The Truth About Politics

nationalism doesnt require your believe
it is the truth, genetic preservation, cultural preservation, proliferating your lineage……. same path

If I take off that CONTRIBUTING, will you die?

Sorry, but when you try and relate race and culture in a way that makes one seem integral to the other, you lose me.

WAR IS PEACE
RACE IS NATION

anything that ends with ism requires belief you ignorant fuck.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/-ism

Where did you educate yourself?
Level 1-2 of super Mario Bros?

You think you can out intellect me and appear to have btfo me or exposed me as a shill or alphabet agency?

Try harder faggot. I'm none of that.
I'm just me.

Someone who studied and researched things for myself instead of being told what to think and believe.

op post
op post
op post
op post

If you really want to know how things work, get this book

amazon.co.uk/Outlines-constitutional-law-Dalzell-Chalmers/dp/B00AQHDWKW

shill harder faggot.

Take off what? There's no need to go below the belt, sir.

op post

Listen up you stupid fuck. Just because I posted a link to a book on Amazon doesn't mean that the book is not of value. I personally think that a book that you can hold in your hand is much more useful and valuable than a pdf.

However, I realise that you are probably poor and too pathetic to know how to make money and spend money so here is the PDF link

archive.org/details/outlinesofconsti00chaluoft

You must be from Holla Forums with that "shill" business.

Someone more intelligent and knowledgeable says something that you don't know about or don't agree with = must be a shill.

What even do you mean by "shill" anyway. What exactly are you trying to say about me?

A bit superfluous, OP, but I suppose if it was initially directed at Holla Forums, I understand the need to break it down in easily understood pieces.

Yes, political/economic systems are constructs of the imagination and don't exist independently of themselves.

I'm trying to educate Holla Forums. For months I have been posting excellent reference material and providing useful and practical information very relevant to politics, and for months I've had threads deleted, anchored, spammed, saged, and attacked.

This book explains so so much. Especially the section on "The Sherrif" (round about page 200 I think from memory) . It explains how a Sherrif can also function as a judge.

Sherrifs of counties are much more powerful than any politician or police chief but most people don't realise it.

I've spent some time in England talking with britbongs and they don't realise that they have sherrifs to this day. ( they think that sherrifs are something from a spaghetti western)

So I direct them to this website :

highsheriffs.com/

The average Joe has NO CLUE about this. Even though this website is to do with England, it is of great relevance to Americans because their sherrifs were and are modelled on this ancient office.

...

Given your opinions on various forms of democracy, I'm guessing you favor some kind of utterly unrealistic Anarchist ideology. Correct?

...

Nope

Skimmed your post, and it's pretty good, with one correction:
The USA isn't a business, but it is a corporation, in legal terms. Businesses can't do what government can do, but the government is a fictional construct treated for certain legal purposes as a person.

which is irrelevant

I agree with most of this, but comparing the US to a company is a little facile.

The branches of government are set up to make accomplishing anything extraordinarily difficult; whereas a business's only concern is the bottom line, and if they believe something will increase the bottom line, they simply make the changes. The power of a corporate president is more like that of a dictator than the president of the US. And as much as Republicans like to use rhetoric about "King Obama", the executive actions by Obama were either passed by the Supreme Court or are still held up in court, because they need congressional support.

Im not sure where the masses of the US would fit into this analogy, but they are certainly not akin to shareholders. A company is beholden to their shareholders whether they like it or not, and if the company is failing, it's often immediately and unambiguously noticed; therefore, they're obliged to make changes that will objectively benefit the value of the shareholders stock. Now you may be equating the masses to the CUSTOMERS of a business; however, your analogy still falls short – at least if customers refuse to support a business, it begins to fail, and this either forces a positive change or it fails.

If the businesses are the shareholders of the US (which would make the most sense), I suppose you could more specifically compare the US to a shareholder-first corporation, but the analogy still falls short.

Unfortunately, due to Citizens United and corporate lobbying, the masses (or "customers" if you want to continue with the analogy) have little control over public policy. And for the majority of American customers, our business has been failing for quite some time, yet it's not ameliorated by change that would allow a more secure life for the masses.

All that said, it's an interesting analogy, and people would benefit from looking at it through this lense more often.

I should have edited this a bit, but I think you get the general idea.

Also, I meant to add that the "business" is the global economy; hence why I changed the US to "company"

Company / Corporation / Person / legal fiction… All a similar thing.

The solution for the world to be a better place is for everyone to understand who and what they are and to just do what they need to live. If you believe that you are sovereign and I believe that I am sovereign then we have a contract. I can do whatever I want and you can do whatever you want. If we both agree on that then that is a start. If we then both agree to caveat that our power only extends so far as to not cause harm to each other and we decide to live with mutual respect then there is no problem. We could even barter and trade. The people are capable of coming together and self governing. The forefathers knew this. They knew that government would grow into a monster. Government isn't necessarily a bad thing if it is truly for the people and by the people but it isn't like that currently so it must change. It doesn't require one bullet to be fired either. It just needs everyone to accept who they are and accept who the other guy is. Believe it or not there is enough natural resources for 20 x the current world population. And then there are many many millions of planets just like this one out there. There is also technology to get there. Fear is a lie.

so my thread on here about the Govt making it illegal to turn off the "Location" option on your smartphone gets deleted, but this thread can stay? interesting…
VERY INTERESTING

Ah, the "man is a sovereign entity" bullshit… I should have known.

Don't bring them into it. They couldn't have imagined the clusterfuck of technology and globalization that we've created for ourselves.

Maybe someday you'll grow up, and learn that we simply arent noble enough creatures to be able to cooperate with one another on such an efficient level.
I find it interesting that every time I refute one of these fantasy-world ideologies, the above response is all I've come to expect.

...

What is bullshit about it? Please explain.

Trump speaks out against Globalism.
Trump made millions off of globalism.

Trump speaks out against using foreign labor to make a profit as opposed to using US workers.
Trump made a profit using foreign workers instead of US workers many times.

Trump talks about how the politicians make bad deals.
Trump has made many bad deals and twice been through something similar to bankruptcy (vid related).

Trump says he is anti establishment.
Trump runs a presidential campaign to become establishment.

Trump says he will be the best on women's issues.
Trump has made a career out of exploiting and objectifying women. The women he surrounds himself with are dolly bird airheads who are only rich because of family / privilege and not because of their own intellectual merits. Plus he's a rapist and thinks that Mike Tyson is an hero.

And he is just one politician. Hillary is even worse.

We should all stop paying taxes and going to school and voting that'll show them xD

this in itself makes no sense as an insult, i didnt care enough to check your other claims or to argue them because you seem to be against trump no matter what he does

hitler was against degeneracy of jewish democracy, germany was beautiful and free for a few short years

thats good
thats good
thats fine too if you have alternative education models like oh i dont know the millions of terrabytes of educationals on the internet?

bump

ye

...

Real Anarchists are not Racist and Opose Borders you are just a Stefbot or a follower of Cuckwell.

OP here.

I'm not a Stefan Molenew-ist.

I'm just me :-)

Which is why it is hilarious when people try to use my group association (when I'm not part of a group) to attack me.

Think about it.

Let's say for example that you do NOT work as a plumber in Zimbabwe.

Then you post something on Holla Forums or Holla Forums and my response to you is something like :

"That's just typical of you plumbers who live in Zimbabwe "

Can you see how that response is garbage?

kek

Quote some American to me

Moly is cool, he puts in the legwork and DESTROYS libcucks with the facts.

around blacks, never relax.

Oh no, we Americans speak English. But i fail to see how using a language = being under control by the nation said language comes from.
Not arguing your point, just your shit example.

Waste of time trying to educate Holla Forums , that place is as much of a hugbox and circlejerk as any SJW forum. A safe space for 'Right Wing Deaf Squads'.

Because hierarchical power structures will always be in place, whether it comes in the form of an elected government or arises spontaneously from an ABOLISHED government. And given the fact that we already live in somewhat of a plutocracy, I don't think it would be very wise to essentially remove our best chance at mitigating the pernicious effects of capitalism – I believe this would be a "cutting off your nose to spite your face scenario".

If we were to simply to remove these institutions of control (however ineffective and corrupt they may be at times), this would open the doors for the wealthy to buy the enforcement of laws in an even more open and brazen fashion than they already do. And let's face it, whether we're dealing with fiat currency or commodity money, capitalism isn't going anywhere… and neither is globalization.

Theoretically speaking, yes, man is a "sovereign entity" wandering a world of constraints imposed upon him by his fellow man; nevertheless, "free will" is merely a product of the imagination, and we're under constraints in ANY case, whether you're conscious of it or not. So when you say that we would be "free" (I do what I want, and you do what you want), unfortunately any "social contract" is tenuous, due to the fact that our individual "will to power" is the more dominant reality.

There are power-structures that need to be removed like the tumors they are, but the Anarchist approach is much too fantastical from what I can deduce.

Note: I'm more well-versed in metaphysics than political philosophy, so I apologize if this seems a bit half-cocked. That said, I think the problem with much of political ideology is due to the fact that certain concepts are often underdeveloped in their depth of contemplation.

Most Holla Forumsacks Shitty Libertarians and fake Anarchists worship Molyneux.

I know generalizations are bad but there is a reason why those assumptions are made.

Well, I'm American and I'm still using English genes. I doubt I'll "break free" of them in my lifetime.

If Holla Forums would only remove some of the hatred and bitterness, I believe that the essence of many of their positions are more rooted in reality than their liberal counterparts; however, like their SJW counterparts, their logic is often tarnished by a refusal to engage in open and honest dialectics.

Instead of using what are essentially Ad hominems like "racist", or "misogynist", or "homophobe", they opt for terms like "cuck", or "shill", or whatever.

Also Checked.

really?
they are the raw resource which is processed into a product

Lol. Yeah that pretty much covers it. This is why extreme ideologies always neglect the complexities of the subjects they're obsessed with – they're too busy attempting to prove moral and intellectual superiority by planting a flag and arguing their talking points.

