History shows these are the first 2 things banned.......

Caesar banned neither when he became dictator of Rome. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

That’s the stupidest thing I’ve read in a while. He didn’t ban iPhones either, I believe.

Friendly Dictators


http://www.chrismclaren.com/blog/200...dly-dictators/

I wish there was an updated version covering the last 17 years, but in the meantime I’ve prepared a giant post with the images and text from the pack of cards. (This is an egregious copyright violation, but since these cards have been out of print for more than 15 years, I’m hoping no one will call me on it. If they did, I would–of course–take this down.) This will be a very image-intensive post–as usual, the little pictures are links to the bigger versions.

That’s the stupidest thing I’ve read in a while. He didn’t ban iPhones either, I believe. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Nope. He didn’t. So what’s that got to do with what I said.

The point is Caesar came to power without banning anything physical.



6b. Julius Caesar


https://www.ushistory.org/civ/6b.asp...%20territories.

Caesar defeated Pompey's forces and entered Rome in 46 B.C.E., triumphant and unchallenged.

Upon his return, Caesar made himself dictator and absolute ruler of Rome and its territories.

Nope. He didn’t. So what’s that got to do with what I said. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

What you said was incorrect, he was pointing out your apparent lack of knowledge

And did you understand what I said to you? Do you understand the difference between a dictatorship and totalitianism? You did not address this. But stupid people usually don't.

Nope. He didn’t. So what’s that got to do with what I said. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

OP, I'm pretty sure we don't have to worry about becoming North Korea or Iraq any time soon so I wouldn't worry about it if that is a legitimate concern of yours. The sky has not fallen. It has just shifted a bit.

And did you understand what I said to you? Do you understand the difference between a dictatorship and totalitianism? You did not address this. But stupid people usually don't. Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

I fully understood that you made a statement which was Wrong and I pointed that to you. If you think that under the reign of the various Roman Emperors their was not totalitarianism you’re plenty foolish. Nevertheless they didn’t ban the Bible or guns which was your point. A wrong point.

Dictatorship- Form of government in which one person or a small group possesses absolute power without effective constitutional limitation Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

You just described the attempt on January 6 2021 to create a dictatorship.

Hi Lucas,

Very good! I'm impressed. Yes, the Kim Dynasty is something I'm pretty sure won't happen here.

OP, I'm pretty sure we don't have to worry about becoming North Korea or Iraq any time soon so I wouldn't worry about it if that is a legitimate concern of yours. The sky has not fallen. It has just shifted a bit. Originally Posted by Lucas McCain

I have no fucking idea what you are trying to say. Try again bud.

I fully understood that you made a statement which was Wrong and I pointed that to you. If you think that under the reign of the various Roman Emperors their was not totalitarianism you’re plenty foolish. Nevertheless they didn’t ban the Bible or guns which was your point. A wrong point. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

And did you understand what I said to you? Do you understand the difference between a dictatorship and totalitianism? You did not address this. But stupid people usually don't. Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

When the Ayatollahs seized power, I don't remember them banning religion. In fact, just the opposite.

And, ahem, WTF is totalitianism?

You did not address this.

Friendly Dictators

http://www.chrismclaren.com/blog/200...dly-dictators/ Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

that card trope is very one sided, yeah.. it included ruthless anti-commies. those guys were amateurs when it comes to ruthlessness.

interestingly, the card left out Saddam Hussien (I think it might be he wasn't considered anti-commie enough) and some other ones who were on U.S. side.

it left out some well known "friendly dictators from the commie-side".
Castro
Pol Pot
Nicolae Ceaușescu
Zedong Mao

Well now . . .the OP is correct for the modern era, say from post WW-I to the present.

In Russia, Stalin consolidated power exactly that way in the 1920s. In the 1930s Hitler did much the same with guns, but managed to co-opt the Catholic Church hierarchy in Germany . . .a bit like what the Russians have done just now. Post-war Eastern Europe was held down by rhe Soviets because there were no guns in the hands of the people and speech was throttled in every way. Uprisings in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968) were quashed in both countries by a foreign occupying power.

Now think of the armed and assisited Ukrainians today. It is almost a fair fight.

Our "founding fathers" presciently had a lot of that in mind when they wrote up the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment deals with freedom to worship, and the Second Amendment deals with weapons. Both of these first two amendments explicitly empower the general public with the rights to assemble, speak, worship and possess weapons. Both amendments forbid the government from limiting these rights with phrsases such as, ". . .Congress shal pass no law . .." and, " . ..snall n ot be infringed . . ."

England, Caneda, Australia and New Zealand do not have these rights spelled out in any fundamental framework of government, let alone Russia China or North Korea . . .or most other nations on earth today.

We can argue about Jan 6th forever, but several things are clear to me. No one arrested inside the Capitol building on Jan 6th was armed. The only violent death was from a gunshot to the head of an unarmed woman from a capitol police officer. Other deaths that day were from chronic health issues such as heart attacks/strokes and subsequently from mental health issues.

We can argue about whether or not it was a protest or an attack etc, but it was not an "armed insurrection", nor was it bloody or deadly.

Sure, there are plenty of guns out there in Fly-Over land, but they stayed at home. If half of the thousands of folks standing in front of the stage that day had brought weapons of any kind and used them, we would be having a totally different discussion here today.

They didn't and we aren't.