Coupling

May 30, 2007 17:55

I enjoy being single ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 6

qtmstr May 31 2007, 03:48:33 UTC
I know this comment is slightly off-topic (and the second reason is a very good one for thinking he's a sleazy bastard), but isn't it just as unreasonable to blame a company for its actions 60 years ago as to blame a whole country? Both are groups of people, not entities with free will. I doubt any person who helped the Nazis is still directing BMW's actions.

Oh, and purely out of curiosity --- I'm not anti-car, but I am pro-electric-car, with the power coming from clean energy. What do you think of that view?

Reply

sorry its so long..sometimes i ramble baristapro May 31 2007, 21:13:27 UTC
Both are groups of people, not entities with free will.(this is not to be confrontational...trying not to take that tone in response...sorry if it comes off that way ( ... )

Reply

I ramble as well qtmstr June 1 2007, 02:23:32 UTC
Rambling is great. And just so I'm not misunderstood, I don't mean to come off as confrontational either.

BUT (heh) the same could then be said about the group of people who called themselves Nazis to begin with. And each individual person within a group of people is in fact an entity with free will. So then should we excuse the entire Nazi party as a group because their actions were a long time ago? And should we excuse the people who knowingly aided their actions soley for their own selfish motives? Hardly.

You're right, groups are made of people with free will. And we can condemn these people individually. But Neo-Nazis today are scary because of what they advocate today, which is the same scary doctrine the original Nazis promoted. But as far as BMW goes, the people in it today want to make money. That makes them about as equal as other corporate drones (which is still pretty evil.) But that doesn't mean that, today, the people at BMW are on the same level as the Nazis.

Aside from the Nazi-link propaghanda, its also a fact that ( ... )

Reply


vyl8 May 31 2007, 22:43:35 UTC
but said interest was somehow defending cars (specifically BMW who funded the Nazi party) in a very militant anti-car household (myself being anti-car) in front of two Jewish people.
Was he playing the devil's avocate? I cannot really understand any other reason to defend a luxury car company in front of anti-car people. It seems like a deliberate attempt to provoke. Which yes, is pretty asshole-ish. To legitimately defend a car company it makes more sense to defend one that makes practicle cars that do not use lots of gas, last a long time so people don't have to keep buying new cars and is made of durable parts that do not need to be replaced often and the parts can be interchanged with other simmilar cars. Granted, I do not know much about BMW, but catering to a high-end market, they do not strike me as a manufacturer who makes practicle vehicles.

Reply

baristapro May 31 2007, 22:51:38 UTC
agreed.
And no, he wasn't just playing devil's advocate. He really was trying to instigate, because both he and the BH kids are very stubborn individuals. Really, they could have just as easily have been arguing about what toppings taste better on a pizza. He was just looking for a fight.

(and BOY did it ever escalate)

Reply

vyl8 June 1 2007, 03:48:16 UTC
I can imagine it got pretty nasty pretty quick. Instigating is worse than playing the devil's avocate because they aren't even taking the opposing viewpoint for a reason.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up