Big Bad Politics!

@TeamBlueplant  
I learn something every day.

@TwilightShitlord  
Jews.

@Officer Hotpants  

@TwilightShitlord  
A perfectly normal reaction to have.

@TeamBlueplant  
Stuff doesn’t fall out if you have normal pockets with horizontal opening instead of shallow diagonal nonsense, and stealthy robbers can just cut through the pants to get stuff.  
@UrbanMysticDee  
Also known as 1 fed, 4 undercover policemen, 8 8-graders.  
@Azure Fang  
*California antifafires  
It’s not a wildfire if it’s intentionally started with pyrotechnics and incendiary ammo.

@Barhandar  
yes but im sensitive to any kind of light rustle or movement, i can feel it when a godam minuscule flea is walking around my arms or legs  
and yea, diagonal pockets are extremely dumb

@TwilightShitlord  

Me too
 

 

 

@RD8K  
Asians are notorious for being too white.

@RD8K  

@RD8K  
@UrbanMysticDee  
Aaaaah, I love it when they chew themselves out over their own dumb backwards logic and totalitarian mindset.

@UrbanMysticDee  
the fuck  
how does that make any kind of sense?

@TeamBlueplant  
Quite simple…
 
If you didn’t vote for Biden, you ain’t black. And white people are Satan. so, it’s just another pretext to exterminate political dissidents.

So, I don’t know if any of you have heard of Jacobin Magazine. They are very left wing, very progressive, unironically use the term “reactionary”.
 
Have you seen the cover of their latest issue? After the Joe Biden Inauguration?  
No? Let me show you:
 

 
TONE
 
DOWN
 
THE STATE WORSHIP
 
YOU CRYPTO-FASCISTS

Jason Lewis, former Rush Limbaugh guest host, who calls himself Minnesota’s Mr. Right. I call him Mr. The Economy, because he must say the complete phrase “the economy” fifty thousand times an hour (13.8888 times per second). He seems to think The Economy (big E) is some deity that must be sacrificed to or something. “And the Economy is bla, and if we just do this the Economy will bestow the blessings of the Economy on people who belong to the Economy. And people who don’t understand the Economy think the Economy is something other than what the Economy actually is.”
 
Literally everything he says is 100% pure, unadulterated bullshit. Even when he’s right he’s wrong.
 
He believes self sacrifice is evil. So is living for others.
 
And he thinks that everyone who ever lived lived under tyranny until Ronald Reagan, who he believes is God incarnate even though he’s the one who flooded California with illegals making it into a permanent one-party Democrat-controlled state and invented Al Qaeda because he wanted to defeat the evil Reds even though they were drawing down the war in Afghanistan before the US sent in their magic missiles that shot down only a handful of by that point obsolete aircraft, invented conservativism and for the first time ever people had freedom. He said kings built castles by stealing wealth from peasants. Those castles didn’t protect the peasants at all, nor were they built buy the peasants (who were paid for their work). The castles certainly did not create towns, did not create new markets for trade in new areas, or protect existing trade routes. Nope. Never happened.
 
“These [castles] are not shrines to liberty, but a stark reminder of an oppressive past that we are quickly forgetting.”
 
That’s news to me! The kings of old had far less power than the presidents of today. They ran extremely limited governments that upheld the rule of law, defended people from foreign aggression, and supported stable social order. And that’s pretty much it. Those peasants he’s claiming lived under tyranny could go where they wanted. If they didn’t like a government, there were no barriers to leaving for somewhere else. Knights wouldn’t ride out to stop them from packing up their bags and moving to some other hamlet. Taxation existed where those peasants were given the means of production by the kings and were expected to give something back in return. The king didn’t say “Here’s some land I’m giving you for free because I’m the nicest person in the world, do with it what ye please and that’s that.” The king said “Here’s some land. You can have it because I’m busy maintaining the army, but you need to give some of your produce back to me so my men have something to eat so they can keep protecting you. If you don’t like the arrangement, which is in our mutual interest, you’re free to go some place else that’s not so well defended.”
 
“These elaborate fortresses were built to honor the riches of royalty.”
 
Horseshit. They were built to protect people, trade routes, and natural resources from really bad people who would ride in to an area, kill people, and loot everything. Many towns were surrounded by walls. They were inside the castles.
 
“But such wealth was not derived from the cooperation of capitalism, but from the conquest of collectivism.”
 
Horseshit. Hundreds of people worked together to build the castle. Hundreds of people worked together to maintain the castle economy for their mutual benefit. No one was forced to work on the castle. It was really good work that paid a lot and provided new job opportunities in new areas. People flocked to new castle construction because it meant jobs. A nobody in an established town could become a somebody by providing a vital service in the construction of a new castle.
 
Here’s an excellent documentary film about castle construction and how the existence of castles created and protected the local economy.

@UrbanMysticDee  
>The kings of old had far less power than the presidents of today.  
Very interesting information.

@TwilightShitlord  
Don’t forget #FellowWhitePeople.
 
@RD8K  
Technically “proletariat” means “people whose job is their sole source of money”, i.e. no alternative legal-ish income, no savings, etc. The poor and the impoverished. Anyone who doesn’t work and subsists on, say, handouts, or has multiple sources of income (like, you know, 99% of BLM) aren’t fucking proletariat.
 
