Upload
Login or register
Newest
auto-refresh every 1 2 3 5 seconds
asd
#114982 to #114977 - Elk
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Trump is consistently doing better in polls than he was last year. Who's to say that things won't get even better?
#114950 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
abortion is actively dealing with the problem

why does pro-life rhetoric say that people should have personal responsibility, as if that's relevant
#114974 to #114950 - theplanetearth
Reply -2
(05/03/2016) [-]
You must really hate niggers.
#114988 to #114974 - anon
Reply -1
(05/03/2016) [-]
They are subhuman filth
#114971 to #114950 - theism
Reply +6
(05/03/2016) [-]
The 13th ammendment forbids forcing people into involuntary labor. So abortion is constitutionally protected.
#114979 to #114971 - canyou
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Lol
#114976 to #114971 - marinepenguin ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Possibly one of the better abortion jokes I've seen.
#114972 to #114971 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
it says involuntary servitude
#114973 to #114972 - theism
Reply +2
(05/03/2016) [-]
They're cinnamons.
#114965 to #114950 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
GIF
a social safety net is actively dealing with the problem

why does pro-libertarian rhetoric say people should have personal responsibility, as if that's relevant

#114966 to #114965 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
touche
#114952 to #114950 - whitechino
Reply +1
(05/03/2016) [-]
Because what we do with the fetus is unethical. They push abortion more than both control only for baby by the pound.
#114957 to #114952 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
I'm very certain it's not pushed as a primary birth control because it can get very expensive and you can't have sex for a month or so after the abortion
#115009 to #114957 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
It's quite a serious procedure, especially if done later, and repeated abortions can permanently damage your cervix. People who claim it's pushed for and similar claims don't seem to understand it.
#114961 to #114957 - whitechino
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Dems push abortion for $$$, reps don't push abortion but don't want birth control. You can easily get stem cells from your face and other parts of your body, but as soon as people figure that out the the supply will exceed demand and the price will go down. It's just a game and unlucky women are the pawns.
#114963 to #114961 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
fetal stem cells are very different from other types of stem cells
there's been a lot of scientific research to create more versatile stem cells, but fetal cells are till the gold standard

and it makes no sense to peg women as victims when they voluntarily do it to themselves
#114967 to #114963 - whitechino
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Woman can do whatever the fuck they want, but if you give someone the option to not take responsibility, make them pay, and sell the little nigga, that's kinda fucked up... To me
#114969 to #114967 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
it may be fucked up, but it's still taking responsibility nonetheless
that's my point
#114970 to #114969 - whitechino
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Sure, a couple thousand to say fuck it. That's some good responsibility only a parent can teach.
#114951 to #114950 - Elk
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
What? People's problem with abortion is that it's essentially killing a baby.
#114954 to #114951 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Yes, I get that's the argument. But they also claim that it's a personal responsibility issue.
That part I don't get.
#114955 to #114954 - Elk
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
For the most part, they're not taking personal responsibility by using birth control. Why should they be able to wipe out a life when it was created by their recklessness?
#114958 to #114955 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
what if they did use birth control
the problem still happened; now they have to fix the problem
#114959 to #114958 - Elk
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Personally, I'm not against it in that instance, but they still could give it up for adoption. There are plenty of parents who would love to have a child who are struggling to get one.
#114960 to #114959 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
except there aren't plenty of parents who would love to adopt
there's actually a huge shortage of them

kids in the system don't have great lives
it's very tragic
#114962 to #114960 - Elk
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
I didn't mean plenty as in a surplus. I just meant that there are people who want to adopt. Obviously, there aren't going to be a ton of them because most people can have their own children.

I never said they lived well. Who is bringing up irrelevant information now?
#114964 to #114962 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
you're the one who brought up adoption

you said there are plenty of people
that statement is factually wrong
#114968 to #114964 - Elk
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Yeah, because it's relevant to the topic. I just exaggerated, but the "irrelevant" line was supposed to be a playful jab. It sounded more playful in my head. I'm pretty tired. Sorry.
#114934 - effort
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I'm pretty layman when it comes to socioeconomic ideas. So, I was wondering if there are any other recommended books, to help build a fundamental understanding of socioeconomics? Specifically differentiating capitalism, socialism, libertarian, authotarian, classical liberalism, left liberalism, corporatism and etc. Would also be a plus if the books included some real life examples.

