Final Essay!

Okay, so I have this big final essay thingy coming up for level-1 english. And I haven't started. I'm stuck between two topics:

Topic #1:
While different cultures and religions hold their respective anecdotes and values concerning death and the afterlife, are there certain things that connect humankind as a whole when it comes to death? Using psychoanalytic criticism, this essay examines the treatment of death and death acts in literature from various cultures.

Topic #2:
In our modern world, liberalism and humanism reign supreme and democracy is the only acceptable form of government. However, looking back to pre-WWII, Socialism and Fascism thrived in many parts of the world, including western societies such as Britain. In the essay, a new historical reading of literature, particularly that of post-WWII reveals how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions. It would also examine the literature other cultures, where either democracy fails or does not exist.

So, what do you think?

I think you're a nerd.
But the first one. :D

death-chan wrote:I think you're a nerd.
But the first one. :D

I'm not a nerd- I just love to write about meaningful philosophical topics!

*cough*

I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

the second one has more words i don't understand, so go with that one.

Woot Republic and football!

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

What's your point?

They word it as a bad thing. But I disagree. When you use words like "Demonization" and "Dogmatism" you insinuate the idea of it being evil.

And that's frankly not true. Can you challenge that?

I see a debate coming


*announcer voice*

and in the red corner, coming all the way from the sand village, weight 187 pounds (just play along) the Magnificence Q!

And in the blue corner, rising underdog, weighting in at 96 pounds and coming all the way from the Storm village is the valiant Aichu!


Round 1 Begin!!

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

What's your point?

They word it as a bad thing. But I disagree. When you use words like "Demonization" and "Dogmatism" you insinuate the idea of it being evil.

And that's frankly not true. Can you challenge that?

Democracy itself is not evil.

But the idea that democracy is the only system that should exist, and that nothing else should ever be considered, is a very dangerous one indeed. Evil? No, but dangerous.

amaterasu wrote:I see a debate coming


*announcer voice*

and in the red corner, coming all the way from the sand village, weight 187 pounds (just play along) the Magnificence Q!

And in the blue corner, rising underdog, weighting in at 96 pounds and coming all the way from the Storm village is the valiant Aichu!


Round 1 Begin!!

Magnificence. Cool.

amaterasu wrote:I see a debate coming


*announcer voice*

and in the red corner, coming all the way from the sand village, weight 187 pounds (just play along) the Magnificence Q!

And in the blue corner, rising underdog, weighting in at 96 pounds and coming all the way from the Storm village is the valiant Aichu!


Round 1 Begin!!

Of course you'd show up and make the random comments

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

What's your point?

They word it as a bad thing. But I disagree. When you use words like "Demonization" and "Dogmatism" you insinuate the idea of it being evil.

And that's frankly not true. Can you challenge that?

Democracy itself is not evil.

But the idea that democracy is the only system that should exist, and that nothing else should ever be considered, is a very dangerous one indeed. Evil? No, but dangerous.

That's not the idea that was promoted during the Cold War, though.

The idea during the Cold War was to stop the spread of Communism from threatening Democracy.

Not sure who taught you history, but they certainly got it backwards.

And Democracy isn't the only form of government that should exist. Only the best.

Although technically the United States is a Republic.

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

What's your point?

They word it as a bad thing. But I disagree. When you use words like "Demonization" and "Dogmatism" you insinuate the idea of it being evil.

And that's frankly not true. Can you challenge that?

Democracy itself is not evil.

But the idea that democracy is the only system that should exist, and that nothing else should ever be considered, is a very dangerous one indeed. Evil? No, but dangerous.

That's not the idea that was promoted during the Cold War, though.

The idea during the Cold War was to stop the spread of Communism from threatening Democracy.

Not sure who taught you history, but they certainly got it backwards.

And Democracy isn't the only form of government that should exist. Only the best.

Although technically the United States is a Republic.

You just said so yourself- the cold war was to stop the spread of communism from threatening democracy.

Now, I'm totally opposed to communism, but if democracy was the best form of government, why would it be threatened by communism? Certainly, if the world was bright and cheery for the democratic world, no one living under democracy would want communism.

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

What's your point?

They word it as a bad thing. But I disagree. When you use words like "Demonization" and "Dogmatism" you insinuate the idea of it being evil.

And that's frankly not true. Can you challenge that?

Democracy itself is not evil.

But the idea that democracy is the only system that should exist, and that nothing else should ever be considered, is a very dangerous one indeed. Evil? No, but dangerous.

That's not the idea that was promoted during the Cold War, though.

The idea during the Cold War was to stop the spread of Communism from threatening Democracy.

Not sure who taught you history, but they certainly got it backwards.

