Monday, February 20, 2006

Lying on the net

This is merely a diversion. A point I make for entertainment purposes. I have decided to see how often the phrase that so and so lied comes up on the web via a google search. It proves nothing except who is seen as lying in important ways.

'Bush lied" 1,730,000 pages
"Clinton lied" 170,000 pages
"Bin Laden lied" 240 pages
"Mohammed lied" 216 pages
"Jesus lied" 815 pages
"Jehovah lied" 223 pages
"Marx lied" 55 pages
"Stalin lied" 173 pages
"Hitler lied" 519 pages
"Kennedy lied" 584 pages
"God lied" 9,240

11 Comments:

Blogger Derreck said...

Dear Nogodzone,

I think it is good is just for a quick laugh that you posted it. I think you might be arrested for some a' these storys one day. But it's good to know this info.

P.S. I think you were right in dispatching our discussion away from your site.

Yours, D.A. Becker

February 21, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

Oh, Nogodzone,

Where did you get this??? Because, you've got a huge variety, from Marx to Hitler, and from God to bin laden.
Just interest, no big discussions here.
And could you name one of the lies Marx told? If you'd please.

Yours as always, D.A. Becker

February 21, 2006

 
Blogger GodlessZone said...

Marx is one of the easiest. Let us begin with that Marx said that the conditions of workers would continually deteriorate under free markets when the trend was rather consistently in the opposite direction. He preached a false "labour theory of value" that was thoroughly discredited and which he probably got from Calvin by the way. He preached against Jews in his monography "A World Without Jews". He argued that the communist revolution could only come about in an economically advanced country when in reality only backward nations like Russia or China (at the time) tried it to their regret.

Marx thought products got their value from the amount of labour put into them. It's the reverse. Labour only has value because it produces goods or services that people want. From this false premise he then concluded that profit only can exist from exploitation. In fact the entrepreneur creates wealth.

Hitler, a national socialist, took his anti-Jewish views from the Left. And Marx was a leader in spewing out anti-Jewish material. He said:
“Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew.
“What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest.
“What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.”

February 21, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

Well, I may be considered a communit and you know... I have to agree with you that communism was only found in the economically less advanced countries, but you have to agree, that Russia, Soviet Union then, became a world power for a while. Now their only power is Gas and Oil, which is really all. After the fall of the Soviet realm, they really fell deep. They are now even joining the EU if you'd ask me. Now, I'm not saying the USSR was wonderfull, hell no. But communism is to me perfect alongside a capitalist world. It's hard to explain, and I won't even try, but when you place a communist Union next to Capitalism, it does seem wonderfull.

Now, Marx was really a great guy, but the lies you presented to me are truly lies, and, with pain in my heart, I agree to you on that point.
Communism should not be judged on those who practice it, as we have seen in Russia, but your connection with China brings me in doubt wether you do or do not know what true communism is.

Communism really is a nation in which money is not a factor, work is. It's much like in the dark-age really. People worked for each other. No money was involved (well, perhaps in the dark-age it did), and people could manage on themselves. Now, I don't think it is good to delete all cash from a nation, to make it communist, I think some is needed, because no one would work for free, would you? And some posession is important too nowadays. Money is handy, but I think it got too powerfull. And no, I am not broke.

Well, I'm not going in a discussion of communism, have you got adds, or comments, please place them, but I'm not going to have a discussion about it.

Yours, D.A. Becker

February 22, 2006

 
Blogger GodlessZone said...

Nazis were a world power for awhile too. But then power is not the issue is it. One can build power with enough blood shed. And the communists in nation after nation showed how easily they murdered millions of people.

People did not "work for each other" but for the state. In capitalists society I, as a producer, must satisfy the needs of others or I don't make a profit. I can't use force like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot or any other Marxist killer. I can only get people to voluntarily trade with me if I want to earn an income. That means I have to make them happy. The only time something else happens is when force is used and almost always that force comes from government.

February 22, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

Now, the idea, which actually cam from no one less than Plato, is that communism is a state in which people have the power. Of course, communism is in the eyes of many, a terror. Communism has been labeled wrongfully, by people like Stalin.

I have my own idea of communism, and yes, states have named themselves communist, probably for propagandic reasons. In communism, by Plato, everything is common good. That can never work these days. People are criminal, and yes, communism has been criminal 'till today, and probably after tomorrow aswell.
But I want to tell you communism isn't meant to be some SU power state, but a people's state, whci Stalin made it look like to his people.

My comparison to the dark-age also tells you that money is very important for today's people, but doesn't occur in Plato's design. The few states who have had their taste of 'communism' have only tasted it from their point of view. So real communism isn't bad, it's just impossible nowadays.

And I think the capitalist world should be together with SOME communist ideas. For example, people would have more services for free when money becomes less important. It seems hard to imagine, but it's possible to make some standard things free. Things like public ransports, and electricity. Now it seems unfair, as one may use PT more than another, but in the end, we are all working to make the state run smoothly, to make our life easier.

I have to say that people do work for each other. I see the state as an advanced extantion of the people, bur clearly you don't.

February 22, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

EXTENSION, sorry.

February 22, 2006

 
Blogger GodlessZone said...

Yes Plato was the first to propose this sort of dictatorship. Popper discussed that in the Open Society and It's Enemies. It is surprising that communist dictatorship after communist dictatorship is seen as getting it wrong after the fact. Common ownership is the main reason that resources get over exploited and mistreated and the reason for much of the environmental damage that has been done in the world. These problems are indemic in communism and can't be avoided. They are part and parcel of the idea --- a bad idea from the start and one rooted in Christian ethics.

There is no such thing, and can't be, of a free service. Somebody has to pay for it or labour for it. If they labour for others without compensation involuntarily they are slaves. If they do it voluntarily then they are paying for it. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

The last person I heard claim that the state is an "advanced extention of the people" was Mussolini and Hitler.

I suspect you have read very little economics.

February 22, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

Sorry if I seem to you as a Dictator, but I guess everyone has some idea's on a better state.

February 23, 2006

 
Blogger Derreck said...

And about economics, I study them thoroughly, I just find it hard to explain it to you. As I feared, we are in discussion, but my point clearly didn't find it's way into your mind.

Love your site though...

February 23, 2006

 
Blogger GodlessZone said...

Derreck: First, I said that the systemof Plato was a dictatorship not that you are a dictator. Second, if you have read economics thoroughly than you would know that Bohm-Bawerk dismantled Marxian thinking a century ago in his "Karl Marx and the Close of His System" and that this was expanded upon by Mises in 1922 in his refutation entitled Socialism.

February 23, 2006

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

 

Web Counters Religion Blog Top Sites