Currently reading, A Theory of Capitalism and Socialism. Looking to read, Why Not Capitalism and Confessions of an Economic Hit Man after this.
#114938 to #114934 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Free to Choose by Milton Friedman

Great read; easy to understand
#114937 to #114934 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
The Road to Serfdom - Hayek, good read
#114883 - canyou
Reply +1
(05/02/2016) [-]
I wonder if Cruz will keep his end of the deal with Kasich if he loses Indiana? Will he really back off of Oregon? Or will he try to go for it too?

Either way, losing Indiana will most likely be the nail in the coffin
#114956 to #114883 - asotil
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
They both already went back on it so my guess is it's already fucked
#114895 to #114883 - seniorawesomesauce
Reply +3
(05/02/2016) [-]
According to Paul Manafort, last tuesday was the final nail in the coffin, and Indiana is when Cruz realizes he's in it.
#114901 to #114895 - canyou
Reply +1
(05/02/2016) [-]
Cruz is already a spooky skeleton
#114929 to #114901 - thumbfortrump
Reply +1
(05/02/2016) [-]
not that spoopy

he did create lots of spooky skeleton tho
#114881 - seniorawesomesauce
Reply +2
(05/02/2016) [-]
>"Hillary will destroy Donald Trump in the General Election"
>"B-but Bernie Sanders is the only one that can beat Donald Trump"

>"Ted Cruz is the only that can beat Hillary Clinton in the General Election"
>Can't even beat Donald Trump
#114900 to #114881 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Winning a nomination is very different to winning the election.
#114886 to #114881 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
in political science and public economics, there's a concept called strategic voting

it has been completely thrown out the window this election cycle
#114876 - marinepenguin ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I wonder what would happen within US politics if the Republican Party dissolved or splintered in the coming years. Would we see a dominant Democratic Party? Would another party like the libertarian party see an increase in popularity to fill the power vacuum? Maybe the democratic party would come under similar problems and begin to fall apart?
#114877 to #114876 - PopcornViking ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
proabbly a new party would rise up with very similar ideals

but they would need all fresh new faces at the top
#114874 - anon
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
so, i just had one of those shower thoughts regarding the US elections. What if Trump is basically a subconscious collective experiment by the American people to see if their democracy really works. They take a guy that has outrageous views and supports him to see if by vote alone they can get someone into the white house, instead by simply going with the "ideal" choice (Clinton). In past elections, you could not outright go and say "man, my candidate didn't win because the ideal of democracy is dead", because the candidates did not have completely radically new ideas like Ol' Donald. In essence, what is going on is Americans trying to see if they're not being swindled out of an election every time. Bernie can be seen as the control, as another now not so potential candidate with radical ideas, but part of the party that is set to win the election, just to see if people are just attracted to radical ideas.
#114872 - canyou
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
KEEP YOUR HATE SPEECH OFF OF THIS CAMPUS
KEEP YOUR HATE SPEECH OFF OF THIS CAMPUS
KEEP YOUR HATE SPEECH OFF OF THIS CAMPUS
#114922 to #114872 - anon
Reply +1
(05/02/2016) [-]
YOU MAKE BUU MAD!
BUU MAKE YOU DEAD!
#114866 - lotengo
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Dutch Greenpeace leaked the TTIP documents
ttip-leaks.org/
#114844 - Zaxplab
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#114862 to #114844 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
It's a daft conspiracy theory.
#114888 to #114862 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
What is?
#114898 to #114888 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
The idea that 'Trump was bought out by Hillary'
#114907 to #114898 - unforgivensoul
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#114908 to #114907 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
But the claim is that Trump was bought out by Hillary. Did Hillary buy Trump?
#114909 to #114908 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
oh, I read that wrong.
#114834 - anon
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
#114993 to #114834 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
I wish Trump was half the Fascist people are making him out to be.
#114840 to #114834 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I'd rather die fighting communists the rest of my life than live in a protestant theocracy, and the only nobility, and royalty worth having is the kind that loves its nation and its people so trump is the only way to go.
#114848 to #114840 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
it's like you've never heard of our constitution
#114879 to #114848 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Yeah. The constitution written by a bunch of fucking enlightenment era deists. Look at where it has us now. Democracy is a mistake, because for centuries humans bred with the environment that many of them were peasants, and few of them were nobility, and changing from a monarchy to democracy does not change that. Peasants will think like peasants and the nobility will think like nobility, but the only difference is that now the peasants voices will be heard instead of the nobility.
#114906 to #114879 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
GIF
Wow. Get a grip.
#114910 to #114906 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
People cannot come to a consensus on what is good for them, and this is only natural. Therefore the only natural way of rule is dictatorship, or monarchy, and since monarchies are more stable dictatorship is out the window. Just look at what the common American views as good. They have no problem with a bunch of faggots dancing down the street half naked, or the people using government money to get their dicks cut off so they can "change their gender". The common man is a fool, but he is a fool we're compelled to love, and a fool we must protect. You need to get a grip, and stop buying into all of this "well as long as everyone is consenting" bullshit.
#114911 to #114910 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
GIF
You're a troll, right?