And Democracy isn't the only form of government that should exist. Only the best.

Although technically the United States is a Republic.

You just said so yourself- the cold war was to stop the spread of communism from threatening democracy.

Now, I'm totally opposed to communism, but if democracy was the best form of government, why would it be threatened by communism? Certainly, if the world was bright and cheery for the democratic world, no one living under democracy would want communism.

Well right now America is having bailout bills being jammed down the throats of the American people. You tell me how stuff happens that the people don't like?

Besides, are you telling me when Russia invaded Afghanistan, that that was the people moving for Communism?

Or when Fidel Castro took away all the land from the people and then jailed all his dissidents that this was what the People wanted?

Or how about when the Small Vietnamese army of communists murdered hundreds of thousands to propel their agenda?

Or when Stalin took over Poland and the Eastern Bloc. All under the guise of very fake elections. And you say, that should not have been stopped? When the Polish people were on trains to concentration camps deep in Siberia, they would certainly have wished someone had defended their democracy.

But yes, you are right. It was Democracy that was evil during the Cold War. That's why Communism Triumphed so well and....oh...wait, it didn't.

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

What's your point?

They word it as a bad thing. But I disagree. When you use words like "Demonization" and "Dogmatism" you insinuate the idea of it being evil.

And that's frankly not true. Can you challenge that?

Democracy itself is not evil.

But the idea that democracy is the only system that should exist, and that nothing else should ever be considered, is a very dangerous one indeed. Evil? No, but dangerous.

That's not the idea that was promoted during the Cold War, though.

The idea during the Cold War was to stop the spread of Communism from threatening Democracy.

Not sure who taught you history, but they certainly got it backwards.

And Democracy isn't the only form of government that should exist. Only the best.

Although technically the United States is a Republic.

You just said so yourself- the cold war was to stop the spread of communism from threatening democracy.

Now, I'm totally opposed to communism, but if democracy was the best form of government, why would it be threatened by communism? Certainly, if the world was bright and cheery for the democratic world, no one living under democracy would want communism.

Well right now America is having bailout bills being jammed down the throats of the American people. You tell me how stuff happens that the people don't like?

Besides, are you telling me when Russia invaded Afghanistan, that that was the people moving for Communism?

Or when Fidel Castro took away all the land from the people and then jailed all his dissidents that this was what the People wanted?

Or how about when the Small Vietnamese army of communists murdered hundreds of thousands to propel their agenda?

Or when Stalin took over Poland and the Eastern Bloc. All under the guise of very fake elections. And you say, that should not have been stopped? When the Polish people were on trains to concentration camps deep in Siberia, they would certainly have wished someone had defended their democracy.

But yes, you are right. It was Democracy that was evil during the Cold War. That's why Communism Triumphed so well and....oh...wait, it didn't.

It's true countries were coerced into communism in the past. I never said communism was a good thing.

But do people living here on good old North America care for the peril of a little place like poland? Oh no. We're more worried about these countries spinning out nukes and aiming them at us. Face it- civil war and unrest goes on all the time, and when major western powers respond, its seldom out of a pure heart. Do I need to rattle off some genocides and wars that took place under *gasp* democracy? Or so called democracy. It's not the system. Not the ideology. People die under republics and they die under dictatorship. Look at the principles of Marxism- they stress equality for everyone. So you can't blame communism itself for all the messed up stuff that's happened. It's the heart of the people who follow that ideology, Q. Millions of unborn children are slaughtered every year in your country- and your new president is happy with it. Did you want this guy in office. Is democracy really better any better?

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

What's your point?

They word it as a bad thing. But I disagree. When you use words like "Demonization" and "Dogmatism" you insinuate the idea of it being evil.

And that's frankly not true. Can you challenge that?

Democracy itself is not evil.

But the idea that democracy is the only system that should exist, and that nothing else should ever be considered, is a very dangerous one indeed. Evil? No, but dangerous.

That's not the idea that was promoted during the Cold War, though.

The idea during the Cold War was to stop the spread of Communism from threatening Democracy.

Not sure who taught you history, but they certainly got it backwards.

And Democracy isn't the only form of government that should exist. Only the best.

Although technically the United States is a Republic.

You just said so yourself- the cold war was to stop the spread of communism from threatening democracy.

Now, I'm totally opposed to communism, but if democracy was the best form of government, why would it be threatened by communism? Certainly, if the world was bright and cheery for the democratic world, no one living under democracy would want communism.

Well right now America is having bailout bills being jammed down the throats of the American people. You tell me how stuff happens that the people don't like?

Besides, are you telling me when Russia invaded Afghanistan, that that was the people moving for Communism?