@UrbanMysticDee  

Ok, so a president of today can publicly order you to be thrown in prison for insulting him? Last time I checked, only kings did that.

@Barhandar  

 
aren’t you russian?  
i didn’t know putin was a king
 
neat

@Perplexia  
I mean Thailand. Damage money (which have a picture of the king) and welcome to 3 years in prison for insulting the ruler.  
Also, Putin is as much of a “president” as Stalin was “a secretary”, they’re both dictators with the difference being that one is oligarchic while the other is ideological.

@Barhandar
 
Rodrigo Duterte, the duly elected President of the Philippines, is outright killing whoever he wants in the name of “fighting crime” and said he would pardon members of his death squads and then pardon himself a the end of his term. Pretty much all the Islamic countries (many of them presidential or semi-presidential republics) all have blasphemy laws that sometimes carry capital punishment. Similar blasphemy laws exist in good progressive European countries, and Canada, where isn’t it illegal to use the wrong pronouns when referring to someone?
 
Here’s more stuff, just from Wikipedia:
 
Germany  
Until 2017, it was illegal to publicly insult foreign heads of state.
 
Iceland  
Insulting a country, foreign head of state, its representatives or flag can be punished by up to two years of imprisonment according to the 95th article of the penal code. For a very serious breach the term can be extended to six years.
 
Poland  
In Poland, it is illegal to insult foreign heads of state publicly.
 
Switzerland  
In Switzerland, it is illegal to insult foreign heads of state publicly.
 
Any person who publicly insults a foreign state in the person of its head of state, the members of its government, its diplomatic representatives, its official delegates to a diplomatic conference taking place in Switzerland, or one of its official representatives to an international organisation or department thereof based or sitting in Switzerland is liable to a custodial sentence not exceeding three years or to a monetary penalty.
 
Turkey  
It’s illegal to insult Turkey, the Turkish nation, the Turkish government institutions, and national heroes of Turkey. It’s even illegal to insult, criticize or do anything negative against the President of Turkey.
 
Similarly, there are fines or prison sentences (or both) for defacing or destroying money in Australia, Singapore, New Zealand, Turkey, and the United States.
 
And Stalin was General Secretary of the Communist Party. His power wasn’t from holding exalted offices, he abused a loophole in what people thought was a dead end position to determine who can hold office and made sure to stack key government positions with people who were loyal to him. The same way the Roman Emperor was really Censor for life, meaning he determines who can hold government positions, so the emperor stacked the senate with people who would do his bidding. Their power was derived from loophole abuse.

@UrbanMysticDee  
And it’s different from literally any other despotical position in entirety of history how? You can list plenty of “monarchs” who did the same with the only difference being that they called themselves “king” instead of “president”.

@Barhandar  
I didn’t say kings couldn’t punish people for insulting them, you said it didn’t happen in presidential governments today.  

@UrbanMysticDee  
Point taken. Still means that “kings had far less power than presidents” is false - the relative amount of power was the same, the absolute just rises because of rising ability to communicate orders.

@Barhandar  
Communities were largely self-governing. Monarchies were like the Mafia, as long as you paid your taxes and didn’t get in the king’s way he didn’t care what else you did. Monarchies weren’t so keen on getting into debt because the monarch had to pay it off and eventually pass rulership on to his son, where as bureaucrats today can rack up as much debt as they want knowing that in the end we’re all dead so whatever happens in the future is someone else’s problem. Most monarchies had a long view of the future and cared about preserving the nation because it was an extension of preserving the family and this was all ordained by God, where as modern governments are run by nameless, faceless bureaucrats who are primarily concerned with extracting as much wealth from the people as possible and they don’t care what happens to the nation because endless hordes of migrants means more debt slaves, and they’re all atheists so nothing is sacred so accumulating power and controlling as much of the people’s lives as possible justifies any means necessary.
 
The difference is ideological, not technological. Monarchies are, by their very nature, more conservative than so-called representative governments.

@Barhandar  
@UrbanMysticDee  
I think I agree with Barhander here, the more accurate way of putting it is that Democrat legitimacy has been undermined by authoritarians to such a degree that our representatives are essentially Monarchs now. There’s a reason Governor Cuomo is being mockingly referred to as “King Cuomo”, not to mention the term “Democrat Fiefdoms” as a synonym for the Blue Cities/Voting Plantations.

@FeatherTrap  
Monarchs, minus all the reasons to not fuck it all up for personal gain.
 
Which is also the general problem of the democracy - it gives power to whoever is better at sweet-talking or manipulating votes, not someone who is actually competent at governance or the specialization they’re given power over (see: all the blatantly unhealthy “health” ministers), and then lets them attack the mechanisms that prevent previously-successful democracies from turning into dictatorships. You can see that in USA with voting for handouts, and bringing in more people that’ll vote for handouts.
 
Additionally democracy only works if the different “parties”, so to speak, are all equally represented - because ruling party will naturally try and consolidate power, and try to prevent itself from being ousted, AND having overwhelming majority of people follow one party results in immediate consolidation. You can see that with USA’s retarded attempt to install democracy in Iraq - it instantly turned into a Shia islam theocracy because shi’its are the majority. And given historical precedent in Iran (shi’its to sunnis: “convert to shia or die”), it’s permanent.