Lying about the little shitstains? A while. Europe protects accused criminals, especially brown ones, better than they protect anyone else. You can literally be a rape victim, and they'll throw your name all over the place while your rapists get called "16 yr old Florian M"
The faggots will have a "minor" back out in the street in a day.
It's part of anonymity for the accused. In their system I guess identifying them by name and initial is considered sufficient anonymity.
In the US generally their names are not spoken. Juveniles I mean. We don't have as much trouble with people claiming to be younger than they are, although there is some.
Typically it tends to be a educational and informative. The problem is that when I just say stuff is removed, some people genuinely don't know why. Others might lie about it, but in some cases, I make mistakes of interpretation. This allows everybody to get an idea of what the problem is in a transparent manner. That way, if I fuck up, they let me know. If they fuck up, they know what was expected. If it's just intentional, then well, it's just intentional.
One of the first things I learned was that approving comments without explanation was actually the worst, because nobody knew where the line wasn't. So sometimes it caused people to think things were against the rules when they weren't, only going by what they had seen in previous removals.
Well, I'm gonna remove some stuff if no one tells me. Like if no one reports genuine death threats, or like when a troll on Reddit mass posted mutilated tranny genitals. If I get there early, then I take that as win.
Damn, I click on here and see the top reply getting mod deleted for sounding like every commie dictator crossed with some Rwandan genocide for good measure.
I'd settle for building stronger wall fortifications along Europeans border and stationery naval cannons along the Mediterranean to stop crossings as that's technically an invasion so is just repelling a hostile landing..
No, incentivizing riotous behavior by running apologetics for it, and funding it with a welfare state is not a solution.
Nor is mass execution of French-Algiers because they are part Algerian, and some crazy yankee has decided that killing all Algerians is a categorical imperative.
No, you should not declare gun free zones, because the French have a right to defend themselves from terrorism.
Have you noticed any patterns among those immigrants who seemingly cannot be integrated?
Yes, they are normally the most degenerate scum of the Earth that the government refuses to filter out, because it's hoping you appeal to the government for protection against the monsters they look to let in. Anachro-Tyranny both helps subdue the general population, and also make the population appeal to government violence. It's a win-win if the state plays it's cards right.
Have you noticed any patterns among those who push for this immigration despite knowing full well that integration is impossible?
They are elites who understand that there is incredible value in crushing everyone into ultra-dense cities, segregated by every available topical line, and balkanizing the population into rotating blocks of political power that can be kept in line with a party-boss system.
That's where you EthnoNats keep getting lost on. The elites are globalists. They don't give a shit about anyone. They only have a loyalty to themselves and their ideology. They'd kill their own family if it could make them money and guarantee their power.
They don't want to totally replace anyone, and they damn sure don't want homogeneity of any kind. They want a balkanized society that needs the government to "keep the peace" between groups. And to keep each group locked into a party-boss system that claims to represent their collective interest. If they could (like with the Romans), they'd divide people by sport team. Anything to keep the balkanized from unifying.
At least you’ve stayed announcing the civic nationalism in your threads.
I've always been a Civic Nationalist, I've never said otherwise. I'm an American. It's what we are based on: a Liberal Philosophical Revolutionary Republic. I'm also a Minarchist Militarist.
You can stop fucking lying right now. I've always stated that everyone has the right to self defense. Including from you.
White people should defend themselves when attacked. I have zero problems with lynchers or looters getting shot. Particularly racialists ones that want to commit an ethnic cleansing. I don't even have a moral objection to shooting people over grievous property damage.
Which is why I said this:
the French have a right to defend themselves from terrorism.
You being ignorant doesn't change reality. Stop lying.
You respect property rights but do not object to legal immigration, yes? And what if the only people “legally” coming to your country belong to demographics who will inevitably erode and challenge property rights?
From the other post you replied to: You have to integrate people into your values system in a Civic National Liberal Republic.
If they aren't going to integrate, they can piss off. If they don't share our values, they don't belong here. Those property rights are based on the refusal to use coercion to take what you want. If they can't accept that, they've announced their intent to engage in aggression.
A good legal immigration system would have that as a minimum.
As for good mass legal migration, no such thing exists. All mass migration ends with colonization, because mass migrants can't integrate. Any immigrant must be so rare in number that they are always pioneers into the host country. They can't isolate themselves into their own communities. They must assimilate into the host culture, integrate into the community, and build families within that community with community members.
As such, a mass migration system is always bad because it's impossible to integrate with too large of a number. For a country as large of the US (300 million people or so). That might be as small as 10,000 a year, legal and illegal combined.