That said, if you can filter through the vitriol and leave emotion out of some of the more unpalatable positions, there is some "wisdom" to be gained – especially when liberalism is becoming more and more schizophrenic and oppressive in its ideology; however, the "Jooz" thing is really difficult to get past.

Something to keep in mind about Holla Forums is that it is constantly patrolled by artificial intelligence.

Censoring written word and image/video is trivial now. It's not just a matter of site operators 'deleting' content. Negative feedback can be generated in huge volume in a believable way with AI in order to turn people off to certain ideas.

People have the instinct to try to fit in. Their opinions in the moment can be and very often are influenced by simple expressions of opinion like a one-sentence comment, especially if there are many such comments all agreeing.

This is the cutting edge of the media. Instead of just presenting ideas and implying their popularity, the ideas can be presented and the appearance of their popularity can not just be implied, but asserted with fabricated evidence. The fact that people emotionally identify with expressions as simple as snippets of text is being exploited to gain a great amount of leverage in influencing their minds.

It's as simple as this: people see that they can post anything they want online, they see their expression appear in the public setting, they see people they know respond, and can respond in turn.

This builds the very deep expectation that anything they see in the same place or in a similar place was made by a person more or less like them.

But it's not necessarily true in every case.

The implications of AI in society are complex. Basically, anyone who has enough computing resources can influence public opinion through the internet in an extremely powerful way that exceeds any other technique in history by far.

How can you deny that this is at very least a possibility? The technology and resources have existed for a long time and such practices would be extremely profitable. There is no possible argument against these facts.

Basically the internet has turned into and is becoming more so a thought feedback machine that puts down "unpopular" ideas and shoves them to places with no audience.

I would say there is some in both sides, but they just get clogged with so much crap.

If you put it like that, it reads like an oxymoron, I get what you are saying tho.
but you have to take into consideration that SJW's aren't liberals, they are a completely new breed, they are progressives.
if you were to ask any Anarchist, from Anarcho-communist all the way around to Anarcho-capitalist and even some Libertarians, they uphold most classic liberal values.

Also I would like to point this out, Conservatives and Traditionalists, aren't pro freedom, if they could they would Impose a Theocracy.
That would just kill all the fun.

Ok, so…

Globalized economy=business
US=corporation
Citizens=raw resource
Product=control? (of the global markets)

I believe this would follow your line of reasoning

No matter how many times you tell us, you will still be a retard. There is no vast class conspiracy. There are many competing and cooperating micro-conspiracies and instances of simple corruption. Please, OP, either kill yourself or learn how to deal with a world of individuals.

Their mods are bots?

Yeah, actually I'm currently banned from both /leftypol and Holla Forums, even if they weren't actively censoring discussions, those boards are so loaded and thick, that it just turns you off from going into those boards.

This is why I feel both sides are dangerous and in the brink of committing terrorism, they are so emotionally attached to their ideas, that if you disagree with them, they take it very serious, way too serious IMO.

Both sides are starting to produce propaganda, using these new resources, even a simple meme and people start buying into their agendas.

that's why both sides go after every single board in here and takes it hostage pumping their venom.
but especially Holla Forums they have many boards under their control and it's quite annoying.

Helps if YOU are old enough to vote, before you can argue a point, dickwad.

...

I'm not sure I follow
In the sense that it often follows a post-structuralist mindset, in which everything is reduced to a social construct
In that if you refer to certain stats or empirical evidence that they find unpalatable, they'll often do their best to demonize, polarize, and alienate you, to the point where your reputation and job-security are threatened.

I'd like to think this is the case; however, these things are ultimately a matter of perception and not static. I try not to let the extremists (who scream loudest) ruin it for everyone, but it's becoming increasingly difficult – especially because it seems the younger generations are only getting worse. And so while I'm certainly "left-leaning" and quite progressive-minded in many respects, I'm starting to find it a bit too embarrassing to identify as a liberal.

I certainly don't subscribe to any form of unbridled form of political ideology, and while there is much wisdom to be gained from Anarchist ideology, it mostly exists in a theoretical and idealistic fantasy-land.

Who is?

Totally

becoming a hermit is ironically the closest way to freedom

Bottom. lol

I think Hillary would essentially be more of the same, which I'm willing to endure for the next 4 years; however, I'm NOT willing to endure an utter megalomaniac who has many of the hallmarks of a dictator, and who would undoubtedly destroy foreign relations and further enrage enemies.

Anyway, Trump doesn't stand a shred of a chance.

yeah that seems consistent. Now flesh it out to expand the picture but don't be too attached to these definitions.

Your inferiority complex is showing.
This is the stupidest thing to think. The stupidest possibility.
And its the absolute stupidest way to present the idea. "I'm right and I'm above explaining myself and you're wrong kill yourself".
A little threatened bitch barking at the wind.

If there are many "micro-conspiracies" what is there that stops them from gathering force in one direction? Competition is not constant and pervasive because if it is both competitors are destroyed as another party steps in to take advantage of their preoccupation.

What makes you set the scale of conspiracy to "micro"? Don't you suppose conspiracy scales with the wealth and power of the conspirators? What is this limiting factor you perceive?
Where is your inventory of interests and your analysis of who shares them and whose interests are at odds?
I'm not sure how you don't realize all the rich put much more effort into cooperation than competition among themselves.
How else can anything be created unless you work with your equals to fit all the requisites together? All industry is interdependent.
Competition is between classes. The motivation is such: "I already dominate here, and you are building something new near my land, and I would have it be mine".

Learn how to deal with a world of collectivism.

Liberal and oppressive don't mix IMO, I think I shifted the discussion negatively.

sadly those loud crazy minorities that scream the loudest, shape the opinion of the others around them.

The young ones are the most vulnerable, in this context, and they are the most valued target, if you shape the opinion of someone below the age of 20, they could be transformed into zealots of (X) Ideology.

I'm too, but I feel so much shame to express it, because of the lunatics, that I just keep it to myself, to avoid trouble.

then I read this 100% agree with you.

There is you should check it out, but both sides have been infiltrated, but I'm sure you could spot the shills, lol.

It could be put into practice, but on a very small scale or just individually, I'm sure the masses cant assimilate it.

I just mentioned to level the field.

That's Actually true IMO but the Anarcho-communists call me Egoists for mentioning it, kek.

Exactly!

Are you American? If so, who are you voting for?… or are you just gonna sit this one out? lol

I fear the second amendment could be at risk with her and the supreme court too, but that's pretending that democracy is real I have my suspicions.

I'm NOT willing to endure an utter megalomaniac who has many of the hallmarks of a dictator, and who would undoubtedly destroy foreign relations and further enrage enemies.

I like some of Trump Ideas, like withdrawing the US from NATO and cooling down the relations with Russia China and Iran.
but he is so unpredictable he is in some cases a freaking lunatic he could set the US on fire.

I Agree as much as I hate to sound like a Shill or an SJW, but he lost the vote of the minorities and with the women and he completely shredded the GOP.

...

I totally disagree, but you seem like a reasonable person. What makes you feel this way?

I think there's a tendency for people (especially gun-nuts, and Republitarians who watch too much Fox and talk radio) to draw a dichotomy between "no further regulations on guns" and "total destruction of the 2nd amendment". And conservative media propagates this notion that if someone proposes Universal background checks, or perhaps more restrictions on assault rifles, that it's only the beginning and that the entire 2nd amendment is in jeopardy – which is kind of the epitome of a slippery slope fallacy.

I'm not of the mindset that the 2nd amendment speaks to your right to own whatever weapon you want, and I believe that people who feel that way are just using their imaginations.

I'm a gun nut.

I avoid watching fox news and such places, but the people that share my passion for fire arms, keep voicing same the same fear I have, they are coming for X type of guns and if they could they would love to confiscate them all and that just panics me and once I let my emotions take over me I just shut my brain off.

Well we can finally disagree, profoundly on something, to me it's all about individual freedom, if they restrict the 2 amendment in any way, I think they are trampling over my freedoms and I feel highly threatened by it.

lol. I appreciate your honesty

Yeah, you didn't strike me as one of those minions.

Theoretically, the purpose of an amendment is to adapt to unforeseen circumstances, and I highly doubt that the founding fathers imagined the state of affairs that we're currently dealing with (hundred round magazines, armor-piercing bullets, mass-shootings, and the general state of gun violence). I believe you could fire around 3 shots per minute when James Madison wrote the amendment.

Now I realize that you're more likely to be killed by yourself a family member than a mass-shooter, but I don't think there's a logical reason why individual should need to own a high-capacity magazine, other than for a mass-shooting or the completely hypothetical (and somewhat ridiculous) scenario where we would have to defend ourselves against a government gone rogue.

That said, the only thing that I'm a staunch proponent for, is universal background checks, and doing away with the absurd loopholes.

Liberals tend to ignore the fact that our homicide rate per capita is around the global average, and they always allow their sense of reason to be clouded by emotion whenever there's a mass-shooting.

Lots of people like to talk about the details of guns when they speak of the 2nd, but those amendments are loosely-codified (or very specifically codified, depending how you want to see it) ideas based on a spirit of things.

Speaking numerically is just a way to destroy the spirit of the thing.

That's logical, but that's also presupposing that the spirit of the thing is valid – I think we may slightly differ on that.

I'm in touch with the reality that the US was founded on the use, and love of firearms, and that there are as many guns as there are people; however, I believe that pulling a trigger is far too easy, and that we would see a drop in homicide rates if they were eradicated – obviously that's not even remotely feasible, and so I only support this in theory, not in practice.

Here I have nothing to hide, WE ARE ANUNYMUS, plus is one of the elements of one of muh waiifus.
But I like being honest IRL too.

It gives the people the possibility to defend themselves, with very competent tools and overthrow a tyrannical government, if needed be.

Technology evolves, the Muskets they had, were the equivalent of today's guns, I know they where single shot only and you could only fire 5 bullets in one minute, nowadays well you can dump a wall of lead, under one minute, but if they analysed today's context they would ratify the 2 second amendment IMO.

mass-shootings, and the general state of gun violence.