Or when Fidel Castro took away all the land from the people and then jailed all his dissidents that this was what the People wanted?

Or how about when the Small Vietnamese army of communists murdered hundreds of thousands to propel their agenda?

Or when Stalin took over Poland and the Eastern Bloc. All under the guise of very fake elections. And you say, that should not have been stopped? When the Polish people were on trains to concentration camps deep in Siberia, they would certainly have wished someone had defended their democracy.

But yes, you are right. It was Democracy that was evil during the Cold War. That's why Communism Triumphed so well and....oh...wait, it didn't.

It's true countries were coerced into communism in the past. I never said communism was a good thing.

But do people living here on good old North America care for the peril of a little place like poland? Oh no. We're more worried about these countries spinning out nukes and aiming them at us. Face it- civil war and unrest goes on all the time, and when major western powers respond, its seldom out of a pure heart. Do I need to rattle off some genocides and wars that took place under *gasp* democracy? Or so called democracy. It's not the system. Not the ideology. People die under republics and they die under dictatorship. Look at the principles of Marxism- they stress equality for everyone. So you can't blame communism itself for all the messed up stuff that's happened. It's the heart of the people who follow that ideology, Q. Millions of unborn children are slaughtered every year in your country- and your new president is happy with it. Did you want this guy in office. Is democracy really better any better?

I can't say Democracy is the best. But, do I think its dogmatic? No.

And I can tell you this.

Thanks to Democracy, the Holocaust ended.
Thanks to Democracy, slavery all over the world has been abolished.
Thanks to Democracy, half the world's hungry is fed, and that's only from America.
Thanks to Democracy, charities have been able to do more for the poverished nations than ever before in any other time.
Thanks to Democracy, a country that killed millions of its own people was stopped from destroying more.
Thanks to Democracy, rogue terrorist networks in Iraq no longer destroy their own people.
Thanks to Democracy, South Korea wasn't massacred.
Thanks to Democracy, Japan didn't roll over the entire pacific and the genocide of millions of Chinese was stopped.
Thanks to Democracy, aide has been given to those who have AIDS in Africa and many conflicts have been quelled.


So do I think Democracy is REALLY any better? Yes. Yes I do.

What has Communism, or dictatorships achieved that even closely compares to the marvels of democracy?

What other system gives people free speech, the ability to debate like Democracy?

What other system says, "Find your talents and use them to better yourself and the world around you?"

You asked, is Democracy really any better?

I ask you, can it even be compared? Sure, there are many instances where Democracy said, "Hey, don't get involved. We want these people to choose for themselves," and yes, during the Cold War democracy said, "We are here to protect our people, even if that means saying no to evil dictators," but if you view that as Democracy being dangerous, I don't know what to say to you. What would you have them do? "Yes, democracy should sit aside and let Communism roll over other nations because since Communism exists Democracy isn't perfect." That's like saying, "Because the Devil exists, God must be wrong because if he were perfect the Devil wouldn't exist." Nope. It means that you must STAND up to the evil and be strong.

And Democracy has proven itself to do that.

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:

Aichu wrote:

quater wrote:I'd rather kill myself than do either.

Liberalism reigns supreme? Oh really.

Write an essay on the "how cold-war era promotes the dogmatism of democracy and the demonetization of all other political instiutions" I mean really. Could they be anymore socialist in their agenda?

And the first one is no better.

Liberalism might not be the best word. "Westernism" would work better.

I would challenge you on that one. To quote from one university's website, the Cold war was essentially a struggle between America's capitalism and the Soviet's communism. And, as it should be obvious, capitalism cannot breed in communism- it requires a democratic society to take root. Therefore, it is in the economic interest of capitalism and countries abiding thereof to propagate democracy.

What's your point?

They word it as a bad thing. But I disagree. When you use words like "Demonization" and "Dogmatism" you insinuate the idea of it being evil.

And that's frankly not true. Can you challenge that?

Democracy itself is not evil.

But the idea that democracy is the only system that should exist, and that nothing else should ever be considered, is a very dangerous one indeed. Evil? No, but dangerous.

That's not the idea that was promoted during the Cold War, though.

The idea during the Cold War was to stop the spread of Communism from threatening Democracy.

Not sure who taught you history, but they certainly got it backwards.

And Democracy isn't the only form of government that should exist. Only the best.

Although technically the United States is a Republic.

You just said so yourself- the cold war was to stop the spread of communism from threatening democracy.

Now, I'm totally opposed to communism, but if democracy was the best form of government, why would it be threatened by communism? Certainly, if the world was bright and cheery for the democratic world, no one living under democracy would want communism.

Well right now America is having bailout bills being jammed down the throats of the American people. You tell me how stuff happens that the people don't like?