They will only piss off if made to piss off by force of arms.
That's called the police.
What we ought to be discussing at this point is mass repatriation
Which is to be preformed by the police. However, encouraging self-deportation is far more reasonable. For example, even though Trump was engaged in some of the largest numbers of deportations, the actual largest scale emigration out of the US takes place during recessions.
Stop giving money to foreigners, or businesses that hire them, and suddenly illegal immigration will collapse.
The silly truth is, most illegals aren't trying to engage in colonization. They just don't give a shit about anyone, are looking for money, and are joining colonies. Get rid of the shit that keeps them here, and they'll leave as easily as they came.
The only reason for their invasions and their marauding is because the French state lets them. The correct solution is to: have a fucking border and control immigration.
There isn't much else that even needs to be done. Just behave like a real country.
That would be pretty fucking stupid since they want the migrants to leave. Even in war, if you win, you still have to remove the remaining troops. If you don't have money to take them back, you'll end up having them becoming a large portion of your population. Like the Americans did with the Germans when they were abandoned here after the Revolutionary War.
Besides, France is already paying billions of dollars to bring them.
buddy in this hypothetical france would wanna get rid of em... only leaves one solution.
but yes, you are correct. """france""", that is, the curious elite that steers it, who only dubiously holds the adjective of 'french', is paying billions to bring em.
First of all, it's your hypothetical, not mine, and not the real one.
The French state is obviously the ones brining every tom-dick-and-harry into France. The French nation isn't doing that, and can't. I can't make more Frenchies vote for Eric Zemmour to change the state.
Except that's a lie peddled by Globalists, which is why when the Rawandan Plan in the UK was announced illegal immigration dropped to zero for a few days. This is because deterrence works just fine, and you should stop literally paying for your military ships to transport them to your country.
It costs much more to drag every single warm body you can from across the world to drive down wages in your country, than it does to repel borders.
I was speaking from a US point of view, where deportees end up returning and committing major crimes, but are never executed. Rather, the taxpayer has to pay for their prison food and lodgings.
Walls work as long as they're built, staffed and operated in a way that results in dead traffickers, and the fines sent to their home country for the cleanup.
You don't need the fines. If someone commits a major crime and isn't executed, that's part of the problem with our justice system.
This is kinda the problem, almost none of this would be an issue if there weren't people actively trying to shove every possible warm body into the country as it is. I don't have a problem waging a war against people smugglers, slave traders, and human traffickers, that's all good. Most of the worthless illegals are just low level criminals and losers looking for an easy score. They don't even need much incentive to leave. A wall fixes that.
Our true problem is the judiciary, legislature, elites, businesses, and bureaucracy that wants a country of 1,000 people per square mile in every square mile of the country to keep a vast underclass of low wage workers available for groundskeeping, fruit picking, and toilet brushing. There's less threat from the avocado pickers, than the idiots demanding the avocados be "green sourced" by not using machines.
I politely disagree on the matter of fining their home country. The idea is to make emigration a risky affair for their home country to the point it becomes impossible to leave, so they overthrow their own shitholes and perhaps start making it a better place than have them look elsewhere for gibsmigration.
Secondly, while it's true what you said about the judiciary, legislature, elites, business and bureaucracy, those 'underclass of low wage workers' have their own agenda in mind - that they turn any of their enclaves into a carbon copy of what they fled. As far as I'm concerned, they're a threat alongside the idiots demanding 'green sourced' avocados because they take taxpayer money that shouldn't be handed to them in the first place.
Shit, you take away welfare and all of the sudden they're reminiscing how much nicer and cheaper it was back home. No, I mean, PTB are not doing anything to get immigrants to leave this country. Quite the opposite.
Boat people aren't the same as a Viking hoard. If they were, it would actually be legal to shoot them. Instead, they are just chancers looking to steal, and be lazy for free money. There are also criminals, but you can only use lethal force when someone is engaged in lethal force activities.
Put it like this: militaries around the world engage in "shoving matches" where no one gets shot. Even with something as serious as borders with armed, uniformed, adversaries violating them, normally people don't get shot because there wasn't enough of a hostile act to actually engage in lethal conduct. Examples include:
.> Instead, they are just chancers looking to steal
You...don't know very much about vikings do you?
but you can only use lethal force when someone is engaged in lethal force activities.
This is just outright false. Also said boat people keep ending up raping and murdering once they get here, so even with your rules of engagement lethal force is perfectly justified. They have a pattern of lethal behavior so we should have a lethal deterrent to keep them out. Simple.
There is no good reason not to be extremely hostile to the point of violence when these people show up looking to invade.
