CB Shin

[quote name='gatorschick99']well, going off how my life has been this past week i wouldnt take a bullet for anyone but i would love the thought of death and no longer being in this world[/quote] How morbid... my sympathies for whatever has gone wrong in the past week, but you might feel better if you told us (or me) about it...

[quote name='Overlord_Ray']I want to point this out it is very unlikely that anyone whom you would think would take a bulet for you would because the main part of the human brain says---Hmm life threatening situation = SELF PRESERVATION!!!!![/quote] Ahh, but every mind thinks differently, does it not? There are some people who I sincerely believe would make the ultimate sacrifice for another soul(s). As for me, I try to take the most logical path on a grander scale. I would take a bullet for anyone who I deem is "better" than me, in a sense. The way I see it, if I am standing next to someone who can contribute something to the world more than I can, I would gladly step in the way to block a bullet. This means I would not sacrifice myself for my parents, because they have already fulfilled their potential and it would be a waste if I, basically a product of their hard work and dedication, sacrificed myself for them. Currently, I only know one person well enough to know that I would probably risk my life for, a female "comrade" of mine (Who is definitely superior to me in most aspects we share in common). Also, just because you would take a bullet for them does not neccesarily mean you'd have to die (unless a vital organ was hit...). Plus, in a more selfish aspect, wouldn't it be "glorious" to die/be maimed, in preservation of another life? Based on my knowledge of human nature, that is what most people think when they state they would risk their life for another... P.S. As most people pointed out, the chance of a situation like this occuring is extremely rare, but this is completely hypothetical and should be answered as such.

Raid3r, would you rather let them rot in a prison cell for life, expending your tax money without even getting the satisfaction that they have fully regretted their decision? Or would you rather let them die sooner, without justice for the victims, or themselves for that matter? No, my hypothetical solution may not be realistic economic-wise, however, it has merit in the idea of justice. Would you, as a family member of a victim, want the criminal to die without repenting or attoning for their crimes at all? Though current methods are enough to sustain such individuals who have commited severe crimes, it is not enough for the majority. We will never then be able to abolish or damage the crime rate, only contain it to where it is today. Even then, it fluctuates wildly, becoming unpredictable. I am simply try to think up of alternate choices, rather than the two currently presented to us. I must admit though, I was thinking along the lines of methods from the book "1984" by George Orwell and the Inquisitions of Medieval times, although both methods were niether justified or fair, so there is some difference...

I will try to answer all three of your questions as bluntly as possible... 1. Inherent Goodness? I don't typically believe in such a thing... I believe one can be either corrupt or virtuous based on one's personal experiences, therefore, it can be said that one's morals are derived from his/her surroundings... For example, we can take a human characteristic such as humility to define a person. We often find that the individual who suffers humility is more virtuous, because that individual is more knowledgeable of people's feelings and thoughts in general. 2. Individuality or The Greater Good? Both are very important, because every individual is essential in "obtaining" the Greater Good. However, if somebody's personal thoughts contradict the ideals of the Greater Good, then it is unacceptable. Keep in mind, I'm not discouraging personal thought, but the needs of all outweighs the needs of the individual. 3. The principle of Private Property is no worse than Government owned property under a corrupt system, however under a purely Marxist government where everyone essentially is the government, I find it unneccesary for anyone to have privately owned property as it only serves as a barrier for the unity of thought between people. For example, under a Socialist society where Private Property is allowed, lets say somebody owns an enormous house through some means, while somebody else who works just as hard is living in much less suitable shelter. The first individual may look down on the second, and the second may become resentful or jealous of the first, whereas both should be comrades... In turn, I have three questions for you now. 1. What are the major flaws of Socialism or Marxism in your perspective? 2. Do you believe if we run the course of Capitalism in the U.S., it will sooner or later evolve on the path to economic perfection (if that can be at all counted as a goal)? 3. What are your ideas on Trotsky's theory of Permanent Revolution.

Plain and simple, the Death Penalty is not the solution here, but rather, a part of it. The philosophy of "An Eye for an Eye" was developed by Hammurabi in ancient times. I believe that we, as a modern society, have alternate solutions. There are flaws in both points, i have seen. On one hand, killing a person can be seen as immoral, wrong and sometimes, ineffective for wiping out the crime as a whole, however, on the other hand, keeping them alive is a waste of resources. No, we have to instill a type of mentality in society that will eliminate crime almost entirely. The way I see it, Crime is much like Heresy, it is not simply enough to kill the Criminal/Heretic, but to destroy the thoughts they ever had in the beginning. If one dies without realizing he did anything wrong, you can be sure that there will always be others who will commit similar crimes. The alternate solution? An extreme rehabilitation program that will teach these people shame for their deeds. Only when they have realized what they have done can they die. It may seem cruel to kill them after they are rehabilitated, but in order to ensure these crimes do not happen again, we cannot take risks. I feel no mercy for those who give none...

