Individual communists [...] want government power to take your stuff.
And how do you think they're going to actually do that? Show up at my door and ask nicely? No, they're going to show up with guns and when I don't comply they're going to shoot me and my family. And they know this.
And let's be perfectly clear; this principle doesn't just apply to communists. Anyone that says "I want the government to enforce X" wants the government to shoot you if you don't comply with the enforcement of X.
My memory was a bit off. The bit about submitting to authority is in Romans 13, but both passages are good.
Read Romans 12 13 and get back to me.
E: daggumit, my memory was off. Both are good passages though.
I don't think defining capitalism as essentially the "utility theory of value" vs. communism's "labor theory of value" is sufficient to distinguish it from pre-enlightenment economic systems, but given that "capitalism" itself (the word, not the idea) is a communist invention, perhaps we're falling victim to the trap of letting the enemy set the terms of the discussion.
Capitalism is based on the well-founded notion that individuals are better at determining how to distribute resources than a centralized entity. The false ideal of "limitless growth" arises out of the legal mandate for public companies to maximize profits for their shareholders (i.e. central government interference.)
I don't play Magic, in large part because I don't like their economic model (the woke shit just made it easier not to get into it once I had money.)
"You're a faggot unless you're willing pay extra for something with artificial scarcity in order to play a game."
Sounds like something a faggot would say.
Who's villainizing the brown dude? They're villainizing the executives who keep casting non-white people in the roles of white characters (or in this case, fictionalized versions of a historical figure.)
"Indians" would be presumably the overwhelming majority of the population of countries on the Indian subcontinent, plus those whose ancestors came from there. "Whites" would be presumably be those descended primarily from Northern, Central, and probably Eastern Europe. Even with the numbers you give, there's not enough for multiple billions, but certainly hundreds of millions.
OK, so there's two possibilities here:
-
TikTok is presenting factual information and people are reasonably forming "pro-hamas" or "anti-semitic" opinions.
-
TikTok is presenting false/misleading information and people are too stupid to disregard it (and thus ought not have input in things like elections.)
Neither one of these helps her case.
(OK, there's a third possibility: that horseshit is just made up, but that doesn't help her very much either.)
How come the author looks exactly like the subject of the article? Surely this has nothing to do with her take on the issue.
The 21-year-old has amassed over a million likes on TikTok
The word choice here is (unintentionally) brilliant and got a small chuckle out of me.
She looked great and beautiful
No, she looks like the curly-haired kid on Stranger Things if he took estrogen for three years and gained 100+ pounds.
“They [men] can’t fathom that people are commenting nice things; the women in my comments actually find me beautiful,”
No they don't. They get to virtue signal by calling some fat broad "pretty", and as a bonus decrease competition for a mate.
“It’s a cognitive bias in which if one male cannot conceive of the person in front of them as physically attractive and a potential sexual interest to them, then how can anyone else?”
So all the women calling you pretty are sexually attracted to you?
Normally I don't comment on this shit because it's so common, but there were actually a few uniquely funny bits in this one to me.
/u/AlfredicEnglishRules gives a detailed summary above, but Scrooge had a hard life and what tipped him over the edge was his fiancée leaving him because he'd become a workaholic. I think most modern versions of the tale leave out a good chunk of the tales from the Ghost of Christmas Past for time or age-appropriateness, but the full tale is way better than the abridged version you see today.
No idea, but I don't think anything more than S2 would have been saved, because I'm pretty sure they were working toward the same general idea (at least until the show got cancelled.)
Westworld. Someone/several people on r*ddit figured out we weren't watching one chronological narrative, but two intertwined ones, and I believe figured out the plot of S2 before it aired, so they changed the S2 plot and the show just went downhill from there (even if I enjoyed it up to S3.)
In a just society all 9 would have avoided jail time, because assuming they even made it before a court, as soon as they exhausted their appeals, they'd be executed.
I wonder how many of these "based" takes from AI are due to hitting a very particular set of keywords that essentially force it to regurgitate the one "right wing" source they didn't manage to scrub from the training data.
Intolerant liberals
We call those leftists.
Chris Pavlovski, Dave Rubin, and Assaf Lev. Unless my understanding of Rubin/Lev getting an ownership interest in Rumble when they acquired Locals is incorrect, those were the three primary owners of Rumble at the time they went public.
Considering Rumble was owned by Jews before they went public, and they still hold the controlling/plurality share as I understand it, and the one time they censored a video (that I'm aware of) was for "antisemitism", it was a really dumb thing to suggest.
I had the same boycott and I slipped once when I bought Sim City 4, because I forgot it was owned by EA.
They don't look like she's the mother, but they did use the same names (but not his son's name) from "All Good Things".
Forbes is the one positing that dichotomy, not (necessarily) the critic they cite, yet they call the critic a "Myopic embarrassment to journalism." I'd say "Pot, meet kettle", but in this case I think the kettle is a nice stainless steel and the pot is rusted straight through.
Tongues too. Wouldn't want them to be mealy-mouthed from their actual mouths either.
Shock-Styled games (which I guess I'll define as "First Person Narrative-Driven Exploratory RPGs", where the main character wields a weapon in one hand and "magic" with the other.) There's so few out there, and every series I'm aware of that does this died on a sub-par entry.
"Casual" RTS games. I played a ton of RA2 and a little bit of several late-90's and early 00's RTS games, and while I love the base building and exploration elements, I tend to dislike engaging in combat that I didn't initiate, so non-coop MP and AI skirmishes aren't much fun for me a lot of the time.
First person puzzle games with enough (but not too much) of a narrative to make the game a cohesive unit instead of just a series of puzzles. Preferably with a well defined set of mechanics. MYST is great, but Portal is way easier to pick up and navigate, in large part due to the well defined mechanics used throughout the series.
And to echo a couple other people here: "BL3 but not woke", and "Civ IV with hexes" (don't think any game will ever overtake my actual playtime in Civ IV+Expansions.)
He's egotistical, so he has a hard time accepting his own faults and that other people could be smarter than him, but he appears to have the type of autism that once he's found a set of facts he's willing to follow, he'll accept and openly state their logical conclusion, even if that conclusion is verboten.