They engaged in mass rape, mass murder, and mass looting on landing. The worst we've seen *on landing) is a dude breaking into someone's house. And you can use lethal force for that, but it's not the same as a Viking beach assault.
There is no good reason not to be extremely hostile to the point of violence when these people show up looking to invade.
There is the law, and there is a less lethal option.
If you tell me, "If I saw a bunch of boat people charging across my property, I'd spray them with mace", that's 100% legit.
Or, hear me out here. You forcibly expel the arab scum and you never have to worry about it again.
“You get called racist once or you get called racist forever”
Well, until the elites that run your country try a new scam to let them in.
this. they keep saying it's racist, but if france was actually racist, this wouldn't be happening.
besides, no matter what you do, they're going to call you racist. https://i.imgflip.com/7iobbc.jpg
if someone calls you racist, ignore them. they're just a bully trying to guilt you into submission.
Probably safer than trying to form a surveillance state all because of a bunch of angry immigrants who've overstayed their welcome.
How long have they been doing this?
Lying about the little shitstains? A while. Europe protects accused criminals, especially brown ones, better than they protect anyone else. You can literally be a rape victim, and they'll throw your name all over the place while your rapists get called "16 yr old Florian M"
The faggots will have a "minor" back out in the street in a day.
Yeah but I don't recall them censoring the name "Mohammed" until recently. I could be wrong though.
It's part of anonymity for the accused. In their system I guess identifying them by name and initial is considered sufficient anonymity.
In the US generally their names are not spoken. Juveniles I mean. We don't have as much trouble with people claiming to be younger than they are, although there is some.
Nearly 10 comments removed.
BUT AT LEAST IT'S NOT REDDIT. right?
Jannies gonna jannie.
Always have, always will. Just because some are moderately less retarded and faggy doesn't mean they still aren't retarded and faggy.
Could have fooled me.
You don't have to fedpost.
Some days it sure feels like I do.
I mean, I get that.
That's my secret,
CapDom. I'm always Fedposting.pls stahp
Nigger.
Luckily, that's not a fedpost
You don't have to chew dried foreskin for breakfast either yet here we are.
How colorful.
lol at all the people not noticing how Dom's "censorship" intentionally informs you of what the original comment says.
Typically it tends to be a educational and informative. The problem is that when I just say stuff is removed, some people genuinely don't know why. Others might lie about it, but in some cases, I make mistakes of interpretation. This allows everybody to get an idea of what the problem is in a transparent manner. That way, if I fuck up, they let me know. If they fuck up, they know what was expected. If it's just intentional, then well, it's just intentional.
One of the first things I learned was that approving comments without explanation was actually the worst, because nobody knew where the line wasn't. So sometimes it caused people to think things were against the rules when they weren't, only going by what they had seen in previous removals.
It makes for hands down the funniest moderation I've ever seen, though, so thanks for that.
👍
he shouldn't be removing them unless he presents evidence of .win telling him to.
Well, I'm gonna remove some stuff if no one tells me. Like if no one reports genuine death threats, or like when a troll on Reddit mass posted mutilated tranny genitals. If I get there early, then I take that as win.
that's not what anyone's talking about and you know it
Pop-lefties, would sooner put billions to the pyre before admit a right-winger made a singular good point, no matter how minor.
Damn, I click on here and see the top reply getting mod deleted for sounding like every commie dictator crossed with some Rwandan genocide for good measure.
I'd settle for building stronger wall fortifications along Europeans border and stationery naval cannons along the Mediterranean to stop crossings as that's technically an invasion so is just repelling a hostile landing..
What about his father? Was he not married to the mother and living in the home?
Hm, no.
Blood and Soil simple ‘as
or you could sack up and tell the army to affix bayonets and go weapons free.
I thought France already surrendered to foreign invader demands?
Not complete and humiliating enough for the Marxists at the BBC propaganda corp
Jesus fucking Christ you psychos.
No, incentivizing riotous behavior by running apologetics for it, and funding it with a welfare state is not a solution.
Nor is mass execution of French-Algiers because they are part Algerian, and some crazy yankee has decided that killing all Algerians is a categorical imperative.
No, you should not declare gun free zones, because the French have a right to defend themselves from terrorism.
Gizortnik is very much against the notion of white people defending themselves when attacked.
Doesn't he also think having a French passport makes you French and race doesn't matter?
No. From a different comment:
"That basically takes us to today. This is one of the reasons you can't find sympathetic Algerians to the French plight. This is why there is a malicious streak in their commentary. The civilizational divide between French Catholicism and African Islamism so extreme, and has resulted in so much bloodshed and hatred, that these people really can't live with each other."