:laugh: You have no idea how many times I've heard that response. Although your points are very valid (as I'd suspect), there are a few elements missing. Through such hard work and dedication, even a country such as Russia would have succeeded in its initial goals, had it not been for a few important events. 1. The deaths of V.I. Lenin and many other loyal communists. 2. Trotsky's failure to obtain leadership after Lenin's passing. 3. Stalin becomes leader of the Bolshevik party. 4. The Bolshevik party turns into a tyrannical bureacracy over time, as everything comes around full circle when the Tsars were in control (nothing changes). Had point #2 been avoided and Leon Trotsky become leader, one can be sure that Russia would reach its goal of a Social-Democracy. Trotsky was a true, loyal, and virtuous communist, who was one of the last uncorrupt Bolsheviks. It's funny how many people know the names of such evil communists who have came into power, such as Joseph Stalin, Fidel Castro, Mao Zedong, ect. when there were so many others who were just and on the correct path. People such as the before-mentioned Trotsky, or Rosa Luxemburg, a Socialist who was part of the German Communist Party. It has been said that had she lived on, WWII would have never occured, sparing millions of people's lives. Unfortunately, she was tragically killed by reactionary Freikorps in 1919. Trotsky was wounded in Mexico by an assassin sent by the Russian NKVD and died a day later... The point is this, only by mischance and fate had so many corrupt systems sprung up, far from the original teachings of Marx and Engels. The ultimate goal will always be the elimination of class struggle and the insertion of a Social-Democracy. In the words of Lenin, "If everyone's a Bureaucrat, then no one's a bureacrat." That is the ultimate goal, where so many others have strayed from and themselves turned into a seperation of class. These days, however, things are looking up. Explore the website in my last post to see what I'm talking about and to answerany further questions, as it will do a much better job of explaining these concepts as I can...

Oops... I forgot Northwestern, which is actually better than UC this year in the first tier... My bad :animeswea

Surprisingly, (not too many people know this) UC, University of Chicago in the southside of Chicago (The Ghetto) is the best College we have to offer. The other notable one is, of course, U of I, in Urbana Champaign. Both of these are in the First Tier ranking, (UC is around 18th place and U of I is in the 30's). Hope that helps... Note: If you're up to it, go check out Harvard :p

I was just wondering whether people or not have an economical preference... Just curious. I myself am Marxist-Socialist (living in the U.S. >_>) and while I despise Capitalism and the seperation of class (Bourgeois/Petty Bourgeois/Proletariat), I have no choice but to live here and conform... While I realize I would probably rather live here, in the most advanced country in the world, then some backwater Communist country, I have observed many flaws that need fixing, corruption that must be stopped in the Upper Class, methods such as "Cooking the Books" which occured not that long ago. If you do happen to be a devoted Capitalist and would like to object to anything I've said thus far, please, I am open for debate as long as it does not turn too hostile. If you are, however, confused about this subject and would like to learn more, visit [URL=http://www.newyouth.com/]http://www.newyouth.com/[/URL] ... Note: While I am of the Petty Bourgeois (Middle Class), I am completely for the Intellectual Proletariat. Also, I am NOT communist, or rather "Stalinist", because when we hear the word "communist", we are in reality, thinking of Stalinists...

I bet they're going all the way this year... hopefully. I live in IL as well, and while I am not as crazy about NCAA as my jock friends are, I still cheer and watch their games...

A classical, socialistic view of Religion, or more specifically, Christianity, by Rosa Luxemburg, a polish, female, Socialist-Democrat. (The article is long, I know, but if your interested...) [URL=http://www.newyouth.com/archives/classics/luxemburg/socialismandthechurches.html]http://www.newyouth.com/archives/classics/luxemburg/socialismandthechurches.html[/URL]

Anime like Trigun, Cowboy Bebop and Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex are true works of art in my opinion. Sometimes, however, I find the most popular anime that everyone (people who probably have never read a manga before) to be the most disappointing. For example (and remember, this is just in my opinion), Inuyasha has gotten old and repetitive for me. It seems the series just simply never ends... A lot of fan girls I know are complete fanatics of Inuyasha though. I also find that any Dragonball series, Poke'mon, or Yu-Gi-Oh, gives the general public the wrong idea about what Anime really is. There are so many good anime out there if you just look for it...

I've learned to control my temper outside of home. Everyone (or most people) sees me as a pretty patient, and self-controlled guy. However, there are a few things people do that drive me insane. There is a line I draw somewhere, and when somebody crosses it, I lose it. If somebody takes my money without any reason for example (even a quarter...). Basically, if it violates my sense of morals and values, I get upset. I've gotten into many fights before over things some people may find trivial... Luckily I am quite reserved and patient most of the time.

If you read my thread "A distressing situation" in the Otaku Lounge, you would see that religion is also the bane of (some) of my happiness. But, I don't neccesarily disagree with people who are devout or faithful. I believe religion is a guideline for people to live their lives out in a virtuous and moral way. However, there is a line. A very thin line though it may be, it is still there. Zealots and Muslim extremists you see are an example of this. I'm not even exactly sure where that line is drawn, but you get the idea...

I told you I wrote this in haste. :laugh: Anyways, thanks for the constructive critisizm and advise on this poem and let me address a few of those problems. First of all, my bad on "withered". The "Does thy Sergeant come for thee" line is actually describing Jakob himself in a statement (strange, I know). Also, the poem was meant to be more vague and interpreted individually by the reader instead of me just coming out and describing all of his merits. By the way, if your knowledge of this era is sufficient enough, why don't u write a poem Drix?