unforgivensoul

?
#114915 to #114911 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Of course. Genuine opinions and I'm a troll. Nobody has real opinions on the internet. We're all just here to meme on people until we can create the dankest of memes. Go fuck yourself.
#114919 to #114915 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I'm curious, what is your preferred system of governance, fascism or absolute monarchism?
#114920 to #114919 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Well ideally we would start off facist, and then the leader's children would be instructed on how to run a nation, and instilled with a love, and pride for their people, and we'd mitigate rule of specific areas to a new class of nobility. I don't feel a facist state could survive without a bloodline based way of determining leadership.
#114921 to #114920 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Here's a curious question. Isn't giving so much power to a handful of people... dangerous? Like what if one of them turns out to be an evil fuck like Ramsey Bolton, then what?
#114923 to #114921 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Hopefully there would be enough of them with a love for their people, and their nation to subdue them. You have to instill the reason for their right to rule into their minds, and remind them that what they rule is precious. No system of government is perfect, or will last forever, but hopefully this one will last a while, and hopefully this new government will come with a renewed Catholic church to provide another safeguard against immoral nobility.
#114924 to #114923 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
But some people are just born evil, what about them? Also, have you heard the saying absolute power corrupts? You give a person so much power, will that not corrupt them? Set them apart form the middle class and make them look at them as peasants, creating such a huge division of power will eventually always lead to mistreatment, no?

I don't know if you watch Game of Thrones, but that show has plenty of examples of the nobility treating regular people like human filth because they have moral superiority above them.

One more question, are you a white nationalist and would your system revolve around keeping location (x), culturally and ethnically pure?
#114925 to #114924 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Yes giving people power can lead to abuse, but what is the alternative after a facist state? Do we go back to democracy, and allow the people who put is in a position where we had to do away with democracy undo all the good that was done? Do we allow the dictator to die, and create a power vacuum? Monarchy is the only reasonable step after facism. Yes I am a white naitonalist. I support the idea that any race that conquers a land has the right to it's ownership. White men conquered America therefore it is for white people.
#114926 to #114925 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
>Yes giving people power can lead to abuse, but what is the alternative after a facist state? Do we go back to democracy, and allow the people who put is in a position where we had to do away with democracy undo all the good that was done? Do we allow the dictator to die, and create a power vacuum?

I'm not sure what your argument against democracy was, please clarify.
#114927 to #114926 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
It gives people who have no idea what's good for them the ability to make choices that determine what is good for them. It's also a very unnatural, and un-christian form of government.
#114928 to #114927 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Ok thanks.
#114913 to #114911 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Pls stop using these weird gifs btw, its really cringe.
#114916 to #114913 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
OK. Can I post cute stuff instead?
#114917 to #114916 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Anything is better, sure.
#114912 to #114911 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
No, this is the true idea and appeal behind monarchism or fascism. I would know, at one point I was like theplanetearth, and I can totally see the appeal behind his movement. I'm far too understanding of him to be some jerk-off and call it "edgy" because many like him genuinely believe that. However, I do not think it is a moral or logical system of governance.
#114914 to #114912 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Monarchism and fascism are insane ideologies. I honestly don't understand why people would choose to give up the freedoms they have to a tyranny.
#114918 to #114914 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
For order and civility, a sense of collectivist pride.
#114885 to #114879 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
>where it has us now
the courts won't even allow the ten commandments in front of the courthouse

