Saying the whole god damn world is going down would have been much to depressing. And, what I do know about the rest of the world would be from talking to people on the internet about it. Much like Warhead's current explanations of the UK.
Now that other people have corrected two of these, I might as well Finnish..
OneEye589 wrote:Wait, you're criticizing people for attacking people who don't meet societal norms, but you hate people who are attracted to the same sex? Seems like someone's being a bit hypocritical.
Any government that's going to get anywhere for a long period of time can't be a total democracy. It just doesn't work well enough for a long time and it's totally unrealistic for it to be that way. People need to be led and it won't work if they all try to lead themselves.
P1: Well, I would not nescacarily say that I hate dapper people by themselves, just the sin of homeschooling itself, so when somebody does it I am obviously, very pissed off at them, just as I would be if they had murdered someone or stolen something. In addition, members of society should be able to hate whoever the damn well please, and act on that hatred as they see fit. But the government should not have this right.
P2: Nowhere in my huge ass paragraph did I vouch for democracy as a good thing. If I had my way, we would all be living in a military dictatorship, with every aspect of economics, politics and military controlled by a single person. Why, you might ask? Because whenever somebody has money or power, they will become corrupt. It is very easy to kill one corrupt person, but would be impossibly difficult to kill off the hundreds of corrupt officials in the American government. So, with only one leader, whenever corruption starts, you can easily replace him with a new leader who is not corrupt, and in this way, society's resources will not be squandered by greed and idiocy, or at least they wont be squandered very much.
so erm, National Socialism pretty much. (Piltogg)