If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
The Hard and Smart Working Minority vs Those [The Majority] who did not make the effort to develop Themselves [The Not-Smart & Lazy]
Libertarianism
Dilip Panjwani - Post # 3413 - 23/9/23
Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?
Question
Anyone want to rip this apart before I do??
Bob A (DM'er)
Hi Bob,
Honest advice from a well-wisher:
It would be better (very helpful to yourself), if you rip apart your DM delusions, instead.
Defends Libertarianism (A Variation of Capitalism) against Democratic Marxism
Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?
Response
1. Persecution: No one is "persecuting" the "hard and smart working minority". In current progressive taxation capitalism, the majority view it that the higher the income, the more the individual is winning within "SOCIETY'S" system. So they should pay more to keep the system running, than those benefiting less. And the system, thanks to manipulation by the elite wealthy (Many of whom are neither smart nor hard-working), is skewered towards the wealthy getting many more ways to decrease taxable income than the hard-working, low income majority.
2. Legal Theft: This is internally conflictual. If something is legal, it may be immoral, this is true. But it is the law. Those who don't like it can try to get it changed.......there's a political task for Libertarianism! So the State is NOT "stealing" from the elite....they are simply being asked by the majority of Capitalists to "pay their fair share!".
3. The Lazy Majority (Elitism Unbounded): Dilip re the majority of society: "those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so" - The majority of society, which will be a surprise to your elitist self, is both smart and hard-working. They do develop their talents. But the capitalist system requires a pool of desperate low-income labour to function........and so it is the case in a wealthy country like Canada, that over 50% of Canadians have less than $ 200 of savings to meet any emergency expenditure......they are living paycheque to paycheck........some working two part-time jobs at the same time, and not making it financially. And Capitalism, of necessity, drives the ever-widening gap between the have's and the have-nots.
4. The Libertarian "Fair Society": Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism:
It is because of the exploitation of the masses, under Laissez Fair Capitalism, that even capitalists felt having kids work in sweat shops all day long wasn't such a great idea.
Sooooo........NO.........Libertarian Society will NOT be a "fair society". Libertarianism espouses Capitalist Ways to provide what they call "Fairness" (And non-Capitalists beg to disagree).
5. Democratic Marxism: The elimination of Bourgeois Capitalism, with the retention of small personal property ownership, and ownership of enterprises by the worker, or, the State and worker jointly, WILL, without doubt, implement a "FAIRER SOCIETY", with more equality.
Defends Libertarianism (A Variation of Capitalism) against Democratic Marxism
Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?
Response
1. Persecution: No one is "persecuting" the "hard and smart working minority". In current progressive taxation capitalism, the majority view it that the higher the income, the more the individual is winning within "SOCIETY'S" system. So they should pay more to keep the system running, than those benefiting less. And the system, thanks to manipulation by the elite wealthy (Many of whom are neither smart nor hard-working), is skewered towards the wealthy getting many more ways to decrease taxable income than the hard-working, low income majority.
2. Legal Theft: This is internally conflictual. If something is legal, it may be immoral, this is true. But it is the law. Those who don't like it can try to get it changed.......there's a political task for Libertarianism! So the State is NOT "stealing" from the elite....they are simply being asked by the majority of Capitalists to "pay their fair share!".
3. The Lazy Majority (Elitism Unbounded): Dilip re the majority of society: "those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so" - The majority of society, which will be a surprise to your elitist self, is both smart and hard-working. They do develop their talents. But the capitalist system requires a pool of desperate low-income labour to function........and so it is the case in a wealthy country like Canada, that over 50% of Canadians have less than $ 200 of savings to meet any emergency expenditure......they are living paycheque to paycheck........some working two part-time jobs at the same time, and not making it financially. And Capitalism, of necessity, drives the ever-widening gap between the have's and the have-nots.
4. The Libertarian "Fair Society": Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism:
It is because of the exploitation of the masses, under Laissez Fair Capitalism, that even capitalists felt having kids work in sweat shops all day long wasn't such a great idea.
Sooooo........NO.........Libertarian Society will NOT be a "fair society". Libertarianism espouses Capitalist Ways to provide what they call "Fairness" (And non-Capitalists beg to disagree).