there is no risk of theocracy
#114894 to #114885 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
What?
#114939 to #114894 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
the way our government works fundamentally does not allow for a theocracy to exist
it doesn't matter who you elect
#114941 to #114939 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
It's more of a hypothetical response. I want to elect a candidate that'll destroy this democracy, and usher in a new facist regime, or at least shift the overton window to the right to speed up that process.
#114942 to #114941 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
ho would you define fascism?
#114943 to #114942 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
The regime would remove all people who are not descended from Ancestors who colonized the United States, there would be one leader with people under him in the government to mediate tasks, priority on increasing the quality of life for working men, removal of usury, and non-catholic heresies, and false religions, and an intense focus on protecting the common worker from dangerous books, and other forms of media.

That's at least what American fascism should be.
#114944 to #114943 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
>The vast majority of americans, and I mean proper gun-touting americans, are not descended from the colonists. You may recall that before WW1 we did have virtually open borders. The concept of genetic purity does not apply and cannot apply to the US. It's not like Germany, or the UK where you have one primary ethnic group.
>usury, an undefined term. you know interest is the price of borrowing money, right.
>Catholicism is itself a heresy so I'm not sure what you mean here
>removal of false relgions.... you were just now complaining about theocracy.
>dangerous books.... god forbid someone gets a paper cut
#114945 to #114944 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Yes we did let a bunch of people in during the 19th century, but that's acceptable because of westward expansion. If your ancestor died to savages in a barren wilderness then you're good.

Yes interest on loans. It's not ambiguous.

Catholicism is the one true branch of the Christian faith so I hope you're joking.

I wasn't complaining about theocracy,I was complaining about protestant theocracy.

Yes, common people can't determine what is good for them, and giving them idiotic notions to spread like a cultural cancer is how communist revolutions happen. Also restricting access to the Bible will prevent Protestant "reformation" 2 electric boogaloo. That and burning Joel Olsteen at the stake for heresy.
#114946 to #114945 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Catholicism outright rejects that christ was sufficient to save people from their sins.
It is the single most fundamental concept of Christianity and catholics reject it.
#114947 to #114946 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Oh fuck of you sola fide fucking heretic. Sure you get grace through Christ's sacrifice, but what the fuck good is it if you do nothing with it? You know what the apostles did with their grace? They went out and preached the gospel until they were fucking murdered. Meanwhile you prottie shitstains cling to sola fide, and sit on your fucking asses not lifting a finger in Christ's name because "all you gotta do is believe" you are not saved by works alone, but by works done through faith. You fucking protties are going to go to the stake or convert when Holy Mother Church reawakens.
#114948 to #114947 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
quod
erat
demonstrandum
#114949 to #114948 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
What's this demonstrating? My outrage at a heresy started in the 15th century by some piece of shit monk that dares to go against the Church founded by Christ himself?
#114838 to #114834 - figatron
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Bernie Sanders is a democratic socialist not a social democrat
#114889 to #114838 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
You have it completely flipped sir. Completely.
#114890 to #114889 - figatron
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Bernie Sanders does not support a market economy in any form. He is just another socialist.
#114892 to #114890 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Bernie Sander's policies are not of a democratic socialist. I implore you to go read about the difference between the two terms.
#114893 to #114892 - figatron
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Which of his policies don't include more government control, higher taxes, and restrictions on voluntary trade?
#114896 to #114893 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Moving the goalpost is fancy an all, but my point was that the difference is enormous. You would beg for a social democracy (you live in one right now) over democratic socialism. The later is FULL government/public control. The first is a mixed system that employs the free-market as a base.
#114975 to #114896 - figatron
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
I know, that's the point. Sanders advocates the latter, not the former
#114981 to #114975 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
Sanders could call himself a cupcake for all I fucking care, his policies aren't democratically socialist.
#114983 to #114981 - figatron
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
So I ask again, which of his policies aren't consistent with socialism, democratic or otherwise?
#114984 to #114983 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/03/2016) [-]
....what. Did you just flip the burden of proof on me? Nigger, that's like saying "proof God doesn't exist". No you prove he has democratic socialist policies.