You have to integrate people into your values system in a Civic National Liberal Republic. If you don't, they have can't stay here.
Have you noticed any patterns among those immigrants who seemingly cannot be integrated?
Have you noticed any patterns among those who push for this immigration despite knowing full well that integration is impossible?
At least you’ve stayed announcing the civic nationalism in your threads.
Yes, they are normally the most degenerate scum of the Earth that the government refuses to filter out, because it's hoping you appeal to the government for protection against the monsters they look to let in. Anachro-Tyranny both helps subdue the general population, and also make the population appeal to government violence. It's a win-win if the state plays it's cards right.
They are elites who understand that there is incredible value in crushing everyone into ultra-dense cities, segregated by every available topical line, and balkanizing the population into rotating blocks of political power that can be kept in line with a party-boss system.
That's where you EthnoNats keep getting lost on. The elites are globalists. They don't give a shit about anyone. They only have a loyalty to themselves and their ideology. They'd kill their own family if it could make them money and guarantee their power.
They don't want to totally replace anyone, and they damn sure don't want homogeneity of any kind. They want a balkanized society that needs the government to "keep the peace" between groups. And to keep each group locked into a party-boss system that claims to represent their collective interest. If they could (like with the Romans), they'd divide people by sport team. Anything to keep the balkanized from unifying.
I've always been a Civic Nationalist, I've never said otherwise. I'm an American. It's what we are based on: a Liberal Philosophical Revolutionary Republic. I'm also a Minarchist Militarist.
...for white people of European descent.
You can stop fucking lying right now. I've always stated that everyone has the right to self defense. Including from you.
White people should defend themselves when attacked. I have zero problems with lynchers or looters getting shot. Particularly racialists ones that want to commit an ethnic cleansing. I don't even have a moral objection to shooting people over grievous property damage.
Which is why I said this:
You being ignorant doesn't change reality. Stop lying.
You respect property rights but do not object to legal immigration, yes? And what if the only people “legally” coming to your country belong to demographics who will inevitably erode and challenge property rights?
The dirt isn’t magic.
From the other post you replied to: You have to integrate people into your values system in a Civic National Liberal Republic.
If they aren't going to integrate, they can piss off. If they don't share our values, they don't belong here. Those property rights are based on the refusal to use coercion to take what you want. If they can't accept that, they've announced their intent to engage in aggression.
A good legal immigration system would have that as a minimum.
As for good mass legal migration, no such thing exists. All mass migration ends with colonization, because mass migrants can't integrate. Any immigrant must be so rare in number that they are always pioneers into the host country. They can't isolate themselves into their own communities. They must assimilate into the host culture, integrate into the community, and build families within that community with community members.
As such, a mass migration system is always bad because it's impossible to integrate with too large of a number. For a country as large of the US (300 million people or so). That might be as small as 10,000 a year, legal and illegal combined.
There are millions of them here and millions more arrive every year. They will only piss off if made to piss off by force of arms.
Solutions aren't pretty and won't fit into your naive idealism.
What we ought to be discussing at this point is mass repatriation.
That's called the police.
Which is to be preformed by the police. However, encouraging self-deportation is far more reasonable. For example, even though Trump was engaged in some of the largest numbers of deportations, the actual largest scale emigration out of the US takes place during recessions.
Stop giving money to foreigners, or businesses that hire them, and suddenly illegal immigration will collapse.
The silly truth is, most illegals aren't trying to engage in colonization. They just don't give a shit about anyone, are looking for money, and are joining colonies. Get rid of the shit that keeps them here, and they'll leave as easily as they came.
Easy solution: deport illegals.
The only reason for their invasions and their marauding is because the French state lets them. The correct solution is to: have a fucking border and control immigration.
There isn't much else that even needs to be done. Just behave like a real country.
what if france doesn't feel like paying for the processing and transportation of its invaders?
That would be pretty fucking stupid since they want the migrants to leave. Even in war, if you win, you still have to remove the remaining troops. If you don't have money to take them back, you'll end up having them becoming a large portion of your population. Like the Americans did with the Germans when they were abandoned here after the Revolutionary War.
Besides, France is already paying billions of dollars to bring them.
buddy in this hypothetical france would wanna get rid of em... only leaves one solution.
but yes, you are correct. """france""", that is, the curious elite that steers it, who only dubiously holds the adjective of 'french', is paying billions to bring em.
First of all, it's your hypothetical, not mine, and not the real one.
The French state is obviously the ones brining every tom-dick-and-harry into France. The French nation isn't doing that, and can't. I can't make more Frenchies vote for Eric Zemmour to change the state.
