Opinion of Woodrow Wilson

[Хahar 🤔]

A truly massive HP.

The very definition of a "Liberal Fascist."

Except that a) he wasn't a fascist, b) he wasn't liberal, and c) that doesn't make sense.

HP, though.

[Хahar 🤔]

Got America involved in WW1

Yes. As we all know, the Center of the World was quite capable of winning itself.

[Хahar 🤔]

Got America involved in WW1

Yes. As we all know, the Center of the World was quite capable of winning itself.

Look, troll, the Allies could have won anyway. Had America stayed out, Germany could have been balkanised and that would have been that. I'm a British isolationist, and frankly I prefer that we'd have stayed out of WW1, but there you go.

That's an interesting idea. How would the Allies have won?

[Хahar 🤔]

Got America involved in WW1

Yes. As we all know, the Center of the World was quite capable of winning itself.

Look, troll, the Allies could have won anyway. Had America stayed out, Germany could have been balkanised and that would have been that. I'm a British isolationist, and frankly I prefer that we'd have stayed out of WW1, but there you go.

That's an interesting idea. How would the Allies have won?

The same way we did in real life.

In real life, you did it because of an influx of fresh Americans.

If America had not entered, Germany would be fighting a one-front war with France and Britain. Given that it had held its own against them while simultaneously fighting Russia and given what happened in 1940, I think it's reasonable to say that Paris would have fallen quickly.

[Хahar 🤔]

Yeah right. Germany was on the verge of starvation in 1918. They could not have continued onwards to Paris, and even if they had reached Paris, they would not have captured the city.

Franch troops would have mutinied before it progressed to such a stage. Germany was coming off a string of victories, morale was low, and smmaller mutinies had already occured.

[Хahar 🤔]

Of course, I think personally he was a SOB and a dirty racist. But led America through WW1 and introduced internationalism to America. And proved that Isolationism is nothing  but a cowardly and failed policy.

Right, it takes a lot of courage to lounge in the oval office while ordering thousands of young boys to be sent to their deaths for no good reason. Especially after you've lied your way through a whole election campaign promising to preserve peace.

Plus thanks to Wilson's interventionism, we eventually got to experience World War II, the Cold War, and the current mess in the Middle East.

What a success story.

Would you oppose war even after being attacked?

[Хahar 🤔]

You know that American neutrality was nothing more than retroactive justification by George Washington for the failure of the French alliance, I hope.

[Хahar 🤔]

You know that American neutrality was nothing more than retroactive justification by George Washington for the failure of the French alliance, I hope.

Besides the fact that we had distinct pro-Britain and pro-France groups that didn't get along well, you mean?

Oh, that's certainly true. And Washington was pro-British. His Farewell Address did exactly what he wanted it to do; make it seem to posterity that he was an impartial moderator.

[Хahar 🤔]

But led America through WW1 and introduced internationalism to America. And proved that Isolationism is nothing  but a cowardly and failed policy.

Yeah, and how has that interventionism worked out for us in Korea, Vietnam, Solamia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq?

Korea was, broadly speaking, a successful war.

[Хahar 🤔]

If that is indeed the case, why even have a government? After all, whether you like government or not, the institution of government can not exist if there is no coercive powers granted to it. If libertarians have to accept the non-aggression principle as inviolable they accept anarchy. If there is really no difference between libertarianism and anarchism what is the point of calling oneself a "libertarian"?

We have a government because this is earth, not Heaven. We can't go back to the garden of Eden. Of course anarchy would be ideal but we need a dose of pragmatism to move forward in this dark age.

According to Harry Reid, paying taxes is voluntary in the U.S. Reid is a lying slimeball, but that is the way it should be if we wish to call ourselves a free society.

If taxes are voluntary, then nobody will pay them, since nobody enjoys paying taxes. We will have anarchy. How does an anarchistic society deal with crime?

[Хahar 🤔]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, I thought government was the will of the people? If they really want it, they will pay for it. That's how everything else on the market works. If people are willing to voluntarily spend their money on superfluous luxuries like big screen TVs and SUVs, why wouldn't they be willing to make the investment to protect themselves and their property? If one government fails, a new one will arise that would meet the needs of the people. Just as with any other provider of services on the free market.

But, then, criminals can also pay to have their own enterprises recognized, yes?

[Хahar 🤔]

You mean the criminals can take all their armed robberies and murders and corruption and abuse and organize into a.... government?

Who said anything about government? Certainly, the end result of anarchy would be feudalism, and an undoing of all the advances of the last millenium.