FourScore

We wouldn't need to tell them, they know. The radical elements in Iraq who actually perpetrated the violence in pursuit of extremism are responsible for the violence.

There is a reason why Kurdistan is one of the most peaceful and developed regions in the Middle East: they act the way you must act to be a prosperous modern people. The violent radicals who squandered the post-Saddam opportunity to build a modern Iraq are to blame for the killing and the chaos.

It was not the US that perpetrated the violence after it toppled Saddam. It was the radical elements within Iraq. They're the ones that bear responsibility.

Tell that to the Kurds and other persecuted minorities who were tortured and killed en masse by Saddam.

The relative loss of life due to war and occurrence of war around the world since 1945 is far lower than at any other point in human history. This is directly due to the US acting as the global superpower.

The Pax Americana is a widely recognized phenomenon.

Which in itself is one of the biggest rationales for developing such a system. The Fed really has a third unspoken directive: maintain dollar supremacy.

Completely false on all points. If you want to equate prisons for lawbreakers with concentration camps for political prisoners there's no further discussion we can have.

Anyone who hasn't realized that this is about more than economics is deluding themselves. This is about a struggle for global supremacy between two nations with wildly different views about reality.

The CCP does not believe in the rights of the individual and holds an iron grip on China. It is instituting policies straight out of an Orwellian dystopia and wants to export its model around the world.

The most powerful nation sets the world agenda, whether we like that or not. The United States cannot allow China to set the agenda.

Hatred and murder has always existed! The idea that online discussion forums create or foment hatred is laughable. That hatred has always been out there. Now people just have a place to vent. The good part about it being out in the open is that we can actually see it and be aware of it.

I'll be very clear about what I want. I want companies that facilitate speech to be forced to tolerate all legal speech on their platforms. It's that simple.

In the 1700's, when we were having the debate over speech protected from government interference, someone could have easily said "yes well if you don't like the government's policies you should go to another country!"

The existence of alternatives is irrelevant to the fact that freedom of speech is sacred and forums for speech - public or private - must never infringe upon its freedom.

But don't you see how the lines blue very quickly? It's not always as clear where morality lies as when some lunatic posts terroristic threats. Arbitrary value judgements must be made when enforcing censorship so censorship always leads to conflict between groups that disagree on what should be censored.

That's why the best course of action is to not censor at all and allow the system to work itself out.

So you're willing to give unchecked control of online discourse to a private corporation?

The only value in superficial diversity (the sort of diversity most valued in the West today) is that of a signal: signifying that there isn't any discrimination going on.

Aside from this signaling value, superficial diversity has very little value.

Ironically, as superficial diversity has become an end in itself, we are now encouraged to reduce individuals to their superficial characteristics, this behavior being the very foundation of the bigotry we want to eliminate from society.

Brave people willing to stand up and call out the diversity mafia for what it is - a bunch of well meaning but naive advocates for what often amounts to disguised bigotry - is what we need now more than ever.