Apparently it's very costly and nothing apparently stops them from returning to commit even more crimes.
Except that's a lie peddled by Globalists, which is why when the Rawandan Plan in the UK was announced illegal immigration dropped to zero for a few days. This is because deterrence works just fine, and you should stop literally paying for your military ships to transport them to your country.
It costs much more to drag every single warm body you can from across the world to drive down wages in your country, than it does to repel borders.
Walls work.
I was speaking from a US point of view, where deportees end up returning and committing major crimes, but are never executed. Rather, the taxpayer has to pay for their prison food and lodgings.
Walls work as long as they're built, staffed and operated in a way that results in dead traffickers, and the fines sent to their home country for the cleanup.
You don't need the fines. If someone commits a major crime and isn't executed, that's part of the problem with our justice system.
This is kinda the problem, almost none of this would be an issue if there weren't people actively trying to shove every possible warm body into the country as it is. I don't have a problem waging a war against people smugglers, slave traders, and human traffickers, that's all good. Most of the worthless illegals are just low level criminals and losers looking for an easy score. They don't even need much incentive to leave. A wall fixes that.
Our true problem is the judiciary, legislature, elites, businesses, and bureaucracy that wants a country of 1,000 people per square mile in every square mile of the country to keep a vast underclass of low wage workers available for groundskeeping, fruit picking, and toilet brushing. There's less threat from the avocado pickers, than the idiots demanding the avocados be "green sourced" by not using machines.
I politely disagree on the matter of fining their home country. The idea is to make emigration a risky affair for their home country to the point it becomes impossible to leave, so they overthrow their own shitholes and perhaps start making it a better place than have them look elsewhere for gibsmigration.
Secondly, while it's true what you said about the judiciary, legislature, elites, business and bureaucracy, those 'underclass of low wage workers' have their own agenda in mind - that they turn any of their enclaves into a carbon copy of what they fled. As far as I'm concerned, they're a threat alongside the idiots demanding 'green sourced' avocados because they take taxpayer money that shouldn't be handed to them in the first place.
You would be amazed at how quickly they would flee back to their homeland as soon as they saw any serious pushback.
Same for the border. One day of live rounds and the shit would stop forever.
They will just flee from france to germany or sweden. Europe just has too many cucked states that will accept them.
For now.
Shit, you take away welfare and all of the sudden they're reminiscing how much nicer and cheaper it was back home. No, I mean, PTB are not doing anything to get immigrants to leave this country. Quite the opposite.
Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Do not advocate for mass murder so you can build a wall of skulls out of the dead.
Why shouldn't I advocate for the mass murder of an invading enemy? It is the moral and practical thing to do.
Boat people aren't the same as a Viking hoard. If they were, it would actually be legal to shoot them. Instead, they are just chancers looking to steal, and be lazy for free money. There are also criminals, but you can only use lethal force when someone is engaged in lethal force activities.
Put it like this: militaries around the world engage in "shoving matches" where no one gets shot. Even with something as serious as borders with armed, uniformed, adversaries violating them, normally people don't get shot because there wasn't enough of a hostile act to actually engage in lethal conduct. Examples include:
.> Boat people aren't the same as a Viking hoard.
.> Instead, they are just chancers looking to steal
You...don't know very much about vikings do you?
There is no good reason not to be extremely hostile to the point of violence when these people show up looking to invade.
They engaged in mass rape, mass murder, and mass looting on landing. The worst we've seen *on landing) is a dude breaking into someone's house. And you can use lethal force for that, but it's not the same as a Viking beach assault.
There is the law, and there is a less lethal option.
If you tell me, "If I saw a bunch of boat people charging across my property, I'd spray them with mace", that's 100% legit.
Why is not getting kicked off Reddit so important to you?
Well, there's not many moderators there at the moment, but that doesn't have anything to do with this place.
Well, obviously.
Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Do not advocate for mass castration as a weapon of terror. Then on top of that, do not advocate for more riots so that you can do the castration.
Stop it. Get some help.
Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Do not advocate the carpet bombing of civilians, particularly in response to rioting by 3rd parties.
They're probably not habitable if they're anything like the ghettos in the US.
Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Do not advocate for deploying chemical weapons of mass destruction against said civilians.
Comment Removed: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Do not advocate for a Holocaust.
Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Comment Removed for: Rule 2- violent Speech
Do not advocate for mass sterilization, and the mass sterilization of children as a weapon of terror.
Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Do not advocate the mass killing of entire demographics including children
Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Do not engage in fedposting about how there are plenty of people in America who want to help commit mass murder