Don't get too carried away, with the fear campaign against guns, the rare incidents of mass shooting, are being exploited and over exposed, don't get me wrong every death is a tragedy, but this world is full of dangers it's just part of the statistics, IKR I now sound like an edgy Holla Forumsack.

1000cc super sport bikes are very dangerous too they can reach speeds up to 200mph

Projection much?

there are countless of activities that you can use them for and all sports fun enjoyment.

Other countries would love to have the 2 amendment, Mexico for example, it's black market is flooded with 35million Illegal firearms add to that the 3.5million legally owned, the 45% of ilegal firearms in mexico are being bought with self defence in mind, in 2014 a group of farmers in michocan grew tired of being extorted by the cartels and the goverment, an armed uprising took place, also in 1994 a whole Army of Communist libertarians (Zapatistas) rebelled themselves against the government and now they are Autonomous and control an area the size of Manhattan if not bigger, also communities of Mennonites in the north of Mexico and some native American tribes, have started to arm themselves and start to manage semi autonomous areas.

I kind of agree with you, but if you give the government one inch of your freedoms, they will start demanding you give up more and more.

They don't let a tragedy go to waste, politicians aren't even loyal to their own Ideology, they are just crooks and parasites, they will carry the political agenda of their donors, there might be ones that are really afraid of guns because they are really dangerous, but most of the time they don't even have a basic knowledge about them, so it's their irrational fear what drives them.

The truly frightening fact is that nobody is in charge.

I think the simple fact that we have an extraordinary abundance of firearms is enough to be a deterrent for a tyrannical government (even without high capacity magazines); nevertheless, the premise that we may need to rise up against a "tyrannical US government" is a bit paranoid, to say the least. Not to mention the fact that the masses would be competing with 40% of the worlds military budget lol.

I agree. In fact, I alluded to that when I remarked on liberals overreacting to mass-shootings.

… what? That's a total false equivalence, due to the fact that 1000cc sport bikes are not specifically designed to maim or kill humans and animals – and it wouldn't be very practical to use one as your weapon of choice kek

I have no plans as of yet

Yeah, and I'm sure rocket launchers would be a fuckin BLAST (no pun), but I think any reasonable human being would agree that they should not be in the hands of an ordinary citizen.

Yeah, Mexico is a mess, but you might as well apply the same logic to North Korea; however, I'm sure you would agree that saying North Koreans would benefit from the 2nd amendment would be a laughably facile argument.

I don't buy into this slippery slope. It's like when privacy-fetishists talk about a mass-data collection system as being the beginning of an Orwellian state (hyperbole much?). And that MAY BE the case, but it's purely speculative, and grossly exaggerated IMO

kek

I agree.

But then you say this…

It's a possibility, who could have imagined in Germany a Lunatic would take over, and convert it and it's people, into a deranged war machine, that left Europe in Ruins, Threatened the existence complete ethnic groups and World Peace, lets not forget the millions of Germans died because of him and back then Germany was a Modern and Educated, who could have imagined it.
I mean, I gave you a lot of examples already, I know a simple semi automatic rifle may seem hopeless, against the military might of the US, but most revolutions are fought with all the odds against the rebels anyway.

We both agree we can move on.

Still is a very dangerous machine, what about commonly used tools? screwdrivers, wrenches, hammers, knives I mean there is a lot of dangerous objects laying around, at your disposal, it's up to you the use you are going to give them.

Hilarious, kek.

the people I know that own a firearms, handle theirs responsibly, it's up to each individual.

Disagree North Korea military power is frozen in time 50's - 60's if the population wasn't starving an uprising could be viable.
Most of their Air force is grounded and the airframes are so old, they cant be put them back into service, they only got a few Nukes that's enough deterrent even for the US, because South Korea civil could be blasted to oblivion.

I agree, people need to be thoroughly checked, before purchasing a fire arm, but it is already like that, in most of the states, an armed society is a polite society and I fully support that.
I don't know if you will catch me on that one.

I think it's important to remember all of the events that led up to Nazi germany.
It was essentially primed for a Dictator to take advantage of it and rise to power.

Now consider that in the US, our system of government is set up so that accomplishing even the most innocuous things is extraordinarily difficult – in light of this, I think it makes the Nazi Germany reference seem a little ridiculous (I think people use Nazi Germany as a reference point much too frivilously).

Wouldn't you agree that pulling a trigger is much easier than using a screwdriver, knife, etc? I think it often leads to people being killed by short-tempered and impetuous people who would otherwise probably not resort to bludgeoning someone to death, or other nasty means. And I believe that this is partly reflected in the global homicide rates of countries without guns – although I'm certainly not reducing it to this.

Sure, most people do

Regarding North Korea, my point was that each country has their own set of circumstances, and many of them are drastically disparate. And so to say that Mexico could benefit from the 2nd amendment is like saying that we could do without it. Does that make sense?

I think that people are generally non-confrontational; however, when imagine a Wild West scenario where every citizen is strapped at all times, what I envision is a state where confrontations that would have ended in a fist fight or a middle finger would start ending in gunfire. I dunno, maybe not.

Yeah… but you still don't recognize, that it could happen to any advanced and well educated nation in the west, the masses are easily manipulated.

But consider this, America is not wining any more, we have to MAGA and people still believe such cheap crap.

Yeah and no, if you want to get out into a killing spree, then yes it's much easier, but if you are a serial killer, that just wants to do shit quietly even shoe laces are useful to strangle people and both of these are rare cases.

Yeah sure.

Ask the people of Mexico, more than 60% of the population, are in favour of gun laws similar to the ones that we currently enjoy in the US.

I cant Imagine the US with out guns they are culturally engraved.

It's the Current year!
Education my friend, a well educated population would know better than in the 1890's.

Sure, but it's highly unlikely. And in the event that a government as powerful as the US, with their tanks, and fighter jets, and drones, and intelligence capabilities, and various other advanced weaponry would go rogue, our little assault rifles wouldn't be much of a match. But like I said, I'm willing to acknowledge the possibility that even owning pistols has been a deterrent for fascist intervention in the past (not so much today).

You'll have to be more specific, and then elaborate on how it pertains to gun rights

I think you misunderstood my point about: I can't imagine it either, as we're pretty much beyond the point of no return. Just as Mexico is, with their tens of millions of illegal firearms floating around – although I think the guns in the US is much more of an indelible staple.

As I stated before, most people are non-confrontational and responsible with their firearms, but I just don't believe that more guns=more politeness. I think that more guns (especially carrying)=more chances they'll be used

Sure, but it's highly unlikely. And in the event that a government as powerful as the US, with their tanks, and fighter jets, and drones, and intelligence capabilities, and various other advanced weaponry would go rogue, our little assault rifles wouldn't be much of a match. But like I said, I'm willing to acknowledge the possibility that even owning pistols has been a deterrent for fascist intervention in the past (not so much today).

You'll have to be more specific, and then elaborate on how it pertains to gun rights

I think you misunderstood my point about: I can't imagine it either, as we're pretty much beyond the point of no return. Just as Mexico is, with their tens of millions of illegal firearms floating around – although I think the guns in the US is much more of an indelible staple.

As I stated before, most people are non-confrontational and responsible with their firearms, but I just don't believe that more guns=more politeness. I think that more guns (especially carrying)=more chances they'll be used

Most of the times the odds are against the rebels as I stated before.

I was Parodying Trump and how easily manipulated the masses are by a loudmouthed clown.

assume the risks and most importantly arm yourself, defend yourself and your loved ones, I know it sounds wild, but that's the price of freedom, is it worth it? to me yeah, idk about you.

Estimates are in the 300 - 325 million firearms, you could arm armies with such arsenal, yet it's not like the wild west and the chances of getting killed with a firearm are a little higher than the other 1world countries.

I say it's a great deterrent, people just avoid trouble, sure there might be ass holes flashing their guns, to scare people, but still the murder rate in the US is not as bad as in other places, where most of the common fire arms you see in the US are forbidden, like in Mexico they even have a ban on certain calibres, for fuck sake the "most dangerous calibre you can legally own there is .380acp.

Gotcha. Yeah, it's pretty fucking sad, and I think Donald Trump is about the most perfect example in American politics of how easy it truly is.

I actually do own a handgun, but it's mostly because ever since I was a little kid, I've had an irrationally extreme fear of my house being broken into. But I pretty much accept the fact that the chances of using it are very minimal.

Estimates are in the 300 - 325 million firearms, you could arm armies with such arsenal, yet it's not like the wild west and the chances of getting killed with a firearm are a little higher than the other 1world countries
I'm aware, and I try to keep that in mind. As I stated way back, the only thing that I'm 100% sold on, regarding gun control, is universal background checks and abolishing any loopholes.

Anyway, I think we've reached somewhat of a confluence here, and I gotta take off.

It was nice talking with you.

Take care wherever you go.

Likewise.

Yo buddy, I think I recognize this song from the Hotline Miami sountrack.

Could you tell me which one it is if you know, please?

Don't let the start-up fool you.

...

that is a disgusting image

What about it do you find disgusting?

...

did u spot the robbin?

...

...

Nop, not following you user. In Burgerland Corporations are legally considered persons by court ruling. So you are point is m00t. Following me so far? Make sense? Good.

...

Dude. This is why they have someone to represent in court. But ask yourself, was it presented the first time before it was re presented.

Suppose you are going to court tomorrow and you don't want a lawyer.

They court clerk will ask "So, are you representing yourself? "

Well, no. In that case you would be making an appearance. Or presenting yourself. You can't represent yourself.

So does represent mean to present the second time as in reee present ? Do you have a legal definition of the word?

vvote

It would be very proprietary.

"To represent a person is to stand in his place ; to supply his place; to act as his sub- stitute. Plummer v. Brown, 04 Cal. 429, 1 Pac. 703; Solon v. Williamsburgh Sav. Bank, 35 Dun (N. Y.) 7."

