Jump to content
11th Annual ExtraLife4Kids Stream ×
The Community Blog (An Invitation)
11th Annual ExtraLife4Kids Stream

213374U

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5642

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

 Content Type 

Everything posted by 213374U

  1. 213374U
    What exactly was it about immigration that some people were very dedicated to proving you wrong about? That it's going to "destroy our culture"? That in a generation there would be less ethnic French in France than second-gen Muslim immigrants? I ask because a lot of nonsense has been said regarding this "issue" and it wasn't so much proving anyone wrong as asking you and others to, um, substantiate your claims, so an actual discussion could be had. I'd also like to know when you say "it" has tanked governments, what exactly is "it"? Immigration? If so, being generous I'd say you're jumping to conclusions, and disregarding other important factors, such as, the huge-ass long-term unemployment in Italy and constant strikes and protests that have been going on in France for a while now, and that have nothing to do with immigration, being instead directed against PM Valls' labor reform pet project. Mind, if you want to play the card that immigration is the chief factor for what has been happening, you are actually pushing the "2016 the year of racism" narrative. Can't have your cake and eat it too. And well, the limp-**** right has been re-elected for another term over here after some embarrassing kowtowing by the limp-**** left, so I personally don't have much to say. Er... the more things change, the more they stay the same? ...I got nothing.
  2. 213374U
    http://electionado.com/canvas/1479173071893 Another guy blacksplaining white working class. It's like me writing an essay "the third trimester and what to expect". I don't know about blacksplaining (ughhh) but between the annoying Twаtter greatest hits formatting and his extremely flimsy "research" (RT comments that take you to Vox pieces that link to WPost articles...), yeah. He's not going to convince anyone who isn't already convinced. Preaching to the choir much? Kinda allegorical in that sense, heh.
  3. 213374U
    Hmm. What about those who _can't_ take care of themselves? Let's say, disabled veterans. Let's say, miners afflicted by silicosis from working towards *another's* "prosperity". Let's say, firefighters and ER personnel suffering from 9/11 sequels. Amputees? Retards? People with ALS? Autists? It's great to blather on about one's hard earned success when one has only had to face a fraction of the obstacles others have. It's only human to be narrow minded and extrapolate one's experience to the rest. But it's also basic human decency to admit that you are privileged just lucky in that regard. The idea that everyone's survival must be predicated upon their "economic success" is an aberration of neoliberal-social Darwinist dogma. Please explain using your own words why this should be so. Maybe when you look at how said "prosperity" is achieved, things aren't so clear cut. Once you realize that work is a scam, that private property is absurd and that the ability to sell money for more money is something that virtually guarantees that the effort-reward utopia you folks worship will actually never come to pass, the "prosperity" of others suddenly doesn't look so sacrosanct anymore. Oh, look. It's Marxism rearing its ugly head again. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  4. 213374U
    You are right. Cuba wasn't to be annexed, at least up until that point where Teller was amended or replaced, such as by Platt (Congress giveth, Congress taketh away). An arrangement like that of Puerto Rico would be more advantageous and likely, because enfranchisement isn't generally a good idea for your colonial subjects. Until then, a military occupation or the threat hereof, and practically puppeting the island's government would be sufficient. In this light, outright annexation incorporation to the Union as a fully fledged State like Texas or prospective one like Alaska sounds like a genuine improvement. I'll endeavor to use surgically precise terms in these informal discussions from now on, thank you.
  5. 213374U
    Yeah, well. You might have a different view of what independence is worth if your country had just wrested it from a colonial power when the next one starts trying to annex you. I've spoken to a lot of Cuban expats and while their conditions were bad enough to force them to leave, none of them regarded annexation by the US as desirable. something something propaganda something something brainwashing Economically, Castro's regime was a failure in absolute terms. But it's not like he had much to work with. Cuba isn't natural resource-rich (read: no oil or gold), and sanctions from the US seriously hamper development in other venues. In relative terms though, right next door you have Dominican Republic and especially Haiti, which weren't doing so hot even before the quakes, despite (economic) FREEDOM. It's funny, because while the damage done by Castro to Cuba is almost a cliché in the West, not many people even know about Papa Doc, who was both a fierce anti-communist and far more sanguinary than Castro. Heh.
  6. 213374U
    OMG. You discriminating against hot people now? Are you suggesting that hot people have no right to be PM? You fiendish hot-shaming ****lord, you. But seriously, look at him. No homo, but DAYUM. He can kill me anytime. Twice on sundays.
  7. 213374U
    Image searching for "liberal cuck" returned this: I figure that explains previous comments much better than an in-depth discussion of his politics ever would. edit: I didn't even enter his name
  8. 213374U
    You new here or something? We ain't big on them "specifics" and "facts" 'round these parts. Shoo!
  9. 213374U
    Perhaps you respond to (material) incentives. Don't assume that everyone does, and don't assume that without them, everyone would turn into a slob overnight. What limited research there is into basic income seems to point in the direction that, in fact, that wouldn't happen to any significant degree. See, the funny thing about you wrote is that it also perfectly applies to how the current scheme of upwards wealth redistribution by means of runaway debt issuance, is hurting the majority. It doesn't only rob people of material "incentives", it robs them of their very future.