5. Democratic Marxism: The elimination of Bourgeois Capitalism, with the retention of small personal property ownership, and ownership of enterprises by the worker, or, the State and worker jointly, WILL, without doubt, implement a "FAIRER SOCIETY", with more equality.
Defends Libertarianism (A Variation of Capitalism) against Democratic Marxism
Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?
Response
1. Persecution: No one is "persecuting" the "hard and smart working minority". In current progressive taxation capitalism, the majority view it that the higher the income, the more the individual is winning within "SOCIETY'S" system. So they should pay more to keep the system running, than those benefiting less. And the system, thanks to manipulation by the elite wealthy (Many of whom are neither smart nor hard-working), is skewered towards the wealthy getting many more ways to decrease taxable income than the hard-working, low income majority.
2. Legal Theft: This is internally conflictual. If something is legal, it may be immoral, this is true. But it is the law. Those who don't like it can try to get it changed.......there's a political task for Libertarianism! So the State is NOT "stealing" from the elite....they are simply being asked by the majority of Capitalists to "pay their fair share!".
3. The Lazy Majority (Elitism Unbounded): Dilip re the majority of society: "those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so" - The majority of society, which will be a surprise to your elitist self, is both smart and hard-working. They do develop their talents. But the capitalist system requires a pool of desperate low-income labour to function........and so it is the case in a wealthy country like Canada, that over 50% of Canadians have less than $ 200 of savings to meet any emergency expenditure......they are living paycheque to paycheck........some working two part-time jobs at the same time, and not making it financially. And Capitalism, of necessity, drives the ever-widening gap between the have's and the have-nots.
4. The Libertarian "Fair Society": Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism:
It is because of the exploitation of the masses, under Laissez Fair Capitalism, that even capitalists felt having kids work in sweat shops all day long wasn't such a great idea.
Sooooo........NO.........Libertarian Society will NOT be a "fair society". Libertarianism espouses Capitalist Ways to provide what they call "Fairness" (And non-Capitalists beg to disagree).
5. Democratic Marxism: The elimination of Bourgeois Capitalism, with the retention of small personal property ownership, and ownership of enterprises by the worker, or, the State and worker jointly, WILL, without doubt, implement a "FAIRER SOCIETY", with more equality.
Bob A (DM'er)
1 & 2. 'they should pay more to keep the system running' a libertarian system would run much better with minimal government (hence minimal taxation) ... as your future PM Pierre Poilievre would attest to. But it appears from your argument that you and Bob G want the current capitalist system running, probably because that gives you guys the sadistic pleasure of taxation on the hard and smart working minority. Can't you decide what is it that you want, and stop acting confused?
3. 'But the capitalist system requires a pool of desperate low-income labour to function' what you are describing is a capitalistic system... another example of your irrelevant arguments in our discussion on the gutter of DM vs. the utopia of Libertarianism.
4. 'Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism' another irrelevant statement, as neither me nor Pierre Poilievre are talking about laissez-faire capitalism, but true Libertarianism which I have explained to you several times, and you are free to ask me further clarifications about it if you wish.
5. 'ownership of enterprises by the State' not a single such enterprise in all of human history has ever worked well, and always ended in disaster, and so Bob A & Bob G, it would be in your best interest if you take your minds out of the gutter of DM...
as far as enterprises owned by workers are concerned, Libertarianism is the only system which would encourage that, not DM or capitalism...
Note: cyclically re-posted for the benefit of new DMGI members, DM-G viewers, and DMGF members/viewers.
The Gamble
Democratic Marxism sets out a platform of self-governance and economics. And it sets up a fundamental structure within which this platform can be implemented. But what happens when ideology meets the local democracy of the Local Political Unit (LPU)?
The problem old-style Communism faced was the revolt of many (Majority?) electors to many of the Communist platforms. Communism's answer? Use the gun; trample human rights of the citizens; suppress all opposition – then implement the ideology & platform without any public opposition. Did it really work?? The jury is still out on Chinese Communism, but it has all the negative features that necessitate its rejection.
What will be Democratic Marxism's answer when an LPU wants to go its own way, differently somehow, democratically? The problem is that DM proudly declares that the LPU's have all power! They have the real control! Democratic Marxism's Global Model LPU can be tweaked by any LPU, or even outright rejected for itself!