So someone can stand in Microsoft's place and represent Microsoft, but Microsoft cannot appear in court.

The stupidest reaction to Trump is to obey his NLP command: "believe me".

Protip: When someone says "believe me", don't. It is dual layered in meaning. Firstly is a command. He is telling you to believe me. "Stop that", "pass the salt", "take out the trash", "believe me" are all commands. It is someone telling you to do something (not asking).

Secondly, it is therefore implied that it would be possible to choose to believe or to not believe and that Trump's success depends on you believing him.

This is nonsense.

Science doesn't need belief.

If you hold out your hand and let an apple drop, gravity will drop that apple to the ground everytime whether you believe it or not.

What is, is.

The same is true of what Trump says.

It's either true or it is false.

So he commands you to "believe me".

Those who don't believe him, study what he says and then they realise why they should not believe him and become aware of why there is a massive problem in America.

People are willing to believe some professional liar. Then they say things like "even if Trump shot a kid in the street dead I'd still vote for him"… And even Trump repeats this type of thing like it is a good thing.

It is very very dangerous to have blind faith and biggoted bias for an hero instead of asking questions, doing research, and applying the scientific method.

I knew Trump was full of shit when he talked about Americans losing their jobs to Mexico. Has anyone actually been to his buildings and seen the illegal Mexicans cleaners??? I mean come on. This guy has made a fortune making deals with foreigners (and depriving American workers) and then defaulted (which further harms the American community and raises national debt).

So now we have a situation where two rotten cancerous people: Hillary and Trump sling insults at each other for months. And whoever survives it is president.

This is no proud future.

At least Trump hasn't yet done damage in office and Hillary has. That's the only thing Trump has going for him…. People giving him the benefit of the doubt and people hating what Hillary has already done in office.

But boy oh boy what a choice.

Asshole A or Asshole B.

This is why votes mean nothing.

yes…

...

Hello Holla Forums.

I see you have selected: retard
from the available debate options to you:

jew
shill
retard ←
faggot

Thank you for selecting one of your four debate options.

We love you and have a nice day.

Wow dude

You know what?

I can tell you aren't from here.

I can tell that you don't care about Holla Forums

I can tell that you're a shill

You know how?

Cause you type like this.

Shilling Holla Forums failed, but you aren't going to get anywhere on Holla Forums.
It doesn't matter what happens with Trump. Even if he does half the things he says, it'll still be great.
What if he doesn't keep any of his promises and just serves the powers that be?
Guess what, Holla Forums will be wrong. Some website with two-thousand counter-culture shitposters was wrong. Insignificant.
Of course, you get paid to shill, so you gotta do this. Just know that in the end, it wont really matter. Even if you're right, you're still a waste.

If voting doesn't matter, does posting about it on Holla Forums matter?

i havent visited pol even once since over a year

or just using fucking logic and your eyes
stop applying "methods" and other peoples systems, you reveal yourself

yes
because if people want change and are tricked to vote then the change they might cause will be thwarted
so yes, helping people understand what is powerless and what is deceitful is meaningful especially when the thing they are taught is meaningful isnt

Hello Holla Forums

checking dubs

up

why

Voting is one of those weird things.
The rich lyons club, masons club, skull and bones club types produce ultimately two "choices". A horrible horrible woman with Bengazi, all the emails, all the harassment and dead bodies from people who were brave enough to talk about Bill, her terrible arms deals with terrible nations in order to make a buck. What a vile woman.

And then there is Trump. This guy is just a maniac who fancies himself a dictator. He's lied about everything. He hires illegals and fucks over Americans time and time again. Then he has the nerve to attack Carrier and Nabisco for doing the same thing he does (make a profit from low paid foreign workers at the expense of American jobs). He sues people who joke about him. He says he'll be great for women's issues and then says that women who want an abortion should be punished. Then he backtracks. He flip flops all over the place and continues to make empty campaign promises for votes.

The guy takes on huge amounts of debt and then laughs at the people who try and collect it. Very dishonest and dishonorable and very damaging to the economy and the average American (who ultimately pays). Then he nonchalantly rattles off Mike Tyson's endorsement forgetting that he is a savage monkey nigger that bites ears off and was a convicted criminal for rape and a Muslim.

And you're telling me I have to vote for one of these two assholes?

No way!

Remember this, please.

You gonna let these fags learn it for themselves.

Yea, gonna need lots of solid evidence for those 3 claims user.

...

Watch and learn.

And then remember my words ;-)

You'll get your evidence

1. Revenue neutral tax plan (this couldn't be further from the truth)
2. Thousands of Muslims doin da jig in da streets after 7-11 (kind of a white lie that one. Can't prove that is false, but he seems to be the only human being to recall such a thing)
3. "Hillary wants to take all the guns away, and abolish the 2nd amendment." Kek. Lie.
3. "Clinton started the "birther"movement." Lie
4. In reference to a made-up pew research poll, Trump claimed “27 percent of Muslims, could be 35 percent, would go to war with the US”. No such poll exists, and the current estimates of active jihadist muslims account for less than 1% of the Muslim population.
5. Trump claimed that his University received a A rating: False. In reality, it received a D- from the Better Business Bureau.

I could go on, and it would certainly be easy to do, as the list is fucking LONG. But it probably wouldn't do anything to dissuade a Trump supporter, because if you STILL trust him, after he has displayed such blatant dishonesty, you're a lost cause.

I don't know about Trump hiring illegals, but many of his products are made overseas (while he criticizes companies for doing the same thing).

As for the dictator mentality: I believe this is showcased in how he dictates interviews, throws hissy fits whenever someone criticizes him, makes comments about protesters needing to be roughed up, and the simple fact that he has shown very little willingness to compromise on a single issue (the tax plan being "negotiable" is just a manipulative tactic to gain Sanders supporters).

You should pay attention to Trump when he says things like "I love the uneducated" and "I could shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and not lose supporters"… I think he's trying to tell you something

Carlin hated SJW faggots like you and bernie so slurp shit retard

1488

This is a really good point. If the government can be shutdown like it has before due to economic problems and face bankruptcy and have a national debt, then it must be a financial person. If the usa is a person, then it is a corporation. If it is a corporation, it won't necessary have everything in common with op's example companies, but it will have some things in common at law.

It's possible that usa will go into bankruptcy or a debt writeoff or debt management plan and that trump is a good choice because he has lots of experience with this type of thing.

stopped reading at the title
"the truth", shove it up your ass
say what you are and want and spare me your empty phrases and pretentiousness

this thread has lasted 12 days. It has really shaken up Holla Forums and will hopefully make it better.

Here, have a rare Pepe.

triggered are we?

Trump has long won votes by saying "I'm self funding my own campaign. All the other candidates are taking money from special interests. "

Well, now in this interview with Bill Riley, Trump is to take ONE BILLION dollars of donations from special interests and is now no longer having a simply self funded campaign.

Do you feel cheated now folks?
Still gonna call me a shill when all why was doing was trying to tell you what these politicians are like?

When you get raped in the ass by a tattooed nigger in a prison just because you grew a green plant that treats cancer and other ailments…

….and when you complain about it…..

….YOU are the fucking dumbass that voted.

Trump regularly makes a point of saying "more people than ever are voting this time". That isn't a good thing. The only vote that matters is ALL Americans NOT VOTING for ANY politician.

A politian is an employee of the system.
The system has failed.

Would you keep putting quarters into a broken arcade machine that doesn't work?

Then, why put votes into a broken system that doesn't work?

yes

...

yes

...

...

You have a dangerous ability. The ability to shout sophomoric opinions with extreme confidence.
It's obvious that this thread wasn't posted by Holla Forums. You seem to have no grasp of the basic duties of the executive branch. You also seem to Not understand of the benefits of party identities.
A political party is the most efficient means of getting things done. An individual's voice is a drop in the ocean in this democratic system. When power is too decentralized, there is no majority, and a nation is flung into chaos. That's why the Articles of Confederation were thrown out in favor of the U.S. Constitution. If you have too many centers of power, I.e. States, then every state will just make their own laws, and laws, infrastructure and war efforts will be unorganized and lukewarm as a result.
Yes, the U.S. constitution was made by mostly British Immigrants, and inspired by philosophers from Rome and England. It's really not that big of a revelation.

Saying that nationalism doesn't exist is plain wrong. Nationalism is a social construct used by politicians and leaders to bring the people together. When people share the common bond of sharing a country, trust in communities go up, and GDP goes up. Nationalistic governments, such as the third reich, post world war America, Italy, and Ethiopia (during European colonization) are examples of tribes and nations banding together to create a strong nation. Nationalism makes nations stronger when people participate.

Your assertion that the U.S. system is based off of british ideas is pointless. It is trivia.
Anyway,
You go on to say that trump is contradicting himself by saying that he's anti establishment when he is going to become the establishment. You also note that he has lied on many different occasions. First of all, none of these examples that you use are irrelevant to his campaign. If you were to produce examples of how he lies about his actual policies, such as tax plans, immigration reform, or foreign policy, then you may have a leg to stand on. All 5 of your assertions on are not important to his campaign
It's like shit you'd bring up in an argument with your significant other "yeah well you said you'd do the dishes and you never did you lying prick". Sure, I failed to do the dishes that one time when I said I would, but that doesn't mean that I'm a pathological liar who will never do the dishes.

There s a difference in the way Trump is taking money from special interests.
First, let me clarify the implications of taking money from special interest groups. A candidate or elected official can act however they please after receiving a donation from a special interest group. Receiving money does not mean that a candidate has to act how the donors want the elected official to act. The EPA can donate to a state governor to try and convince him to stop coal mining. However, the coal miner's association can also donate to the same governor to try and convince him to keep coal mines running. Taking money from special interest groups does not mean that one is controlled by said groups.