Again, look up the definitions of social democracy and democratic socialism before yapping about it. Bernie Sanders is a social democrat like you and most people, he's just closer to the left on that scale.
#114847 to #114838 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Bernie says he is a democratic socialist, but his policies are social democrat
He points to Scandinavian countries as example of his ideas, but those countries are neither democratic socialist, nor social democratic, but in fact social market economies
#114855 to #114847 - figatron
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Bernie has little in common with Scandinavia. Denmark and others are social democracies. Free market economies that unfortunately also devote many resources to a welfare state. Democratic Socialism requires state control of the means of production. Bernie hasn't endorsed lower corporate tax rates, lower levels of regulation and freer trade. Scandinavia has those things to some extent. Bernie Sanders is closer to Venezuela than Denmark
#114856 to #114855 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
>Free market economies that unfortunately also devote many resources to a welfare state
that defines social market economy

social democracy is different in that it heavily regulates the market and often restricts international trade, which is what Bernie wants

democratic socialists want full blown communism and total abolition of capitalism. They just don't want to go through a violent revolution like what the classic marxists wanted.
#114837 to #114834 - figatron
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
point me to the quote by Ted Cruz saying he wants the country run by religious leaders
#114836 to #114834 - anon
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Oops
#114835 to #114834 - whoozy
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#114831 - whoozy
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
How mad will you guys be if Hillary wins?
#114875 to #114831 - marinepenguin ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I'd be a little mad, we'll either change course now and at least post-pone our inevitable economic collapse, or we'll continue on our path and be crushed under the weight of our growing debt and social services.
#114870 to #114831 - canyou
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
#114868 to #114831 - anon
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
#114864 to #114831 - mixednuts
Reply +1
(05/02/2016) [-]
I've come to accept it as likely.
#114871 to #114864 - canyou
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Fuck I hate North Korea
#114845 to #114831 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
everything will be ok
#114843 to #114831 - youregaylol
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I'm never really angry about disastrous events in the world, just disappointed and sad.
#114841 to #114831 - whitechino
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I'll be happier if Trump wins.
#114832 to #114831 - Elk
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
**Elk used "*roll picture*"**
**Elk rolled image**
If Trump is the Republican nominee, 200% mad.
If Cruz is the Republican nominee, 100% mad
If Kasich is the Republican nominee, 100% happy.
#114849 to #114832 - pebar
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
nvm
#114846 to #114832 - pebar
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#114822 - anon
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
#114823 to #114822 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Oh yeah. I'm sure this ungrateful fuck would love to be born under communism. I only hear good stories from my family.
#114796 - anon
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Gotta love lynched Nationalists

#114810 to #114796 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
It really sucks that " Nationalism" has such a negative undertone now a days when in reality its the most common sense, logical and caring position.
#114854 to #114810 - pebar
Reply +1
(05/02/2016) [-]
I think you're confusing nationalism and patriotism
#114884 to #114854 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
No I'm not at all.
#114812 to #114810 - marinepenguin ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
It really sucks that "liberalism" has such a negative undertone now a days when in reality it's the most common sense, logical, and caring position.
#114827 to #114812 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
That's true. What's your point?
#114828 to #114827 - marinepenguin ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I just wanted to see what you said.

And are you referring to modern liberalism or classical liberalism?
#114829 to #114828 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
The idea of "liberalism" in general in its purest means, liberty.
#114811 to #114810 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
It's because retards tried turning it into supremacy when it's about preserving.
#114765 - pebar
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
Black Lives Matter Racism A Conservative Perspective Larry Elder Interview Rubin on rekt
#114839 to #114751 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Thank God. Hopefully we'll open back up the sanitariums. These people are a fucking danger to themselves, and others.
#114861 to #114839 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
In what way are they a danger to others?
#114878 to #114861 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
They make people think that this glorified case of body integrity identity disorder is normal and natural, and they encourage people to have their genitals mutilated. These people need help, not support for their psychosis.
#114899 to #114878 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I agree that they probably do need help but they aren't hurting anyone other than themselves. People are responsible for their own actions.
#114902 to #114899 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
So you're just going to let members of your own race who are sick hurt themselves, and give money to people who are willing to hurt members of your race for profit? It's a societal cancer, and it needs to be treated properly. Those who've enabled it need to be prosecuted, and those suffering because of it need help. The ones that can be rehabilitated will be put back into society, but some of them are too broken mentally to function properly. They'll have to be put in sanitariums for their own safety.
#114903 to #114902 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I tend to think it's a mental disorder but as far as I know science hasn't decided on that. It's not for me and it shouldn't be for the state to decide what people should or shouldn't do if they're not harming others (and they aren't).
#114795 to #114751 - Elk
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
**Elk used "*roll picture*"**
**Elk rolled image** It's a stupid law, but it's going to be okay. There aren't that many of these people anyway, and not many people are going to call them out. My cousin uses the men's bathroom all the time, and my cousin is still actually a woman. I don't know if they have those kinds of laws where my cousin is, but still.
#114792 to #114751 - canyou
Reply +1
(05/01/2016) [-]
Where are they supposed to poop? That's stupid.
#114761 to #114751 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
>bum fuck Alabaman Town of 20k

