> First, you start off with a promising statement about the correlation between slavery and dictatorship. Unfortunately, your following paragraphs have almost nothing to do with it. You quickly delve into a anti-religion rant which uses a poor metaphor involving Toyota.
If this was a review for a movie, you nailed it. Metaphor definitely not my best. It was an anti-religious rant. Thank you for noting that. Hopefully you'll dive into more detail as to why you feel differently?
> It's just easier to dismiss you by the third paragraph and down vote.
> Hopefully you'll dive into more detail as to why you feel differently?
You didn't ask for why I felt different (to be honest, I don't necessarily), you asked for why you were getting down voted. While sometimes you get down voted for an unpopular view (which I don't think is fair as long as your view makes sense), I felt that you might've been down voted for the lack of clarity in your post.
Then I get down voted for an honest response. Lovely. Sometimes I don't know why I even bother with HN because the karma system is quite a bit of fail. It appears that the early adopters can down vote to their hearts content but those of us who haven't been around as long can only up vote. I would love to know the karma level needed to up vote but that is not anywhere that I have looked (faq, guidelines, etc.).
>> It's just easier to dismiss you by the third paragraph and down vote.
> Nope. Guess not.
I wouldn't be so smug, what you said still might not be good, it just could be the best comment out of a really poor batch. :)
The problem with HN is this. The sport of 1-uping each other to prove something. It's not a matter of being smug, at least not from my perspective. My point is - you either are against group/mob/religion thinking or you're not. If you're for these types of groups be prepared to see your theory through past warm, fuzzy feelings for us westerners. If that wasn't clear, my apologies. But I'm not bowing out because the politically correct view makes me more popular. The politically correct view should be against tolerance of violence through not-so-obvious roots. Instead, we have those who are dancing around the subject rather than addressing it directly.
Isn't it funny that when you come up with a counter argument against violence you end up back at my original point about religion being a force of violence?
If this was a review for a movie, you nailed it. Metaphor definitely not my best. It was an anti-religious rant. Thank you for noting that. Hopefully you'll dive into more detail as to why you feel differently?
> It's just easier to dismiss you by the third paragraph and down vote.
Nope. Guess not.