Second point: these special interest groups know Trumps position on things and know that he will not go back on things like immigration reform, his tax plan, and repealing obamacare. The kinds of special interest groups donating to him are the kinds of special interest groups that have a chance of convincing him of certain view points. Pro-amnesty PACs would not even bother donating to trump because they'd get nothing out of it.

fuck off you slave statist

is this a meme?
did you intentionally write the opposite of what your next sentence elucidates?

Third point: in a group of individuals as large as the United States, it is inevitable that not every individual gets what they want. Niche people like Ron Paul can't get elected because even though he made good points, he did not represent the will of the majority. People do not want to take risks when voting for a candidate. There was a large pushback against trump for this very reason, even though he is a supporter of the establishment in many aspects.
Just because voters don't get their way all the time doesn't mean that the system is flawed beyond repair. It just means that most people don't want to risk their livelihood on a renegade who may tank the economy.

Last point: Voting is a thing that takes minimal effort. There is no reason not to vote. If there's something that you believe in, voting on legislation, members of congress, and other local issues can have impact. Talking to your local representatives can also have an impact, as most representatives want to represent people, and often are indifferent on certain issues.
Urging people to remain politically inactive is poisonous and will lead to a more dystopian future where the will of the few overpowers the will of the majority.

I meant to say that the examples that you used are irrelevant to his campaign. I think you could have figured that out, given the context of what I was writing. You know, if you're as smart as you think you are.

It's interesting how liberally you use ad hominems, considering how often you accuse people of using ad hominem attacks.
Anyway, democracy is far from perfect. It's a balance between power being too decentralized in a nation's states, and power being too centralized in the executive branch. You can't expect your personal views to be perfectly represented in a nation of hundreds of millions of people. That's unrealistic. The best you can do is to be as politically active as possible, as opposed to your proposition of becoming intentionally inactive.

but now you accidentally fucked yourself up
the very OP states that "doing nothing" is better than voting, voting is simply doing nothing and cheering it on
yes becoing politically active is the answer
and by politically active we mean community building not vote and campaign building
but you knew that already, you are trying to shut us down and push your statist dream of "centralization"

the very OP states that "doing nothing" is better than voting, voting is simply doing nothing and cheering it on
No, voting is participation in the political process just like community building and activism. If you get a large group of people to vote a certain way in your local area, then you can have an extreme influence on that area.
For example, this cult voted all of their members into office and took over a town until their motives violated the separation of church and state en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajneeshpuram
I'm trying to shut you down because you're encouraging people not to vote, which is counterproductive to getting things done.

And also, you were painting Donald trump as being someone who goes back on his word, but you only provided semantics, rather than examples of Donald trump changing his political platform. Why would you choose to go after the most anti establishment candidate in the race?

thats implying that statism isnt corrupt and that "voters" get their voices exerted in the same manner as the "representatives" who ca only be punished after the fact for doing wrong
you are either young, and literally dont realize how bad it is even in the best of circumsances - or like i said in the earlier post you have a dream and you are trying to shut down dissent

im encouraging people to getting things done
check this analogy
instead of sitting in the crowd or watching a porn (an observer) im asking people to put in the effort and be players (be active)

you are telling them to sit down and accept "Democracy" which never existed in any of the forms any of the regimes that claimed to be democracies put down on paper
its always one form of corruption or another

it rings just like obama for the leftists, this time it will be different

Nice try Holla Forums. Very nice try.
10/10 for effort. Much better responses than "fag" or "shill".

Read "Outlines Of Constitutional Law" by Asquith and Chalmers and then tell me that British influence in America is a moot point.

And who said that voting is doing nothing?

I personally do much to help my local community including taking baked goods round to the elderly, harvesting and giving fruit and herbs to the poor and needy, and helping to plant and maintain local and organic food around the place where I am.

I've been blessed with wealth and power and I feel it my responsibility to give something back to the community.

What I won't do, is volunteer more power to the political and financial system that has done so much evil.

Trump might have self funded his own campaign, but that changes when he becomes the GOP nominee.

And then he will take the GOP money and directions. He will take the SS briefings and follow orders.

If the elections were genuine and not just a distraction / illusion and I was a voter, I'd vote for Trump because of his values.

And who wants that horrid vicious hack Hillary who's already been in the White House for too long?

I hope that you come to realise the nature of the game soon.

You seem really intelligent.

Research the Crown and see where your research takes you. And don't forget to research Canada's link to the crown, land purchases in Colorado and Khazakstan.

America might not be as free and brave as you think.

shills gonna shill

Just looking at her is an abomination to me.

I hope that she bombs out of the race soon. There's been a Bush or a Clinton in the white house for the last forty odd years now.

No, responding to your post is pointless, but here I go…

The things that I listed are barely scratching the surface of his lies. And when you analyze his behavior in a fashion which goes deeper than the superficial nature of many of his claims, patterns begin to arise – a pattern of lies, and white lies, and generally manipulative behavior.

I think your analogy is a perfect example of why Trump supporters are juvenile blowhards (much like Trump, himself), who have a difficult time deciphering nuance. The fact that you perceive these blatant lies as being innocuous and inconsequential tells me that you're more concerned with the style of Trump's hyperbolic rhetoric than his ability to present tangible policy proposals – The Wall is ridiculous, the Muslim ban is absurd, his tax plan is deficit-busting, he knows nothing about foreign policy, his business practices are highly suspicious, and his behavior is that of a megalomaniacal dictator (I'd be happy to elaborate on any of these things if you want).

As I mentioned in my earlier post, Trump has essentially insulted his supporters numerous times – I don't know if he's even aware of it, and obviously his supporters are too stupid or ignorant to realize it. You should pay closer attention to some of the comments that he's made. The thing is, people are so blinded by their admiration of the fact that he "speaks his mind" that they don't bother listening to what he's actually saying.

People love the fact that he's not politically correct. Well, unfortunately he's also rude, arrogant, narcissistic, and juvenile, in ways that go far beyond simply refusing to pander to overly sensitive bleeding-heart pussies.

He would destroy foreign relations. And since you're a Trump supporter, perhaps you'll believe me if I say "just trust me, I'm like sooo right about this. No one had ever been as logical in the history of the universe"

Oh, and as for documentation to support my examples, just go to factcheck.org and type in Donald Trump. Lol

Her derr you guys asoooo stupid how dare you not agree with muh OPINION I'mm 22 and i read four whole books OMG GUYS!!! i mean really!

...

Doesn't give a shit.

But posts on the thread.

Thanks for your mental energy.

Dat nigga just mad he can't formulate complete thoughts.

With linguistic skills like that, you will certainly be the next silver tongued orator of note.

Pshh, you stupid, mane

Politics means "of citizens" in Latin.

Citizen means "A legally recognized subject or national of a state or commonwealth, either native or naturalized"

Subject means….well….I keep saying to read Outlines of Constitutional Law. There's a whole chapter on "The Subject"

Check the book out.

ia801408.us.archive.org/18/items/outlinesofconsti00chaluoft/outlinesofconsti00chaluoft.pdf

Thanks. I think I've seen your posts before. I will check this out.

Research "subject" and it's relation to the royal family and the Crown.

Then research "subject matter jurisdiction" and how policy is implemented at court.

You should by this point have a good grounding in just how strong the British grip on the United States still is and be realizing that 1776 was just a TV show for the ignorant masses.

I saw this book before. It is greatly significant to the Irish/Eyre peoples, because Ireland got its constitution round about the time that the English jurisprudence authors penned this masterpiece.

Other equally important works of note are Blackstone's Commentaries.

link please

Lol. What? The roles have clearly reversed.

oll.libertyfund.org/titles/blackstone-commentaries-on-the-laws-of-england-in-four-books-vol-1

Btw, I'm not the user you were responding to

thanks law user. This is good stuff. I can see just scanning through the chapter names and headings what you mean about English control. It all came from England. The customs, the laws, the language. I'm starting to get it now.

exactly

I think that we both agree that citizens should seek political activity outside of voting for president, and that voting is not the best use of one's time when seeking change. However, I think that voting itself is not a waste of time . I also think that choosing Donald trump as a candidate sends a message to the establishment that we disagree with where the country is headed. Donald trump's main platform is running against rampant illegal immigration in the US, as well as less taxation for the lower classes. Voting for a candidate that represents these viewpoints, despite being flawed, sends a message to people that we want these changes to be made in society. A vote for trump is sending the message that we like the idea of keeping special interest groups out of politics as much as possible, despite his reliance on special interest groups now. Hillary has a lot of money to spend. Trump will need to keep up. Politicians will start to follow suit and push to reject superPACs if they see trump's strategy as a winning strategy.

Also, I'm interested in what your alternative is to our current system. What is a better way to balance the needs of individuals in a society and the need for unifying power? If we allow to much political power to get in the hands of individuals, then we will have millions of different ideas to sort through and it will be extremely inefficient. If we have a dictatorship, then the needs of the people will be misrepresented. How do you propose that we balance individualism and government?

i respect your desires user
however i find it amusing that you think those who start wars and print debt money really care what your opinions are beyond controlling you and influencing you to do their will

Check lawfags books. Everything you need is in there.

I think that you don't support trump because you disagree with his stances on foreign policy issues. That's fine. I actually like his tax plan, because it lowers taxes on the lower and middle class. I like his stances on immigration and the wall because the wall restricts the flow of drugs, people and crime across the border. It may even restrict the supply of workers coming into the United states, making it easier for workers to make demands. I don't have an opinion on the way he talks.

Not user, but this is some pretty severe reductionism

Nationalism as always, not from the state but from the people and their culture. Not obedience to the law and bureaucracy but activism from individuals and in every local area to the smallest groups. Think in terms of 20 guys walking down the street and beating the shit out of a hooligan instead of cowards calling for police and trembling while the police cruiser rolls down the street "to make them feel safe".

There is no "need" for unifying power. This is the stumbling block. This is only a goal of self serving bureaucracies.

No such thing.

You are simultaneously thinking of two incompatible ideas. Of the collectivist state and of the individual desires. You think there is a balance to be struck; that the state is a thing or a person that needs to be preserved. That is not the case. You have absolutely no reason to even be made aware of the decisions of the people in the suburb to your city that do not affect your local neighborhood. You do not possess that right. No politician does. No human does. You do not own others. People are not things to be owned.