What shiny said.
#114752 to #114751 - Shiny
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
Good thing we have these empty but emotionally charged issues to argue about, or we might have to discuss scary relevant things.
#114753 to #114752 - PopcornViking ONLINE
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
reminder that multitasking exists
#114754 to #114753 - Shiny
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
So do wedge issues
#114747 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
What a fucking victim.

It's like we gunned down this poor little deer with our words. Such a persecuted soul.
#114763 to #114747 - anon
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
Also I love how you got so butthurt you had to go bitch to your little friends. You should get a private board so you can have a real echo chamber.
#114766 to #114763 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
You're conflating being butthurt to laughing at you. Dum-dum
#114768 to #114766 - anon
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Because I always block the people I'm laughing at.
#114788 to #114768 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
I followed the advice of the man below, honestly can't tell if you're baiting half the time. Bye.
#114794 to #114788 - anon
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
>Listening to thumbfortrump
Never go full retard
#114767 to #114766 - anon
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Yeah, you seem so amused.
#114785 to #114767 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
I am lol
#114762 to #114747 - anon
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
It's almost like I'm using hyberbole to mock you. And thumbfortrump shouldn't be talking since you quite literally blocked me for insulting you.
#114750 to #114747 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
block and hide all
#114745 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(04/30/2016) [-]
An idea never becomes good and refined by holding itself above criticism. To the contrary, it does so by besting all criticism offered. It is oftentimes the most abysmal of ideas that receive the ironclad protection of pathological altruism.
#114818 to #114745 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Nazi Book Burning

Nazism was and still is an abysmal idea.
#114819 to #114818 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
You know they're burning pornography right?
#114860 to #114819 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
They're not just burning pornography. Watch the video or do some independent research of your own.
#114880 to #114860 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
Yeah they're also burning communist books as well. No big loss.
#114897 to #114880 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
They burned all sorts of books.
#114904 to #114897 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
yes, and most of these books were pornography, communist books, and other degenerate works. You do know about the state of Berlin post world war 1, and in the 1930s? It was a regular shithole full of drugs, prostitution, pornography, and other degeneracy. You know people hate facists, but when it comes down to cleaning up a neighborhood they excel in it. Just look at Mussolini, and Hitler.
#114905 to #114904 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
I'm pro-free speech and not a fan of burning books regardless of content. The fact that the Nazis wanted to burn them is a point in the books favour as far as I'm concerned.
#114769 to #114745 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Which is why all totalitarian states target intellectuals and ideas that contradict theirs. Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, the medieval Catholic church, Saudi Arabia, Isis.
#114797 to #114769 - jewishcommunazi
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
To be fair, the intellectuals targeted by Stalin were usually either conspiring to kill him or being informants to the FBI / CIA. Snitches get stitches.
#114820 to #114797 - theplanetearth
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
So several million Ukrainians were working with the CIA. Gotcha.
#114932 to #114820 - jewishcommunazi
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
"Millions of ukrainians were involved in a conspiracy to overthrow the USSR government in favour of a different communist tendency."
Ok...
#114798 to #114797 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
That's what Starling believed, not necessarily the truth.
#114799 to #114798 - jewishcommunazi
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Bukharin pleaded guilty in his trial, and was one of the main conspirators who wanted to overthrow the government. In general, I believe criminal lustice took care of him and others like him, not Stalin personally.
Plenty of sources provide the information that Trotsky was an FBI informant.
#114800 to #114799 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
So every person executed by Stalin deserved it?
#114801 to #114800 - jewishcommunazi
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
I don't think you should take a conclusion like that so quickly, man. I very often defend Stalin when debating him, but I'd never say something like that myself.
#114802 to #114801 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Would you agree that plenty of people were killed to suppress dissent?
#114803 to #114802 - jewishcommunazi
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Some of those associated with groups that were life threatening to the government at the time were (bloc or rights and nazis). I believe most were incarcerated though. Out of the incarcerated some were peaceful. A lot of people would be released in a matter of months.
#114891 to #114803 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(05/02/2016) [-]
>Some of those associated with groups that were life threatening to the government at the time were (bloc or rights and nazis). I believe most were incarcerated though. Out of the incarcerated some were peaceful. A lot of people would be released in a matter of months.