This is where Democratic Marxism has to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. It is committed first to “democratic process” and “local power”.
Human society is governed by laws. Laws are passed by the governing authority, whether it be by direct democracy (Citizen voting), or, by the representation circle to which the electors have given power over their lives. And if the system is working, and Dem. Marxism has it right, each LPU, hopefully, will implement laws modelled after the proposals of the Democratic Marxist Vetting Committee (DMVC). But should an LPU, within its borders, decide to revert to Wildwest Capitalism, this will be legal........but, hopefully, the effect of such rogue actions will be limited and minimized and restrained by the general structural governing context within which every LPU exists. Diversity will definitely be the order of the day in a true democracy – and maybe one should support the saying used financially: There is safety in diversity.
A Suitable Test Nation for DM
The DMVC has targeted Canada for the first partisan Democratic Marxist Party......and it will be provincial.
The reason is the possibility of fundamental societal structure change within the existing Canadian Constitutional documents. Canada presents the possibility because constitutionally, municipalities are the “creatures” of a province. It is therefore open to a Canadian province to realign local government as currently existing, into the DM LPU structure. The province also has, constitutionally, full jurisdiction over certain civil powers, as against the federal government (Eg. Health Care, Education, etc.). So.....IF it was determined to do it........any Canadian province could “down-load” all of its powers to the LPU's. Thereafter it would identify itself in two ways:
as the hand-maiden of the LPU's, while remaining, as a provincial representative circle of the provincial electors;
as the traditional province with which the federal government must deal within the existing constitutional structure of Canada.
The federal government may object to the provincial restructuring, but will be toothless....it is within the provincial power of a Canadian province to do this. And the federal government will have to continue to deal with that province as the valid “Provincial Government”.
Commencement of Partisan Democratic Marxism in Canada
The DMVC will receive applications from those wishing to apply for provincial party status as: The Democratic Marxist Party of (Province). For those ideologically acceptable, the DMVC will grant a formal “Endorsement” - the approval of the ginger group's use of the name.
Thereafter, the provincial party will develop a provincial DM platform suitable to their province, in concert with the DMVC.
Should the Provincial Party at any time stray from adhering to fundamental DM principles/platforms, it risks the DMVC withdrawing the “Endorsement”, and disowning the Provincial Party. Of course, the DMVC may still consider itself an ally of the rogue party, and see it as still the best provincial option, and thus continue to work with the provincial party, should it so desire.
Democratic Marxist Global Institute (DMGI)
Author: Bob Armstrong, Chairperson, DMGI Vetting Committee Reviser: Bob Armstrong – 20/10/17
Copyright – Democratic Marxist Global Institute - 2020
Why are you polluting the COVID-19 thread with your DM horseshit as you have with NWO and Anthropogenic climate change threads? I have a great solution for all of this BAN any politicians from relationships with the WEF, destroy the WHO, disband the UN, and finally make big pharma liable for any products they sell especially vaccines. 50% of the money spent by governments on big pharma should go to cheap, repurposed drugs for diseases like cancer, Respiratory diseases, etc. Healthcare costs and budgets will go to a fraction of what they are now.
Any political party that proposes violating a country's constitution or charter of rights should not be on the ballot. The abolition of private property violates Article 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights.
They are making 60 billion dollars a year selling vaccines ... ALSO ... making 500 billion dollars a year selling the remedies for the injuries caused by those vaccines!!!
.....
4. 'Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism' another irrelevant statement, as neither me nor Pierre Poilievre are talking about laissez-faire capitalism, but true Libertarianism which I have explained to you several times, and you are free to ask me further clarifications about it if you wish.
......
Yeah, RIIIIIIIGHT.
Bob A. ..... kindly ask Dilip why his idol Pierre P is NOT RUNNING for the Libertairian Party of Canada?
I've asked, but oooooh, I'm a nasty troll, so if you ask, he has "promised" to answer LOL
And please Dilip, no answers about "electability" which would make Pierre P. out to be just another opportunist / wolf in sheep's clothing
Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Thursday, 28th September, 2023, 02:15 AM.
This topic was introduced here as a Capitalism vs Communism issue. I felt it was a hijacking of the thread, so I moved the discussion to the Human Self-Government thread, where it is currently awaiting processing.