I propose that compromise be properly spoken of as weakness and deception. There is no need for government. Everything you can think of that you might consider to be "government that is essential" is simply a zombie arm of the government that has replaced a real people owned institution with government factory style indoctrination. Everything from laws to education and military can and has existed in many eras as less government and more decentralized.
The current world you live in, the short century or less time you spend on this earth - is not the end game and is not the best system possible. So put any such arguments aside. Government is neither necessary nor wanted nor efficient just because it exists today in 2016.

Starting wars is not necessarily a bad thing for the U.S. we keep our influence strong, and therefore keep our currency strong. We print debt money to keep unemployment rates stable.

no one cares "who" you are
welcome to anonymous posting
write your ideas and let them be judged for their merit, not based on who is saying it

I'll get to this in a sec

You have too much faith in the individual. You have, in my opinion, way too much trust I'm people. You can't just expect people to have the same mind as you. There are easy ways to take advantage of your changes to the current government. What if a whole army of hooligans takes over a mall and the 20 people that you have with you aren't armed well enough to fight them? Then those hooligans are in charge and you're a slave to them. They might not be as tolerant as the U.S. government.

You might say that "businesses are unfair because businessmen exploit their workers and money will be devalued", but then what incentive do farmers have to give you their crops? What incentive do truck drivers have to deliver the crops? If you're proposing a breakdown in the system, you're proposing millions of casualties due to starvation and fighting.

1. His tax plan doesn't really lower taxes all that much on the middle class, and for many lower class individuals, they'll barely notice a change, due to the fact that most of them don't pay much (if anything at all) in federal income taxes – most of their taxes come out of social security and other things. And so it's totally disingenuous when he says things like "the lower classes can write their IRS agent a letter saying "I win"" (typical sleazy salesman Trump)
2. The Wall: he's been recalculating the cost like a fucking buffoon ever since he introduced the "plan". First it was 4 billion, and now it's at around 8 I think; however, according to people who actually know what the fuck they're talking about, it would cost upwards of 20 billion dollars. Oh, and then there's the fact that there are ropes and ladders, and tunnels that they ALREADY BUILD.

Well you should. And it's not exactly "the way he talks" that concerns me, it's the bombastic and obstreperous nature that is behind it. Anyway, the way in which a president handles himself is of the utmost importance when it concerns diplomacy, and the fact that people don't seem to acknowledge this, concerns me.

I think I don't support Trump because I'm not an uneducated moron who likes the idea of a frat boyish bully running the country… and for all the more tangible reasons that I've listed.

I have no words for you except that you need to put down the kool aid and think for yourself. If you're getting paid to spam this tripe on every political forum you can find then I sincerely hope you find the self esteem to find a real job.

There is no real thing called "the government" there are only many indviduals.
You have way too much faith in some humans deciding for other humans how to live. You will get hurt because of your belief sooner or later because humans are not farm animals.

I don't need them to. I need you to stop thinking you can tell me what to do. Enforcing it will require taking my life. Your ideology is only a flavor of might is right. Unfortunately the lack of passion that naturally follows from your ideology means I will win every time. So, empty words are meaningles here. The individual is real. The collective is a fancy that does not.

This is now repetitive. You are making the mistake of again simultaneously holding two opposd ideas. I will never be a dictator and there are no changes to government I want. I will not play your game where you imply that me going politician and getting elected is the only way to get what I want - that is the way of blowing hot air and serving legitimacy to the system I do not want.

Why would I be in a mall. I won't live in your consumerist paradise. Your trinkets do not interest me. My body is healthy I do not need machines to do what my body is fit to handle. I do not need shiny objects. I will not live in sardine cans.

nice slave fantasy, unfortunately our exchange will have to end here because I do not desire having this pseudosexual discussion about slavery and picking the least evil option

I choose none, there are other choices. You may not know this, I give you the benefit of the doubt. There are more options. Always.

Ok well rather than doing that, because I could not possibly read 300 pages in the time that im responding to you, why don't you quote the book or give me some pages that illustrate the points that you're trying to make? I have my own books to read.

"the very OP states that "doing nothing" is better than voting, voting is simply doing nothing and cheering it on"

The political and financial systems are not inherently corrupt. It is people that are inherently corrupt. Politicians are politicians because they believe in something. If they wanted to make money, they'd have been businessmen and bankers. Businessmen and bankers are not inherently bad either. Many businessmen and bankers believe that money is a means to an end to spread their influence. There's nothing wrong with that. The government has done a satisfactory job in managing the currency that hundreds of millions (at least) of people use all the time. It's not easy.
see
"A candidate or elected official can act however they please after receiving a donation from a special interest group. Receiving money does not mean that a candidate has to act how the donors want the elected official to act. The EPA can donate to a state governor to try and convince him to stop coal mining. However, the coal miner's association can also donate to the same governor to try and convince him to keep coal mines running. Taking money from special interest groups does not mean that one is controlled by said groups."
if you vote for Trump now, it will send the message that what he says is what we want. It will have an effect on campaign strategies in the future and could perhaps force politicians to act, just like how feminists forced the government to act in certain ways.

I appreciate that you're a good person that does things for his community. I like they way you live your life. But I don't think that the government is out of our control We need to take baby steps and make compromises with the current system in order to make a more ideal future. Trump is a compromise and a means to that end.

The difference between the government and a group of individuals is that the government is elected to uphold the law. A group of individuals does not need to be elected by their peers and is not subject to the word of the law.
The decisions made by the government have to be in accordance to the constitution. If something is seemingly unconstitutional, there will be an army of lawyers to jump on it so that they can gain publicity.
You would be in a mall or some sort of superstore because that's where all the food will be when the supermarkets are looted and all you can find is vending machine food and trinkets that you hope will gain value so that you can trade it for food and water.

In your anarchist style world with no government, there are literally no incentives for farmers to share and transport their food. That's the main problem with your assertion that the government and financial system need to be abolished.

lol wut

No, the main problem with Anarchism is a failure to acknowledge the fact that hierarchical power structures arise, regardless of the conditions.

You don't understand how feminism and multiculturalism are ways to make sure no one is in power and everyone is in fear do you?
Have you read animal farm, how about 1984? Do you know what a fallacy is? Your naive belief in politicians is simply wrong. We can go with facts here. Politicians are not politicians because they are good people that believe in the goodness of law. They believe in many different things and think they will be good with the campaigning and orating.

...

What are you gonna trade for food? Money? Fiat Currency is worthless without a government to issue and back it. Gold? Where are you gonna find gold? Fort Knox? What are you going to trade for food?

This is true. However, I believe that the power structures would revolve around the farmers.

No, I understand that. I thought it was obvious that I understood that.
Yeah, but I've also read economics textbooks political science textbooks, history textbooks, and math textbooks. I believe that these are more relevant than than 1984 and Animal Farm. If you were going to make a point using either of those books, then do it. I'm not gonna do it for you.
You're going to have to give me proof that I'm wrong.
Alright
Proof? Citations? These are not facts. Show me the facts.

"Rights" are illusory – this is a big part of the problem.

This isn't the 19th century, user. There's only so much you can glean from Bakunin (or whomever you read) before you end up living in a total fantasyland – we live in a globalized, technological clusterfuck of incomprehensible complexity.

It certainly sounds nice on paper tho

its inside the ground silly boy

Who's gonna grow and transport the food in an anarchist society?

Facts, like politicians being corrupt whenever they get investigated. The "good" ones simply reveal their corruption before being found and apologize for it.

Have you studied science? Econokmy textbooks are mostly bunk. History textbooks are also hit and miss. I've seen the american history text books that high school and college kids get shown, it is full of lies and bullshit.

so whats your solution? or are you just here to tell everyone their solutions are dumb and to stop trying to change things

see how bad you look?

those who get paid to transport it to markets
why do people think bitcoin could only exist with american government backing it?

statists can be so funny to watch as they try to logic

haha nice

So far, in math, I've learned up to multivariable calculus and vector calculus. I've taken organic chemistry courses and know how to to do stuff like buffers, chromatography, stereochemistry, Spectroscopy, that sort of stuff.
I know basic kinematics, momentum stuff, forces, torque…
Economy textbooks aren't bunk. There's basically history textbooks until you get into the really math-based stuff. These days we don't fuck around with economic theory as much, but it'\s still relevant.

Bitcoin only got big because of it's relationship to the dollar. Bitcoin was a substitute for the dollar when The Silk Road was big. The only reason bitcoin got big was because of its relationship to the dollar. Take the dollar away, and bitcoin is worthless.

so since bitcoin would be worthless, how would you pay farmers besides with other crops or water?

Corporations will still exist. And it will be in a much less inhibited form of Plutocracy than the one we already live.

To remove as much money from government as possible… for starters. You don't just abolish the entire fucking thing and start from scratch – in fact, that's not even possible.

In the history of modern civilization, there has never been anything even RESEMBLING an Anarchist system.

What purpose will corporations serve? What currency would they be dealing in? What is incentivizing their existence?
Okay here, we're in agreement. We're focusing on what to do for starters. What's within our reach?
What's within our reach is the vote, and this presidential candidate Donald Trump who
There's your solution for the short run.

stop, stop, its so transparent that you keep pushing voting despite it being torn down by people with varying opinions and ideas that all agree voting is shit

see
"I think that we both agree that citizens should seek political activity outside of voting for president, and that voting is not the best use of one's time when seeking change. However, I think that voting itself is not a waste of time . I also think that choosing Donald trump as a candidate sends a message to the establishment that we disagree with where the country is headed. Donald trump's main platform is running against rampant illegal immigration in the US, as well as less taxation for the lower classes. Voting for a candidate that represents these viewpoints, despite being flawed, sends a message to people that we want these changes to be made in society. A vote for trump is sending the message that we like the idea of keeping special interest groups out of politics as much as possible, despite his reliance on special interest groups now. Hillary has a lot of money to spend. Trump will need to keep up. Politicians will start to follow suit and push to reject superPACs if they see trump's strategy as a winning strategy."