  10. 213374U
    Wow. That's certainly not something I'd expect from you, though perhaps I'm simply not fully understanding your meaning. What you're saying is if a sufficient* amount of your fellow Americans agreed to impose a social transformation that is anathema to you, on everyone including yourself, you'd just shrug and bend over? Why not simply ask for, nay, demand the right to opt out of a social contract whose terms are being radically redefined? Seems to me that you either undervalue your own core beliefs, or place an undue importance on "legality". Laws, like markets, money and all that, are man-made things, meant to serve humans. Not the other way around. *remember: governance 101 is about making sure you have the necessary "majority" to get away with whatever. Jurisdictions, voting calendars, quorum, judicial obstructionism, and so on and so forth. It doesn't take legitimacy, just political savvy.
  11. 213374U
    My thoughts exactly. So, um. Good luck.
  12. 213374U
    Well, maybe look harder then. The common element is their longing for a return to a past they see as better, characterized by blind discipline, nationalism (with or without racialist tints), little tolerance for deviation from the social norms, political authoritarianism in diverse forms, etc. It's important to note that this representation of the past may or may not be accurate, but accuracy is less important than the feels from romantizicing the past. In short: reactionarism. The necessary and sufficient condition to be considered part of the alt-right.
  13. 213374U
    Yeah, and? The German media didn't have a political boogie man to call the actual Hitler to get the masses that terrified. No, they had an actual bogeyman who was in power right next door (literally Hitler Stalin), and a unified, organized and most importantly, unabashedly militant, radical left-wing movement that had already tried to overthrow the democratic Weimar regime. By the time Hitler got elected, commies and nazi shocktroopers were openly duking it out on the streets. Unlike today, the "media" back then didn't need to make stuff up. Just reporting on stuff was enough to get people scared. Problem is today the corporate media are so corrupt and have been doing shock therapy for so long, that what we're seeing is a sort of "the boy who cried wolf" effect. Not saying there is a problem presently, but when there is, you won't see it coming.
  14. 213374U
    You may not have noticed, but violence is all coming from one side. Sure is mate, sure is. https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656?m=1 Ha ha ha ha. http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/11/10/police-muslim-student-fabricated-hijab-grab-trump-supporters/ Hold up. So one reported incident was fabricated, therefore the implication you are making is that ALL of them are, right? I don't even, so I'm just going to quote your own immortal words:
  15. 213374U
    I thought: what the hell, two threads? And this one is already 14 pages long? Then I saw Alanschu. Well played.
  16. 213374U
    You may not have noticed, but violence is all coming from one side. Sure is mate, sure is. https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656?m=1
  17. 213374U
    It's such pathetic demonisation and conspiracy theory crafting that makes me laugh, when Brexit results were announced and now, the desperate need to blame voters who don't align with their own smug elitist positions is always absolutely hilarious. One wonders how such people deal with the real world where not everyone echoes their inane tweeting. I didn't see a single tweet in that post demonising anything, merely hypothesizing. No value judgments in any of the tweets. And the describing of a spontaneous, decentralized phenomenon is hardly "conspiracy theory crafting". She makes no reference, explicit or otherwise, to who may be funding, coordinating and leading those groups -- because clearly no one is. Perhaps you haven't had the pleasure of mingling with MRA and PUA types, but I assure you, she's pretty much spot on. Hell, we even have some of that here. Whether what she's describing can be singled out as the reason for Hillary's rather hilarious crash-and-burn performance is another matter. Personally I think her theory is excessively reductionist and ascribes undue weight to those people, but I wouldn't say she's wrong. Who's demonising who?
  18. 213374U
    Crap, I was hoping for a fire sale. Can't a guy catch a break?
  19. 213374U
    Does this mean Hillary will end up in jail where she belongs? I mean, it was a campaign promise.
  20. 213374U
    Plot twist: he really does work for Obsidian. The mod tag is part of a dastardly scheme to infiltrate the community by posing as part of the volunteer mod corps. It's just that so far only Chippy has seen through his clever façade! We're onto you now, Pidesco.
  21. 213374U
    So, maybe it's a good time to invest in treasury bonds? Either it pays off or it's an end-of-the-world scenario where money not invested ceases to be worth anything. Win-win, from my perspective.
  22. 213374U
    Boring interview. Two pages of "I don't know", "can't say", "couldn't tell even if I knew" and cryptic remarks about Obsidz management. I agree with the passive-aggressive observation. I'd much rather have the dude talk about stuff he's working on. And I specifically mean games, not issues. Though that's as much his fault as the interviewer's. Ah, who am I kidding. Came for the gaming, stayed for the drama. Rock on, Infinitron.
  23. 213374U
    Nope, sry
  24. 213374U
    Don't waste time arguing on the internet.
  25. 213374U
    Why? Is Fargo (and BNone) trying to pitch the game over there? That would be lolworthy alright. I'd expect much of the 'dex to pledge regardless... In eggs isle going full popamole is hardly surprising, at this point.
×
×
  • Create New...