There are so many things wrong with what you said.
A) Why are you defending Stalin, you're doing the equivalent to Holocaust denial.
B) "Some of those associated with groups that were life threatening to the government at the time"
The over-whelming majority of people locked up were not at all threatening to Stalin or his grip on power. Nor were the Nazis in the USSR anywhere close to a big deal.

C) "Out of the incarcerated some were peaceful." Peaceful? That's such a vague idea, the over-whelming majority of people locked up could have been defined as non-peaceful, but that's because making jokes about Stalin was seen as a danger to the strength of the state. I would know, my Great-grandfather's brother spent 17 fucking years in the gulag camps for uttering a joke about Stalin. 17 freaking years buddy. For uttering a joke about Stalin. It's not a matter of if they were seen as "peaceful" by the state, but a matter of did they deserve a punishment, and should that have been gruesome, intense hard labor for years on end.

D) "A lot of people would be released in a matter of months." Don't believe that, you're gonna have to show me some proof because I haven't heard a single fucking case like that. Regardless the majority spent more than mere "months", Stalin was a deplorable human being, on the same level as Hitler.
#114804 to #114803 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Can you back any of this up?
#114805 to #114804 - jewishcommunazi
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Right now, this is all I have. Notice the increase of deaths in the early 40's due to the capture of Nazi POW's and such.
#114806 to #114805 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Why did the number of prisoners jump for the years after the war?
#114807 to #114806 - jewishcommunazi
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
After the war, the allies started targeting and capturing german soldiers to use for reparations through forced labour. Especially the UK and the USSR, since they were the ones that really needed reparations.
#114808 to #114807 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
That's not very good.
#114809 to #114808 - jewishcommunazi
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
True.
#114771 to #114769 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
There's a difference between real intellectuals and student political ideologues.
#114773 to #114771 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Well yeah duh. Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, the medieval Catholic church, Saudi Arabia, and Isis tended to target at least the latter if it both.
#114774 to #114773 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
National Socialism gladly targets the latter.
#114775 to #114774 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Historically, no.
#114776 to #114775 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Historically, yes.
#114777 to #114776 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
The one time national socialism was tried Hitler wasn't a proponent of free speech.
#114778 to #114777 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
He's probably harsher on free speech than I would be, but I haven't been a proponent of completely free speech for a while. And besides, what does this have to do with what we were talking about?
#114779 to #114778 - theism
Reply +2
(05/01/2016) [-]
>National socialism
>The one time it's been tried
>Totalitarians enforcing real life echo chambers by shutting down descent

It's textbook what you're talking about, almost the definition.
#114780 to #114779 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Nice buzzwords, friend.
#114781 to #114780 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
The Nazis quite literally burned books they didn't like.
#114783 to #114782 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
You don't have a source for that do you?
#114784 to #114783 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
I had one at some point. From what I remember of it, there were very burnings anyways, and completely community organized.
#114786 to #114784 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
I do not believe you.
#114787 to #114786 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Cool.
#114789 to #114787 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
Try having basis for your beliefs if you want them taking seriously.
#114790 to #114789 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
It's harder than you realize to find the few real sources on a subject controlled by Social Marxists. If they don't want you to know about something, you probably won't.
#114791 to #114790 - theism
Reply 0
(05/01/2016) [-]
There's two possibilities, your beliefs are deluded or they really are out to get you. Nine times out of ten it's not the second.