Then just stfu. If you don't vote you haven't earned the privilege of discussing politics ITT.

>nice try, Shillary

we need money taken out of things like social security. we can't keep supporting people who can't support themselves. it's unsustainable. One major food shortage or one major war and that will lead to millions dying of starvation.
Walls do not simply protrude from the ground, they also reach underground as well.

I forgot to add that Mexico is going to be paying for the wall.

Whether it's fiat currency or commodity money, it's the same shit, different toilet.

Sure, Trump is within reach. And so is Trickle Down Economics (which never quite seems to trickle down). And so is a healthcare system that will exploit the consumer in an even more unfettered and unscrupulous fashion.

Sounds good, but unless corporations begin to bring factories back home, and decide to pay their wage slaves UPWARDS of 15 per hour, it's not going to happen. And lowering the corporate/top-tier tax rate will only benefit the wealthy (this is what history has shown). Take companies like Walgreens and Burger King for an example: they moved their corporate headquarters to Canada and Switzerland for their lower tax rates. Are products cheaper? Are they paying their employees more? No, so whom do you think is benefitting from this?

I don't say otherwise

Heh yeah, I don't think he factored this into the cost… or has even been mentioned. Interesting attempt at moving the goalposts tho.

Well gee, if Trump says so. Do you take EVERYTHING he says at face value? I mean I'm not talking with an actual retard, am I?

So, a country that was originally a colony of another country borrows heavily from said country in matters of laws and language. How shocking OP! You really made me re-evaluate my life!

Not really, but the fact that you believe that what you're saying is relevant is quite funny.

That old chestnut 🌰

Muh u can't say anything because you aren't a retard like me that votes for TV celebrity talking heads.

Try harder commie.

I bet I do more for my community then you do

What's the commodity that commodity money will be based off of? Is it food and water rations? It's food and water rations isn't it? What else could it possibly be?
Would you care to explain how Trumps healthcare system is more exploitative of the consumer? It seems to me like increasing competition between healthcare companies benefits the consumer.
You're against trickle down economics? But why? Don't you want the government out of your hair?
Are people even worth 15/hour? You're one of these people that just thinks that everyone should live forever and be able to breed as much as they want, regardless of how much overpopulation is fucking us. We need to de-inscentivize the lower class from breeding so much. There's no use for them in society. Sorry, but ghetto people rarely pan out as functioning members of society. Most of them don't have what it takes.
see
"I also think that choosing Donald trump as a candidate sends a message to the establishment that we disagree with where the country is headed. Donald trump's main platform is running against rampant illegal immigration in the US, as well as less taxation for the lower classes. Voting for a candidate that represents these viewpoints, despite being flawed, sends a message to people that we want these changes to be made in society. A vote for trump is sending the message that we like the idea of keeping special interest groups out of politics as much as possible, despite his reliance on special interest groups now."
It's not a matter of believing what he says. He's sending a message that we support. Of course you can't trust him to follow through, you can't trust anybody anywhere ever. But the message he sends is clear, and his popular support will send that message so that others will hear it, and other politicians will follow suit.

Precious metals, or perhaps something invented by new institutions of power. Is it really that hard to imagine how something resembling a government would eventually arise? I mean… the current forms of government around the world didn't come out of thin air lol.

We tried this, and it left 50 million people uninsured, individuals being denied for preexisting conditions, and insurance companies who covered LESS than what they DID COVER.

We need a single-payer. Period.

I'm against it because it only seems to benefit the wealthy. Just look at income inequality ever since Reagan took office.

Your assessment of wage workers is incredibly shallow and uninformed. Veterans, the elderly, students who need to pay off mountains of debt? These people don't deserve a LIVEABLE wage? Let's not forget that society needs these workers… and always will. And there is something fundamentally wrong with the fact that some of the most successful corporations get the Lions share of our tax dollars, and yet the taxpayers STILL have to pick up their slack when they don't pay their employees enough to survive.

What??
You're one of those people who equate someone's wealth with their worth, don't you?

I believe its an incredibly shortsighted one.

People like yourself should have supported Sanders if you simply wanted to send a message – only then it wouldnt be a message that would destroy foreign relations and make the US look like a bunch of ignorant hicks again

Satan
His angles / sons of God / ETs
The system
The bankers and owners
Large Business
The political parties
The politicians
You

Mfw voting for a politician.

You don't appreciate who really runs things do you?

Get back to work and pay those taxes, "subject"!

"Oh, I'm sure glad that I sold my farm, the only means of my subsistence for a bunch of copper! Man, I'm hungry…"
Yeah, a government based on food rations would arise.
You really need to need to put a source to these kinds of statements.
I've met a bunch of Asian and Mexican Americans whose families rise up from squalor to being millionaires. IMO, the income gap separates those who are worthy from those who are unworthy.
deserve more compensation. Trump is adamant on this.
yeah how about grandpa lives forever! Like in Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow where the prisons have better living conditions than the outside world. People have to die sometime and Grandpa shouldn't be kept in a home or a hospital for 10 years on the backs of his grandkids.
Suckers. Sorry, you fell for the scam. Maybe you should have focused on getting smarter instead of doing make work all day.
Yeah and we have such a large supply of these unskilled laborers that none of them are able to ask their employers for more money. Your way of incentivizing population increases through government benefits is actively fucking them over.
This is happening because trickle down economics is not in effect. The herd is not thinned enough. There are too many workers to choose from. Competition between workers is too high. Government handouts are causing all this. Some people need to stop being incentivized to breed, like I was saying. But nooooooo, I'm just so insensitive and inhumane. You people are literally creating new life in order to sustain the corporate power structure, but trickle down economics is so inhumane to you.
I've seen it in practice. In my chemistry and math classes, there are people who are born from scientists and the wealthy. They're incredible, and worth much more than I am. To say that the ones with access to higher education early on are not worth more than the son of a salesman is just plain stupid.

What I'm trying to say is that people need to be punished for being unfit and making mistakes. If we don't do that, we have a society that has too many losers. These losers over saturate unskilled labor markets and humanities majors and make it so that they can't demand a pay raise.

This is exactly why you shouldn't support Sanders, too. All Sanders will do is increase the supply of minimum wage workers, and make it impossible for the working class to survive.

Goddam you paranoid little fuck, nobody gets paid to post on Holla Forums, especially Holla Forums's.

People like you just have a fundamental lack of understanding of how the system works, which causes you to be victimized by it. In the old days, hunters didn't think that the animals were working against them because they ran away when you shot at 'em. Yet you seem to think that the system has to provide for you even though you're worthless.

Most of your arguments are too facile and underdeveloped to even warrant a response, so I'll make it quick and then I'm going to bed…

You seem very sold on this theory. Does this tie in with the historical features of our current political systems? Does it factor in globalization and the exponential rate of technological development? Of course it doesn't. Perhaps if you would think outside of an archaic ideology, you'd see how simpleminded you're being.

I really shouldn't have to. This was discussed at great length when Obama first introduced his half-assed healthcare plan; although you were probably too young to remember.

If thats the case, these are called anomalies. And the rest of the workforce should not be marginalized because they don't "rise up" as well.

The income gap should not separate people to the extreme degree that it currently does. And you're essentially supporting the fact that taxpayers are the ones who have to pick up the tab when they can't support themselves (all while supporting corporate subsidies as well)

Stay dumb

My way? You're misrepresenting my position. It's not a way to incentivize, but rather to simply allow them to be self-sufficient.

You're being much too vague, and there isn't a stitch of substance to any of this.

Consider the example of Walgreens and Burger King that I gave earlier. Also, look at the contrast between the 1980's-present day/the 1940's and 50's and their respective approaches to economics, and finally, their impact on the distribution of wealth (hint: you'll find that trickle-down economics doesn't hold up).

Value is invented. You may have to think real hard about that one

Are you TRYING to be a fucking asshole, or does it come naturally?

Anyway, it would take FAR too long to refute most of your broad generalizations in any greater length.

that's an opinion and it's irrelevant because you haven't proven it wrong.
You've obviously never been hungry before.
if you're unable to provide a source for your arguments then it might as well be disregarded
Here's how it works:
First generation works as a wage slave, saves money, lives communally, buys a house for the family.
Second generation moves into higher education.
Third generation prospers and excels in education.
All they have to do is be an undocumented worker or open a restaurant.
Yeah it should. People who can't support themselves in the real world need to die off. Otherwise our population is bloated with useless slaves.
No, you're saying that. I'm saying that people need to be weeded out because we're overpopulated. The taxpayers are burdened like 3x more by social security than corporate taxes (see pic).
I'm smarter than you are, unless you're just being disingenuous. I'm in college and have no student debt yet. I made an informed decision on whether college was worth it or not, and for me, it was.
that's not being self-sufficient. that's relying on the government…. and you're calling me dumb.
Food stamps are a thing. Welfare is a thing. Welfare recipients earn between $11,000 and $60,000 per year in America depending on the state. It's not even taxed. nypost.com/2013/08/19/when-welfare-pays-better-than-work/ However, wages are taxed. That is incentivizing useless people.
Increase in population plays a huge role in this. Also, decrease in work ethic over time plays a role in this. It's not trickle down economics as much as it is shifts in population and demographics.
That's ridiculous. By your logic, an accountant could get paid at the same rate as a burger flipper. By that logic, I could make my shitty indie band as famous as a pop star just by proclaiming that I'm really valuable despite not having the means to produce listenable music. By that logic, i could pick up a nearly illiterate homeless guy off the street and put him in a chemical laboratory and he'd do just fine. What kind of brain dead fluff did people put in your head when you were younger to make you think something stupid like "value is invented"? That's like something Jaden Smith would say on his twitter. Utter bullshit. Hey, I have an Idea, I'm a great chemist. How about you let me work, testing bombs, pesticides, and chemical flavorings? I don't have any experience or formal education but I invented the knowledge into my head. No experience needed. I just came right out of the ghetto and suddenly I have all the smarts that a college graduate from an educated family has. What a bunch of stupid bullshit.

like do you honestly think that some guy can come out from Detroit, having racked his brain on crack all his life, having received no formal education, and reinvent himself to be as good as someone whose parents were scientists? Can you even say that to yourself and keep a straight face? What the fuck?

