Is non truth a lie?

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

As I have tried to say about ten times, IT IS NOT SOCIALISM WHEN THERE IS A DICTATOR RULING IT, THAT IS CALLED A DICTATORSHIP!

[Boringanarchy2]

As I have tried to say about ten times, IT IS NOT SOCIALISM WHEN THERE IS A DICTATOR RULING IT, THAT IS CALLED A DICTATORSHIP!

Yes, but the implication was that socialism is a natural precondition for dictatorship, when this idea only incorporated a small portion of socialism as it has been applied throughout history.

[Double-O-Scotch]

What about a socialist dictatorship???

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

There is no such thing. People claim it is "socialism" so that we can't call them viscous dictators, whenever there is a supreme ruler it is no longer socialism.

[Gorzo]

What about a socialist dictatorship???

I'll believe it when I see a dictator redistributing his own wealth. (Never gonna happen)

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

^^^ Well said.

[Piotr]

Ok, this is just dumb.

I beg your pardon?

That's right, take a small snippet out of context and just ignore all the content. I think we are done here.

Yup, I thought 7 days will be enough. You are unfit for Gathering.

[Piotr]

As I have tried to say about ten times, IT IS NOT SOCIALISM WHEN THERE IS A DICTATOR RULING IT, THAT IS CALLED A DICTATORSHIP!

You are confusing two things: economic system with power system.

You can easily have socialism implemented in democracy (most of Europe now) or socialism implemented in autocracy (Hitler, Stalin, Korean monarchy). You can also have free market in autocracy (Pinochet)  or free market and democracy (US before income tax and FED).

Socialism is about wealth redistribution, it doesn't matter what the power system is.

whenever there is a supreme ruler it is no longer socialism.

This is a lie, please do not claim it to be true.

[Piotr]

What about a socialist dictatorship???

I'll believe it when I see a dictator redistributing his own wealth. (Never gonna happen)

Socialists never redistribute their own wealth*, they mostly take from the working population, under force (income tax). That's why socialism is illegal under iMtG law. It doesn't matter if the socialists are majority in democracy or if it is one guy and his cronies. The act of extorting wealth from unwilling people is what makes it illegal.

* distributing your own wealth is called charity, not socialism.

[Apathy Reactor]

._. So... What about that topic fellas...

[Piotr]

I hope I defined it clearly, for the purposes of the iMtG law. I do not claim that my definition is the only definition valid in the universe, blablabla, but for the purposes of the iMtG law: lie is false statement which hurts someone. For example, if you dare calling me misogynist, you better have valid logic to prove that I'm indeed a misogynist. Would misogynist marry a woman and have 2 daughters?

[Gorzo]

Yes, they would I don't believe that you are mysogenistic, but a sexist wouldn't avoid marriage or turn gay - his reason for marriage would simply be different than yours. Most likely for dominance or power over his wife. Because they are scum.

As for daughters, you'd have to have magic sperm if you chose

[Apathy Reactor]

Haha^

From my own beliefs, a lie is any intentional false statement, for good or worse, and withholding information. Partial truth is lieing.

[Piotr]

Yes, they would

How can one prove that they are not indeed misogynist?

[Gorzo]

Yes, they would

How can one prove that they are not indeed misogynist?

Curious question. I haven't really thought it. To be honest I'm not sure there really is a way to "prove" it. It's just a part of one's personality that shows through their opinions and actions. I've disagreed with your opinions and actions multiple times (even in this thread) but I've never once seen you display any behavior to indicate a disrespect of women, mysogeny, anti-feminism, or any unfair treatment towards women whatsoever. I think that Leslie person was just looking for a soap box. I wouldn't worry about it, if that's what you're concerned with.

On another note, you declared Boringanarchy unfit for gathering. I assume this means you banned him again? And I'm guessing permanently this time? I must admit I'm not happy with this decision. I understand why you did it, he was antagonizing you this time, and you had told him to stop. I'm just a bit disappointed about it, and don't want this leading to people being unable to disagree with what do/don't personally believe in, lest they be struck down by the ban hammer for speaking their opinion. That's all.