5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

I've never heard of Eliza Bleu, so Pool's effort has done more to make me aware of her, ergo make her more famous, than anything she'd done up until now.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes, but it's inevitable that easy catchall terms will be used. Woke. SJW/Social Justice. PC/Politically Correct. It's been going on for decades with very little difference between the terms.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

german

Well, considering how you skirted the point, sounds like chances are you are not in fact Caucasian then.

As for my question being rude, I guess that was kind of the point? I certainly wasn't trying to stroke your ego considering I view idpol as some of the dumbest shit out there, regardless of whether it's demonising or idolising white people. Might as well be talking about astrology for how serious I'm gonna take it.

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +9 / -5

Considering you're probably not caucasian, it's certainly retarded at the very least.

This is one of the funniest parts about idpol crap from non-SJWs. You're all just as ignorant and stupid as those SJWs that lump everything together.

According to you, why is it caucasians specifically that are the descendants from angels? Why not the Normans? Or the Saxons? Or the Anglo-Saxons? Maybe the Slavs? Why caucasians specifically?

Because like SJWs, you all think it's interchangeable.

We are only allowed to say that all human beings descended from chimps and came out of Africa.

Just as retarded as the drivel you've spouted.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +3 / -0

Palming the blame off to just neo-cons largely ignores the foundational issues with the party, and the two party system at large. Are there individual exceptions? Maybe, but I've found them to be irrelevant at best and shams at worst.

It's not something that can be fixed by "reforming" the party. You root out corruption, not foundational issues.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +3 / -1

It should have been obvious decades ago. It was co-opted a looooong time ago, but most people bought (and still do buy) into the two party "conflict" and truly believe there are no other options.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +3 / -0

It's because too many people believe that the enemy of their enemy is their friend, and that has never been the case.

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

The funny part about this is the idea that there's not force to try and get men to comply. There absolutely is. The difference is that, compared to women, most men are capable of not caring and doing their own shit anyway.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +2 / -0

Which is funny, because even if there is "systemic racism", bitching about it won't actually change anything. The only way to beat such supposed systems is to actually beat it. Bitching about it, asking others to "dismantle" it won't do shit. Bettering yourself? That's how you beat it. It's not about "The Other Side™". It's about the person. The individual.

But that goes against collectivism, so Leftists (and let's be honest and not mince words, statists in general) hate such ideas because it's counterproductive to creating a class dependent upon them.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +2 / -0

You're objectively a bad person for thinking unarmed men on the ground deserve to die because some cop wanted his power trip. Fuck cops, and fuck you.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly my point. You cannot have generational wealth when you don't have stable families to pass wealth onto.

And there are theories out there that the government helped influence black culture to be this way (and I think there is some validity to that), but it doesn't change the fact that the solution isn't to simply give reparations or some shit like that, it's to put in the effort to counteract those internal cultural values. It starts with black dads actually being dads, and continues on with eliminating gang culture, drug dependency and removing/replacing the idolatry of being thugs (how much rap music is just idolising being a scummy person?). It starts from the inside, not from the outside.

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

The idea that "muh generational wealth" is god damn laughable when you compare different non-white demographics to each other. There's a reason black people are the poster child for poverty compared to latinos. And to an extent there are social factors, but it's almost all within minority cultures themselves. This bitch whines about "muh generational wealth" without even considering other cultures and their lack of fathers. That's why Asian's are rarely included in these discussions, because they disprove so much of this bullshit.

It's not racism, it's internal. And it's a damn tragedy, because it's cunts like this that help perpetuate such environments rather than rightfully exposing it for the harm it is.

She's worse than crab bucket mentality. She's outside the bucket and pushing any trying to escape back down. She's a part of the reason for these disparities.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +2 / -0

And he deserved to die over that? Really? You're going to suggest he deserved to die because some agro cop felt threatened by a man on his knees?

The cops won't fuck you. They will shoot your dog and beat their wife though.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

under which anyone who supports building roads "WANTS YOU SHOT".

Roads existed before the state came around to promise them (and then deliver some of the worst quality possible).

People care about their own lives, and their own lives are better with cops.

Nope.

And how much crime would there be with no cops?

Depends how you define crime, statist. But probably less considering speeding wouldn't be a crime anymore.

No cops is way worse though.

You admit that the system you shill for is for show and then immediately fall back on state programming. And you don't think you're licking the boot? You're outright shilling for cops under the admission that they're an illusion of safety.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sucking off cops that execute a man on his knees doesn't make you a good person, it makes you a bootlicking faggot.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do you think it'd be better without the cops though.

Yes.

"But what about-"

No, it's still not justified, it still won't be better. It's a lie sold to you that you need the police. The reality is that the police are incredibly inept. Violent and non-petty crime still goes on every single day, but their priorities are shit like parking violations and speeding tickets. They exist to create revenue and an illusion of safety.

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +4 / -0

There is no other way to prevent civil discourse other than threat of force.

AKA The Ends Justify The Means.

8
AccountWasFree 8 points ago +8 / -0

Less than 1% of interactions daily with United States Police Officers end in any form of violence.

Compliancy doesn't change the fact that all laws the police enforce are done through the implicit threat of force.

11
AccountWasFree 11 points ago +12 / -1

All cops uphold unjust laws through threat of violence. That's literally their role. Compliancy doesn't change that reality.

22
AccountWasFree 22 points ago +22 / -0

But he's white, so he'll be forgotten in a week.

Anyone who ever doubts this simple fact need only look at the Daniel Shaver case.

The fact that there's an international movement because some scumbag druggie died of an overdose and not that the police executed a man on his knees says all you need to know about the state of the world.

15
AccountWasFree 15 points ago +15 / -0

You want to know the real injustice here? Unless those cops face jail time, not one of them will face actual punishment. Fines get sent to their boss, so that's just taxpayer money. Leave is a slap on the wrist at best, and most times includes still being paid. Being fired is also laughable considering they just opened fire on an unarmed man.

It should be clear that every single cop involved should be hanged. They're thugs that tried to kill a man. Qualified immunity is an abhorrent policy and anybody who should require such a policy should not be a police officer, no exceptions.

Fuck these pigs. And make no mistake, the cops will come after you if you're on the wrong side of the political line. There is no thin blue line, there is just them and their orders. Any hold outs are being weeded out and there are efforts to federalise the police force around America. The state is not your friend. It will never be your friend.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

Of course it is. And it's a decent jumping off point for the ideology, but to suggest it's representative is beyond retarded.

Sadly, that propaganda is also a big part of what stops many libertarians from taking that leap and fully shedding statist beliefs.

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +4 / -0

Okay. You do that. Then you'll be given two options: deal with court and have to pay legal fees (or defend yourself and probably lose because you don't know how to draw shit out long enough for this to be repealed), or you'll resist that as well and enter into a situation where you'll face prison for evading court dates.

And while I respect standing your ground, it should be clear that you probably won't win. Best case scenario is that you're capable of becoming a martyr akin to Ruby Ridge, except you probably won't because that was heavily due to entrapment.

15
AccountWasFree 15 points ago +16 / -1

And what do you think will happen if they simply ban it anyway?

Nobody is going to revolt. Comfort is still too high for that. They'll simply go around censoring people and charging them, clog up the courts for a few years, have the average people suffer not for the penalty but for the legal fees, and then get the compromise half-way point anyway because that's what always happens.

The Constitution is a speed hump, not a barrier. It stops very little, contrary to popular belief.

view more: Next ›