Into the Storm (part 2)

No description available.

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• Empire
• war
• Churchill
• Biography
• Britain
• Great
• Speech
• Finest
• Hour
• ww2
• history
• Brendan
• Gleeson
• Iain
• Glen
• Janet
• McTee
• Golden
• Globe
• film
• movie

[luke33]

If this island of ours is to end, at last, let it end, only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground

[Voice463]

If neccessary for years.....if neccessary......alone

[TheSdthomas74]

Defiant in War. Resolute in Adversity. Compassionate in Victory. These are qualities that leaders must have in grave moments of history. Churchill had these in spades, and England and the Commonwealth are better off for it today. As an African-American-whose father also fought for Freedom and Liberty in WWII, I doff my hat off to one of History's greatest fighters...Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill, K.G. RIP, valiant son of England!!

[Ranillon]

@bxjam85 Your basic problem is that you seem to be oblivious to the fundamental weakness of rulership by an elite and thus miss a fundamental truth -- any elite will INEVITABLY twist any system to serve their own ends, thus creating a de facto tyranny. Many of the problems of today are due to our modern quasi-(business) elite going corrupt and caring so much about wealth without end they are slowly destroying our economic and social system. Hardly good evidence for the virtues of a ruling elite!

[bxjam85]

@Ranillon One last point that I forgot to mention. Aristocratic social orders have existed since the first civilizations arose in ancient times. They have only "failed" in the last 200 or so years because of the influence of Christian slave morality on modernist political ideologies.

[bxjam85]

@Ranillon Ruling classes never go away as long as there is a state. The ruling class is our modern, egalitarian, liberal democracies is a collection of mediocre politicians whose only excellence is in herding sheep. I called you an envious pleb because you think like one. Either way, that's beside the point. I do not wish to engage in a belligerent argument where we only exchange emotions. Thanks for the discussion.

[bxjam85]

@Ranillon Now we're getting into a game of tit for tat. You say I support your view of dictatorship and I say you support my view of dictatorship. You say that I want to be a ruler and I say that I don't. As I said, dictatorship is now a loaded term that serves little more than the purpose of arousing emotions. Continued. . .

[Ranillon]

@bxjam85 "Populist dictatorship?" That's little more than sour grapes over a certain group/class not having the control it thinks it "deserves". Everything you say makes it clear you think you deserve to be one of the "rulers" yet it never occurs to you that maybe you wouldn't be. Elitism is great when you are the "elite", but such regimes always fail precisely because the non-elites won't stand for it over the long term -- mostly because the "elite" always abuse their position in the end.

[Ranillon]

@bxjam85 All you're doing is repeating Patrician mythology -- we're great and so we deserve to rule. But, that ignores the whole point that if a government is going to have influence over you it's only fair if you have influence over it (e.g. voting rights). Otherwise, the relationship is only one-way -- which is pretty much the definition of "tyranny". Likewise, your idea of Patricians is a sort of pie-in-the-sky version where they are so noble that they'd never abuse their power. Riiiight!

[bxjam85]

@Ranillon There are more laws and taxes under democratic nation-states than there ever were under aristocratic states. What you call "freedom" means nothing to me under this arrangement. The word 'dictator' is such a loaded term that you can use it according to your likes and dislikes. You can call rule by the whims of the masses and their representatives a populist dictatorship. 

[bxjam85]

@Ranillon The plebs always assume that it is force alone that defines the ruling class. Force is just one of the means by which a ruling class rules. The aristocratic ruling class was defined by individuals and families with intellect, military prowess, wealth, creativity and distinguished taste. In the case of egalitarian, liberal democracy, rule is in the hands of the plebeian masses and their sheep herding demagogues. continued. . .

[Ranillon]

@bxjam85 I have no "envy for excellence" as in this case "excellence" and the ability to vote often did not go together historically. Rather, you had a so-called "ruling class" that pretended that it was somehow deserving over others when it was just a matter of the brute force of (usually hereditary and not earned) power to rule over others. Anyone who pays taxes and owes allegiance to a particular government deserves to have a voice in that government -- or else you just have a dictatorship.