with most of this.

I just sometimes ponder that if, for example, the EU wielded the unbalanced power the US does and the Scandi countries were somehow in charge, that places like Africa, SE Asia, Latin America, Central Asia might have been lifted up even more rather than being nearly entirely subservient to greater economic powers. If there were less Winners v Losers, everyone globally might be a bit more in the middle.

My point about farmers in China is that while there are often battles, there were also periods of relative calm and without being able to read and poor communications, most peasants wouldn't have really been bothered by it at all.

 

[Power Raid]

I agree with most of this.

I just sometimes ponder that if, for example, the EU wielded the unbalanced power the US does and the Scandi countries were somehow in charge, that places like Africa, SE Asia, Latin America, Central Asia might have been lifted up even more rather than being nearly entirely subservient to greater economic powers. If there were less Winners v Losers, everyone globally might be a bit more in the middle.

My point about farmers in China is that while there are often battles, there were also periods of relative calm and without being able to read and poor communications, most peasants wouldn't have really been bothered by it at all.

the issue of africa, SE Asia, central asia and latin america; is they represent poor(er) places with governments that are not held to account to the interests of the people.

A dangerous situation for these types of places is what we are seeing in the Ukraine, where foreign influences are pulling and pushing reulting in war. The east "apparently" wants independence, there are left factions, right factions, pro russia and pro west. The outcome is clear.

With one global super power, we have seen a reduction in these types of conflicts and uncertainty. With the rise of china, we will see Nth v Sth Korea and Vietnam conflicts once again. It isn't about whether china or the US are right or wrong, it is just what happens when two power plays see "game on" when jurisdictions are fractured.

 

[Seeds]

No references to how people should lead their lives in the little red book?

The little red book aint an athiesm book.

these leaders comitted atroticities based on political ideology and maintaining their own power. Not based on a desire to spread the idea that the universe is solely physical with every phenomenon reduced down to four physical forces. it never comes up once.

 

[Mofra]

the issue of africa, SE Asia, central asia and latin america; is they represent poor(er) places with governments that are not held to account to the interests of the people.

A dangerous situation for these types of places is what we are seeing in the Ukraine, where foreign influences are pulling and pushing reulting in war. The east "apparently" wants independence, there are left factions, right factions, pro russia and pro west. The outcome is clear.

With one global super power, we have seen a reduction in these types of conflicts and uncertainty. With the rise of china, we will see Nth v Sth Korea and Vietnam conflicts once again. It isn't about whether china or the US are right or wrong, it is just what happens when two power plays see "game on" when jurisdictions are fractured.

The US will remain the world's most influential nation while most global commodities are settled in USD, and that doesn't look like changing anytime soon.

 

[Cooldude]

Land of the free, home of the brave

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Land of the free, home of the brave

Far canal. Just sickening.

 

[Rob R]

Land of the free, home of the brave

sickening display that will hopefully result in jail but not evidence supporting the title of this topic given in the barbaric PRC, North Korea, Iran etc they would have shot the people filming and billed their families.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[carltonchelsea]

Atheists have done fairly well too, when it comes to killing millions. Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin.

Really, I’m most certain we’ve danced this dance before and you were belittled, but I’m happy to go again.
Hitler was a Christian his entire shitshow was based on the premise that “Jews were evil, they killed jesus”, he had the backing of the Catholic Church, otherwise known as the ReichsKonkordat.
Stalin was educated in a Seminary, he was a believer, he was very religious and used the knowledge learned in the seminary that to control people was the ultimate power, there is nothing to say that he did what he did through atheism, in fact the opposite is true.
Mao was considered a god, a living god in human form, still is by many, “Supreme Leader” as he was known by, sound familiar?
As for pol pot, show me any historical literature where he claims atheism as his belief system and the system that he set in motion on his killing spree?
Cheers big ears….