Choose your Alignment

alignment according to ideology.jpg (771 KB)


| Send to Facebook | Send To Twitter
  • Leave A Comment

    Subscribe
    Notify of
    27 Comments
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Lamb

    I agree with all of them. Does that mean I… What does that mean?

    tiki god

    I don’t agree with putting Anonymous in the chaotic evil spot, they’re much more ‘chaotic good’ to ‘chaotic chaotic’

    tiki god

    and who in their right fucking mind would put fucking Patton as chaotic?

    TGGeko

    Well, considering no two people can agree with what lawful and chaotic mean, it’s pretty much a crapshot.

    Dral

    I would. War defines chaos, and in a peaceful time, Patton was lost. He did what he thought needed to be done to complete the mission he was given, regardless of the law or rules.

    #makecasemdsgreatagain

    Chaotic good and neutral evil

    GrandAdmiralThrawn

    Lincoln should not be lawful. He violated more laws up to and including the Constitution which he was sworn to uphold, invoke God as his Judge. There is no doubt that he violated that oath. He could not be considered Lawful under any measure. As to good, this to he can not be considered. HE is responsible for the deaths of more Americans then any other person in history. HE is responsible for dividing families, making kids fight their fathers, brother verses their brothers….if you consider what he did, and wrote it out as a plan instead of history, it… Read more »

    While I agree with everything you said, it’s really difficult to think of major historical figures that really qualify as lawful good. Most of history’s “good guys” were law-breakers

    Korinthian

    Is it still an oath if you don’t believe in the Christian god?

    Anyways, I can’t think of any USAdish branch of government that protects and upholds the entire constitution nowadays.

    gor

    An oath is just an affirmation of something sacred to the oath taker, it doesn’t require any god, christian or not.

    As for what “protects and upholds the entire constitution nowadays”, that is not a branch of government that has the responsible, but people. Actually, it’s all of us as individuals whose responsibility is to protect and uphold the constitution, because as soon as you let someone else have that responsibility than that is the day you have lost it.

    GrandAdmiralThrawn

    It is not just the Christian God, but the God of the Jews and the Moslims. Although I if you were a Hindu you could swear an oath to one of the many gods you have to pick from. And of course you are right Korinthian, but that is a different issue.

    fracked again

    Lincoln was responsible for deaths and families split? Wow, now that is revisionist bullshit.

    Who seceded? Or is your point that he didn’t let them.

    The Matrix: Rebooted

    IMO, he should have let them secede. The US was founded on the principle that if the central government isn’t working out then secession is justified. OTOH, instead of violently seceding the Southern states could have worked to amend the Constitution to have an explicit exit clause, then exercised that clause. Neither side was faultless.

    gor

    I do agree with your statement, but if it took a war to end the shame of the slavery (which was a compromise in the first place to secure a fledgling nation) then I agree with Lincoln’s actions, because in a imperfect real world, the ends always justifies the means.

    The Matrix: Rebooted
    The Confederacy did not succeed violently until after Federal troops refused to territory inside of an Independent County). If Japan told the U.S. to remove their bases, and the U.S. refused, Japan would be justified in the use of force.

    In addition, there was no need to amend the Constitution is a clause in the with addresses this issue explicitly.

    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”

    fracked again

    They seceded because their guy didn’t win the presidency! How lame is that? (So lame that the gov of Texas wanted to do the same when Obama won) The South were poor losers then and still are.

    GrandAdmiralThrawn

    The point his he had no Constitutional authority to stop them, he violated the Constitution and acted against the law. He arrested sitting Senators and threaten Judges, disregarding the U.S. Supreme court.

    Lincoln was the war that waged an illegal war. Lincoln was/is responsible.

    fracked again

    Riiiiight. Why am I not surprised to hear neo confederate bullshit coming from you?

    The South Shall Rise Again!

    Shit Floats.

    GrandAdmiralThrawn

    Depends on what states you are talking about. And regardless of if you agree with slavery (It was wrong IMHO), the Constitution does and did not give the Federal Government the power to interfere. The abolitionists could have ended it with a Constitutionally amendment, they did not, what they did was illegal. The Northern and Western States of the Confederacy (Texas, Virgina – for example) succeeded because Lincoln Illegally raised a huge Federal army, and those States feared invasion and occupation. Maryland was occupied for the duration of the War. Some state may have because of Federal intervention where is… Read more »

    Korinthian

    I’d say Darwin was one of the good guys (at least we know whoever made this chart isn’t a creationist). I’ve heard some bad things about Che, btw, I’m not so sure he’s neutral either.

    TGGeko

    True, but being a scientist is about being neutral.

    Korinthian

    Mojo Jojo begs to differ.

    fracked again

    Being neutral until you have evidence, maybe, but Darwin was stridently anti-slavery.

    On the other hand, Ghandi was a pedophile.

    DMYTRIW WDS

    Chaotic neutral forever.

    KommissarKvC

    how does setting niggers free to rampage across america count as lawful good