Besides, are you telling me when Russia invaded Afghanistan, that that was the people moving for Communism?

Or when Fidel Castro took away all the land from the people and then jailed all his dissidents that this was what the People wanted?

Or how about when the Small Vietnamese army of communists murdered hundreds of thousands to propel their agenda?

Or when Stalin took over Poland and the Eastern Bloc. All under the guise of very fake elections. And you say, that should not have been stopped? When the Polish people were on trains to concentration camps deep in Siberia, they would certainly have wished someone had defended their democracy.

But yes, you are right. It was Democracy that was evil during the Cold War. That's why Communism Triumphed so well and....oh...wait, it didn't.

It's true countries were coerced into communism in the past. I never said communism was a good thing.

But do people living here on good old North America care for the peril of a little place like poland? Oh no. We're more worried about these countries spinning out nukes and aiming them at us. Face it- civil war and unrest goes on all the time, and when major western powers respond, its seldom out of a pure heart. Do I need to rattle off some genocides and wars that took place under *gasp* democracy? Or so called democracy. It's not the system. Not the ideology. People die under republics and they die under dictatorship. Look at the principles of Marxism- they stress equality for everyone. So you can't blame communism itself for all the messed up stuff that's happened. It's the heart of the people who follow that ideology, Q. Millions of unborn children are slaughtered every year in your country- and your new president is happy with it. Did you want this guy in office. Is democracy really better any better?

I can't say Democracy is the best. But, do I think its dogmatic? No.

And I can tell you this.

Thanks to Democracy, the Holocaust ended.
Thanks to Democracy, slavery all over the world has been abolished.
Thanks to Democracy, half the world's hungry is fed, and that's only from America.
Thanks to Democracy, charities have been able to do more for the poverished nations than ever before in any other time.
Thanks to Democracy, a country that killed millions of its own people was stopped from destroying more.
Thanks to Democracy, rogue terrorist networks in Iraq no longer destroy their own people.
Thanks to Democracy, South Korea wasn't massacred.
Thanks to Democracy, Japan didn't roll over the entire pacific and the genocide of millions of Chinese was stopped.
Thanks to Democracy, aide has been given to those who have AIDS in Africa and many conflicts have been quelled.


So do I think Democracy is REALLY any better? Yes. Yes I do.

What has Communism, or dictatorships achieved that even closely compares to the marvels of democracy?

What other system gives people free speech, the ability to debate like Democracy?

What other system says, "Find your talents and use them to better yourself and the world around you?"

You asked, is Democracy really any better?

I ask you, can it even be compared? Sure, there are many instances where Democracy said, "Hey, don't get involved. We want these people to choose for themselves," and yes, during the Cold War democracy said, "We are here to protect our people, even if that means saying no to evil dictators," but if you view that as Democracy being dangerous, I don't know what to say to you. What would you have them do? "Yes, democracy should sit aside and let Communism roll over other nations because since Communism exists Democracy isn't perfect." That's like saying, "Because the Devil exists, God must be wrong because if he were perfect the Devil wouldn't exist." Nope. It means that you must STAND up to the evil and be strong.

And Democracy has proven itself to do that.

We can go on about this all night, Q. But I must be to bed.

So I end with this: The point of Essay #2 is to prove that democracy is not the absolute. There are simply some places in this world that are too unstable for democracy. Many countries lived for years under monarchy and enjoyed a relatively good history.

Remember: Democracy, or at least, a 'real' democracy, is elected by the people. It is only as good as the people. And frankly, most people are not by any means capable of choosing who should run a country.

I could go on about this for years, Aichu.

I agree with the last statement, Aichu. Which is why we should be glad we live in a Republic.

But tossout your cynicism of Democracy's, if I were you. Besides, Democracy battled Communism and Totalitarianism and Dictatorships, not Monarchies during the 20th century. In fact, they helped preserve monarchies when they could.

Sure, people are not perfect. But that is by no flaw of Democracy, but by a flaw of people's ignorance.

And for the world, this is an argument you could have never won, in a million years. I am, to put it bluntly, to learned on this one topic. It'd be the equivalent of me debating Abortion with you and being for it.

This is kind of beside the point, but my left eye dried out trying to read those big words.

Anyway, I thought topic one was good.

I'm sure I've done that first essay before... or at least something similar hah.

oh my gosh, you and Q really did get into it

and WHAT THE CRAP is with all this? I haven't even thought of a topic yet!

but new historical is retarded and confusing. the first one sounds a lot more interesting, and I think you do more with it

OR you could go with #2 so I could steal your first idea

We got into it?

arguing Q

I guess so.

I just thought we were discussin.

that's not what I heard from aichu *shrugs*