Is infowars the most autistic news website?

thats not what communism is faggot

read marx

The word "conspiracy" has literally been a COINTEL PRO invention to put critics in a box with tinfoil crazies.

When you look at it technically, conspiracies happen every day - it's people coming together making a deal to further their interests.

Marxian class isn't real, read something else than marx.

Conspiracy has gotten two meanings, with one getting it's weight, but not it's definition, from the original meaning. Like "miso.gynist".

NWO is pretty real tho. Postmodern liberals pushing for technocracy and micromanagement based on economic necessities and liberal universalism pretty much equal that.

yup

Yes, it is. And your strawman that Marxist think everyone who isn't a wageworker is a hive mind shows just how poor the critique you read of him was.

They do have that part right, tbqh.

I watch Alex because he makes me laugh and I think he has a nice voice.

Corporate America doesn't favour gun control?
Queer theorists aren't trying to coerce people into homosexual sex?
The number of people requesting gender reassignment hasn't increased massively since the start of the SJW phenomenon?
Corporate America isn't pandering to the identity politics crowd as a method of garnering positive PR?
The NSA isn't indirectly owned by Corporate America via their purchase of the US government?

Okay infowars is certainly dressed up to appear to foilhatters and Holla Forums, but steamingly blatant propaganda is easier to deal with than the rather more insidious sort you get from the Guardian

infowars is paranoia

THIS is autism: anti-dialectics.co.uk/

They have passed the mere "autism" and now are full on schizophrenic.
Holla Forums is following the same path

Globalist is code for jew

and jew is code for irish

They aren't, right.

Doesn't mean they weren't dysphoric to begin with and only started going for treatment once it started becoming more acceptable.

The gun control thing too is kind of wonky, certain porkies do indeed support it, but others (like the ones with a stake in gun manufacturing) sort of aren't (at least where white people who buy guns are concerned, anyway.) Remember that porkies aren't a monolithic class with a unanimous consensus on how to deal with every societal issue - there's plenty of disagreements (even on the idpol stuff) but what they share in common are the same fundamental material interests, so while they disagree on certain cultural and societal issues they will still cooperate to maintain the material basis of society.

The whole point of Queer theory is to coerce more people into tribbing and buttsex.

Doesn't mean that they're not just impressionable people mislead by rhetoric, either.

You're just regurgitating what you've read in a book, here. Try actually thinking. Yes, it's self evident that the section of the bourgies that produce firearms wish to promote conditions that increase the number of firearms in circulation. For the rest of the bourgies, few weapons in circulation is preferable. Armed proles are simultaneously a direct danger to both them and their property as well as the resulting violence in society disrupting the optimum conditions for profit generation (shoot at shoppers and they stop shopping and start running…). Ergo, the great majority of the capitalist class will seek to reduce access to firearms in order to minimize social violence.

[citation needed]

Got some proofs there, buddo? I know transtrenders are a thing, but they seem to be overwhelmingly cisgendered people who dye their hair bright colours and insist they're some special snoflake gender category because they don't shave their legs and armpits. People aren't going to go sign up for HRT and SRS because they saw The Danish Girl once.

But no, I think you're making a mistake in your reasoning here. I agree that it is absolutely in the bourgies' material interest to keep guns out of ordinary labourers' hands. However, not all bourgies will necessarily act in their own interests. They are human beings like us each with their own spooks and irrational fixations. The instrumentalist view doesn't really hold in light of everything we know today. And in a lot of cases gun control doesn't take the shape of Alex Jones style regulation and confiscation, but instead the progressive illegalization of the proletariat, where the ordinary sins of working-class people are made into felonies and their official classification is changed in such a way that they have less rights and we can say that it's their own fault. As things get worse, I could see them contriving a way to make vagrancy and non-payment of bills sufficient justification for revocation of 2A rights, and so on.

This talk about flouride and gun grabbing is just fantasy garbage. The real way it works is far more insidious, and is something Alex Jones and co would probably root for as it's happening because of the way it's framed.

...

plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/#QueTheSocConSex

You've just asked me to prove a negative. No. You need to prove that these people do have dysphoria, not me that they do not.

If this were the case, we'd see something along the lines of imprisonment for non-payment of child support being applied to firearms owners. AFAIK, this is not happening and policymakers are applying a much more overt and paternalist "no firearms for you!" approach.

Cool story.

No proofs there.

That was a double negative, you dum dum. I'm expecting you to prove your argument that queer propaganda is turning white christian children into tranny degenerates.

How the fuck do you get to that from my saying that turning potentially dangerous proles into felons is easier than saying everyone including your reactionary ideological supporters can't own guns?

>The advertising industry isn't built on coercing people to buy shit they don't need

Your list contains things which are not in the same category. Marketing exploits and tries to form needs and desires, sure, but it plays on already existing desires to do so, and having something suddenly being 'required' in someone's life - a commodity of some sort, is not the same as altering someone's base sexual attraction.

This is no different than the gay scares of the past, insisting that if let loose - they'd turn everyone from heterosexual to homosexual. That's only the case if you're already slightly bi to begin with, or already have such attractions.

The logic that you're using, implies that there are no base sexual attractions. That it's 100% conditioned. In which case, heterosexuality, hell, sexuality doesn't exist. Just learned behavior.

As for "more queers" or "more people trans surgery" = people have been 'brainwashed into becoming such', is reading the whole thing upside down. If something is restricted and tabood, to begin with, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Once no longer a taboo, those that can be open about it more - are.

I do see your point - though. If you truly believe that the only thing keeping the heterosexuals, heterosexual, is constant brainwashing for them to be hetero, then it makes sense you'd see it as brainwashing to 'turn the gay on'.

Yes, there are.

Where did I claim that? I point out that there was a correlation between SJWism and increased requests for gender reassignment. I didn't claim causation.

Read your own post:

The whole point of the child support laws is eugenics via the back door. If you're poor and reproduce in a social context that the ruling powers disapprove of, off to prison you undesirable! At the same time, the masses are presented with a narrative that leads them to blame the man concerned.

...

The queer theorists I've seen run on that logic: "Everyone is bisexual" "Just look at all this gay sex in prison". for me to remark that people are acting based on an assumption they've made is not for me to claim that assumption is correct.

As usual I see you're resorting to deliberate mischaracterization because you can't succeed by force of argument and dislike my criticism.

...

See, here is deliberate characterization. I've made no statement that I actually think these people would succeed. For the very reasons you point out in your own post, they won't turn straight people into gay people. That doesn't mean that the queer theorist will refrain from making the attempt, regardless.

...

Are you going to make an argument or can I go and masturbate, now?

I thought that was what you were doing here all along. What was the point of your posts, then?

Maybe slight autistic, but at least they support Holla Forums, and are paying the costs of hosting this board where you guys have your discussion.

Alex Jones does a pretty good impersonation of liberals tho. I mean, spot on.

Only because the TIME IS A CUBE WITH FOUR SIDES THE FOURTH SIDE IS TIME site got shut down

...

...

Isnt alex jones a confirmed CIA agent or something?

Breitbart is a pretty big pile of shit imo.
at least infowars don't take themselves too seriously. its more of an X-files tinfoil hat entertainment than anything.
you have to be a brain dead moron to take it seriously.