Then this current topic was introduced........all the CT'ers here had read it.......I felt it was really off........and that I should answer it here, rather than just move it like I did the other conversation. And I did. There is now a reply from Dilip Panjwani.
I propose to Dilip that this is hijacking this thread, and I would suggest the discussion go over to "Human Self-Government". But I feel we are at loggerheads. I think it is just best to let CT'ers decide now.
COVID Vaccines Causally Linked to Increased Mortality, Resulting in 17 Million Deaths: Scientific Report
Data suggest COVID-19 vaccines haven’t saved lives, but instead, have resulted in 17 million deaths and increased all-cause mortality in 17 countries.
By Megan Redshaw
9/28/2023
Updated:
9/29/2023
Print
X 1
0:00
A new scientific report challenges the idea that COVID-19 vaccines have prevented deaths after researchers assessed all-cause mortality in 17 countries and found COVID-19 vaccines did not have any beneficial effect on reducing mortality. Instead, researchers found that unprecedented peaks in high all-cause mortality in each country—especially among the elderly population when COVID-19 vaccines were deployed—coincided with the rollout of third and fourth booster doses.
The report published Sept. 17 by Correlation Research in the Public Interest (pdf) quantified the vaccine-dose fatality rate (vDFR) for all ages—which is the ratio of inferred vaccine-induced deaths to vaccine doses delivered in a given population. After analyzing mortality data, the researchers calculated a mean all-ages fatal toxicity by injection of vDFR of one death per 800 injections across all ages and countries. This equates to 17 million COVID-19 vaccine-related deaths worldwide from 13.25 billion injections as of Sept. 2, 2023.
"This would correspond to a mass iatrogenic event that killed (0.213 ± 0.006) % of the world population (1 death per 470 living persons, in less than 3 years), and did not measurably prevent any deaths," the authors said. The overall risk of death induced by COVID-19 vaccines is 1,000 times greater than previously reported in data from clinical trials, adverse event monitoring, and cause-of-death statistics obtained from death certificates.
5/19/2022
All-cause mortality is the death rate from all causes of death for a population in a specific time period. This is the most reliable data for detecting and epidemiologically characterizing events driving death and for measuring the population-level impact of any surge or collapse in deaths from any cause.
"All-cause mortality is a good feature to use in statistical medical analyses since there is no ambiguity in whether someone has died or not," Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), told The Epoch Times in an email. "It is highly disturbing that these authors have found a consistent trend among seventeen countries showing a significant increase in all-cause mortality coinciding with extensive COVID vaccine rollout. Their estimate of one death for every 800 injections globally is alarming."
Ms. Seneff said her investigations into potential mechanisms of vaccine injury have led her to believe that it is plausible that these injections are "extremely toxic" and should not have been approved by regulatory agencies.
AAPS Statement Calling for Moratorium on COVID-19 Shot Mandates and Genetic Injections
1. COVID 19 injections are under Emergency Use Authorization and must be considered experimental. Informed consent is a bedrock principle of medical ethics, yet millions of people have taken COVID-19 injections under duress.
2. The long-term effects of the novel mRNA or DNA technology and the lipid nanoparticles involved in their administration – including carcinogenesis, mutagenesis, autoimmune phenomena, and impairment of fertility – cannot possibly be known.
3. There are numerous safety signals, including excess sudden deaths, that would in the past have prompted immediate withdrawal of vaccines or drugs from the market.
4. The expected intensive, sophisticated investigations of reported adverse effects associated with COVID-19 vaccination, including myocarditis, pericarditis, paralysis, thromboembolism, menstrual abnormalities, and unusual cancers, have not been undertaken.
5. COVID-19 genetic injections have not been shown in randomized, controlled trials to be effective in preventing infection, transmission, hospitalization or death.
6. In children who have virtually zero likelihood of death from COVID, there is no evidence of benefit exceeding risks for these products.
7. Regulatory agencies are corrupted by conflicts of interest, lack of transparency, and lack of accountability.
8. Vaccine-injured patients have little if any expectation of compensation, and manufacturers are shielded from liability. This liability protection must be ended.
9. All mandates, including requirements for school attendance or work, should immediately be withdrawn.
10. COVID-19 genetic injections should be withdrawn from the market. Share this:
Tweet
Comment