"value is Invented". What the fuck dude, seriously. Like everyone is born the same and everyone's special. Yeah why don't you go down to East LA and see how special those people living in literal huts are.

That is, if you don't get mugged, richfag.
What the fuck even goes on in your head that you would believe an idea like that. Like people who aren't born into highly educated families aren't more prone to be smarter and more valuable than others. Who the fuck are you kidding?

Are you trying to convince people that you're nice or something? Have you stepped foot outside a middle class community ever in your life? There are some worthless fucks out there and they were born and raised that way. No amount of "inventing" can save them. Like seriously dude what the fuck are you thinking?

Saying shit like that around people is just plain fucking wrong. Trying to convince a born cashier with a drug addiction that they're meant to be something more is just cruel, man. You know in your heart of hearts that they will never be what they want to invent themselves as. You're setting them up to be fucking miserable and guilty that they couldn't be something more.

And the worst part is that it's all for the sake of your own self image. It's not even for their sake that you're saying this shit. You're spouting this nonsense so that people don't think you're an asshole like I apparently am. You're worse than an asshole, dude. You say shit like this to make yourself look good and so you can take advantage of people. And all it does is create this environment where the weak are coddled and work is de-incentivized.

Stop it, user, it's getting weird.

When you make an assessment of someone's subjective worth based on such a superficial family background, your assessment of their "value" is most certainly invented.

And you can either factcheck me or not… or you could just pretend I'm full of shit if it makes you feel any better.

No, fuck you. The shit you're saying is utterly wrong. You may have read in a book that everyone's special if you think they're special, but that's not what reality is.
Think of it this way:
You have standards for friends and sexual partners right?
I assume you don't keep the company of drug addicts who steal shit and shoot people right?
I assume you don't want a girlfriend/boyfriend who has herpes and spends your money on drugs, right?
You can't just assign value to these people and then all of a sudden they aren't what they really are. What they really are is a drain, and they're useless. Stop pretending.

It doesn't even have to be spending money on drugs. Could you honestly say that you've dated a poor person before? You would have to pay their bills and constantly wonder if they were only with you to escape the welfare life.

I think you should practice some intellectual honesty, instead of moving the goalposts (yet again) by referencing drug addicts and STD-riddled girlfriends in order to make your assessment of value more palatable.

Btw, welfare is a very tiny fraction of the federal budget.

Says the guy who says some stupid shit like "value is invented". What the fuck is wrong with you?
Welfare is 9% of the 2016 federal budget. That's a large fraction of the budget compared to most things.

*welfare is 9% of the federal budget from 2011 to 2016

I'll give you an example of how value is invented, and it just so happens that you've provided a good starting point…
Pretty "valuable", huh?
I don't think I need to elaborate much on this one
Pros and cons, but cancer rates have skyrocketed since industrialised agriculture. And that's also assuming that you're a good chemist who will be an asset to Monsanto or whatever conglomerate hires you.
Pernicious. Period.

ALL. RELATIVE.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

Take a hedge fund manager (or take your pick of illegitimate wall street jobs) who makes millions or billions on what is essentially gambling. Their value to society is extremely relative, and would totally be a matter of perspective.

Now take a lowly wage worker, or EMT, or various factory technicians, and assess their value. How about a garbage man? I think garbage men are far more essential than a hedge fund manager, or a chemist working on artificial flavorings, or some asshole programmer working on a useless app.

Beginning to understand?

The people in these professions may not be valuable to society as a whole, but they do have a lot of value in terms of money. Of course, you've probably never had any problems with money so that kind of value is probably not something that would occur to you.
In the real world, what denotes value is your ability to provide things for yourself and others.
I would say that garbage men and EMTs are compensated fairly for their work and what it requires of them. Factory workers with credentials such as welders are compensated fairly for their work.
It takes a lot of work to become a PhD Chemist, and it takes a lot of work to actually start making money in a wall street business since that business is so highly competitive.
The value of these positions are not invented. They're dictated by supply of skilled labor and demand for skilled labor. Their wages are dictated by the natural equilibrium of the universe, not some arbitrary system..

Yes, and monetary value is invented

You seem to be cherrypicking quite a bit when it concerns your Anarchist leanings.

You're subjectively assessing their value.

The value (as determined by the company, which often has an extremely disproportionate power of influence over the consumer).

Lol

Do we really need to continue with this, or would you rather continue being a pugnacious contrarian?

Monetary value is not invented you idiot. Read an economics textbook for once in your life rather then your stupid philosophy books.
I am not subjectively assessing the value of garbage men and EMTs. Garbage men are paid more than your average worker because of barriers to entry. Not everyone wants to work with garbage. EMTs are paid more than the average worker because of barriers to entry. Not everyone wants to go through the specialized education that is required of EMTs.
Businesses literally exist to make a profit. They hire people based on what will make them a profit. They demand labor as a means to an end for making profit. Making money is indeed a science based on the theory of equilibrium. There is math that you have to do in order to calculate the wages that will keep the company afloat. Not every company exploits their workers by giving themselves huge paychecks. Business owners need excellent communications skills, excellent math skills, and excellent critical thinking skills in order to land their jobs. It's because the market for businesses is highly competitive. It's not because of arbitrary value assignments. The value of every job on planet earth is dictated by the barriers to entry required of performing that job. That is the law of equilibrium.

The value of labor is not determined subjectively, it's determined by competition and the monetary bottom lines of companies.

I think perhaps your depth of contemplation could benefit from some philosophy.

I'm not saying that monetary value is completely arbitrary, you fucking dipshit. Once again, you're misrepresenting my position. The crux of my point is that the disparity of wealth is egregious and needs to be reassessed.

And I think you'd be well advised not to lump together business owners as if they all have the best interests of the consumers and investors in mind. You can have all the talent in the world, and also be a cancer to society – it shouldn't be difficult to think of examples.

Then you don't know the difference between objectivity and subjectivity

Anyway, this debate is beginning to become stale, and I should have been asleep 2 hours ago.

Thanks for temporarily curing my boredom.

I suppose we've gotten to the bottom of our disagreement.
I believe that I place a lower value on humanity than you do. That's what creates our difference in opinion. I also believe in determinism more that you do.
Well, I suppose that we can agree to disagree.
I appreciate your participation and wish you well. It's good to know that there are people with faith in humanity.

I wanted to add that I thought a bit more about the objective/subjective value of labor, and I suppose it's both; therefore, there is room for both subjective/objective compromise on the distribution of wealth.

I'm a firm believer in determanism. In fact, I think compatibalsim is tepid bullshit.

But I suppose we'll have to leave that one for another time, because that would undoubtedly last hours

Understood. I wont let this go any further.
Go to bed. I'm not responding anymore tonight.

fucking illiterate idiot we just talked in the fucking thread how voting is worse than doing nothing
stop pushing voting like a retarded drone

But there's no downside to voting. It's much better than doing nothing. IDK where you got the idea where voting is inherently bad in this thread, but you're obviously being disingenuous. Voting is much better than doing nothing.

It won't matter. The next economic collapse may seal the deal.

Holla Forums keeps bitching about know jews run everything but whites still dominate the financial and political spectrum of the US and the west. They don't mind being enslaved as long as they're being whipped by a blue-eyed blonde with a verified 23andme test result.

This is what I loathe about Holla Forums, they don't mind being raped as long as it's by whites. They'll praise anything they hate as long as it's done by whites.

Vid VERY related

oy vey
the goyims are oppressors. iI had 6 of my grandparents die in the holocaust.

...

Omg what a horrific tragedy. Get the fuck outta hea.

youtube.com/watch?v=cXfmfj4z3Zc

Trump:

The Trump shills are Jews.

Not voting isn't doing nothing. It's doing something. It's willingly withdrawing your consent from a corrupt system. If no one voted at all there wouldn't be a system. All government employees get their power only because people voted. And then those employees serve the people.

👍

up

Voting what a fucking Joke.

Fuck off!

ye faggot statists right?

...

788 and then 899 one after the other with 111 separating then between the posts.

What are the odds of that?

Sorry 1111 separating them.

Spooky dubs separated by spooky quads.

voting is for kikes and dikes

...

you must be confused about determinism
the difference between being compelled to desire women vs being "forced" to do something you don't want to do makes a major difference
but Free Will believers are not rational anyway

true
therefore if you dig a ditch with your bare hands you dont get to have 3 days worth of pay for the ditch just because you refused to use a shovel

.

truth

...

vote

...

...

wew

sad

...

...

...

There is now NO other alternative for your future.

...

voting sucks

Here's some truth about politics.

Be me:

Post on Holla Forums asking what is new.
Any happenings? Any new subjects to discuss?

…100 posts later there is nothing.
Not one new topic to discuss that hasn't already been discussed.

Embarrassing right? Well, Holla Forums thought so too. Because they deleted the thread and banned me.

So I made a post in honor of the one guy that posted something almost original: crows as pets.

The thread was immensely popular, but once again I was banned and the thread was deleted.

In conclusion, if you have a REAL conversation on Holla Forums that isn't just circle jerking, you will be banned.

Such is politics. Those who are allowed to speak get to speak. The rest get the "shut it down " tactics.

Pic related.

Shut the fuck up

Try harder butthurt Holla Forums

back to tumblr

ha

ahahhh

hhahahahah

ahahahahahahhh

aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

u

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuuu

uuuuuuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuuuuuuu

bump

You missed a beat between post ending 31 and post ending 33.

Try harder Holla Forums

well meme'd sir

opinion discarded

Try harder Holla Forums

k