1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

Most people are aware that the media is corrupt, lying and propagandistic. The problem is that they believe they're immune to propaganda and that the media they consume is done so critically and therefore it becomes irrelevant.

The other problem is convincing people in which way the media is propagandistic, because a lot of die hard leftists truly believe the media is right-wing and pro-trump. And no just some media, they think outlets like CNN and MSNBC are pro-trump.

It's not that "it won't work", it's that it's irrelevant if you do. Because again, most people agree that the media is fucked. The problem is they think they don't fall for the lies when they continually and routinely do.

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

Honestly, it's the same thing. The point is to plan to have some kind of value or worth down the track, and the people that Chillin is referring to is the people that spend all their paycheck and leave little to nothing for savings. All because instant gratification is more addictive.

7
AccountWasFree 7 points ago +7 / -0

I had a guy at work once actually tell others that they shouldn't be saving or trying to get more money. This is a man who is at retirement age who's working not because he needs to (because he saved and is well off) but to keep himself busy. And while I don't have a problem with him still working, I do have an issue with someone who is well off giving others the worst advice possible.

This is also a man that routinely spouts "you pay peanuts, you get monkeys", because that's what happens at this business. But yeah, you shouldn't save, just spend it all on instant gratification.

And they wonder why they're middle age being a mindless labourer working for bare fucking minimum when they're given this advice by someone who appears to have their own shit together. And I admit, I truly don't know if this man is a blithering idiot that got lucky in his own life with a decent amount of charisma, or if he's actually malicious.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +3 / -0

the reform party

I always laugh at these kinds of things. Because I truly do believe it has to be a really hopeful naivety to believe the system can be reformed. At every step it's been actively against the public, and there are people that think this knowing hostility can and more importantly should be saved?

And I know it seems like this is just doomposting and to a certain level it is. But it's also not. It's about coming to terms that the state is something that cannot be reformed and moving forward from that. Anyone that still clings to that at this point is either wilfully naive (and I don't entirely blame them) or subject to a sunk cost mentality and doesn't want to comprehend the idea of giving up on something that has ultimately already failed its purpose.

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +5 / -0

Because they're ignorant about what is and isn't the left/right dichotomy. And the small percentage that have even a slight idea (but still don't understand it) buy into the idea of The Great Swap, an idea that supposedly only applies to America, but they truly believe that all historical great evils of the left are now evils of the right for some arbitrary reason.

They don't care to look at the horrors of people like Stalin or Pol Pot. They're not interested in the reality that they'd agree with most of NatSoc talking points if it wasn't presented as NatSoc. They're not interested in the reality that Fascism is a threat to the left because it was explicitly an authoritarian reaction (and not one born from the left/right dichotomy) to the failures of current leftist doctrine, namely socialism.

They're not interested in the reality that the vast majority authoritarianism, paternalistic policy and general statism has roots in leftist doctrine. Because one day, they hope that they can be one of the people who can control someone else. Because deep down, that's what kind of person they ultimately are.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

To be fair, at least the Kyle situation was politically charged and mainly by the mass media, so that explains some of the division due to partisan lines. Can't really say the same for Gary.

8
AccountWasFree 8 points ago +8 / -0

I understand why this needs to be illegal

Personally, I don't. I have no issues with vigilantism like this with the simple clause being that you being convinced someone is guilty doesn't absolve you of criminality if someone you target is innocent.

Basically, this shouldn't be illegal so long as the target is objectively guilty. I have zero issues with this.

14
AccountWasFree 14 points ago +14 / -0

It's kind of insane to me that there are people who are actually against what Gary did. It's truly hard to imagine the kind of person (that isn't themselves a pedophile), who is so utterly brain rotted to think that what Gary did wasn't swift and deserved justice.

9
AccountWasFree 9 points ago +9 / -0

So you're suggesting it's a chicken/egg kinda situation? That while it could be single women are more prone to paternalistic policy making due to some sort of innate maternal drive, you're suggesting such people are less desirable as a life long partner?

It's not a terrible theory, though there is other elements at play, like long documented generational shifts in voting patterns (eg the young of that era tend to be more inclined to vote left while that same group will end up more right wing as time goes on. Pretty clear cut example of that is hippies being baby boomers). However, there's also the counter point to that about constant political shift, in that today's Republicans are yesterdays Democrats, so have those demographics actually shifted, or has the Overton Window just moved to make them appear more right wing?

The overall point I'm trying to make is that for most of these things that can be presented as chicken vs egg dichotomies, it's less a dichotomy and a little of both, and in some cases can even feed into one another.

6
AccountWasFree 6 points ago +6 / -0

Just like when women say they don't want a guy who uses steroids, what they mean is they don't want a guy who looks like a walking beef jerky and garden hose golem. But they love moderate steroid use and a little bit of eating disorder thrown in, you know to be 'naturally' fit like their favorite celebrities.

This is such an easy concept to understand I don't see how even a woman could not get it.

Well you see, it's actually pretty simple, and it boils down to being an egotistical cunt that not only lacks the ability but actively refuses to have any sort of actual empathy. And when I say empathy, I don't mean sympathy where you feel bad for others circumstances, I mean actually trying to understand a given point of view that you don't agree with.

These people lack this ability. They cannot comprehend outside their very narrow, very egotistical mindset. That's why they cannot see their own hypocrisy in this manner.

Oh, and they also ignore that the vast majority of people who "enforce beauty standards" are other women, not men. So it's once again "Women do X, men at fault".

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +3 / -0

Japan has insanely strict laws, and in some cases it could be easy to suggest it's very much over the top. However. Japan also does NOT have an issue with prison overcrowding.

As per usual, if it's not strict, overzealous laws that cause prison overcrowding, what is it? And the vast majority here already know that answer, but people not paying attention need to be asked in that way because they instinctively reject uncomfortable truths. They need to stumble upon the answer themselves.

6
AccountWasFree 6 points ago +6 / -0

This is just objectively false. Are the instances where interpretation is needed? Sure, but in the vast majority of translation, and even more in the specific examples that receive 99.9% of criticism, interpretation isn't something that comes in to play. It's the fact that these worthless turds explicitly, knowingly, and often gleefully alter the translation to push their agenda.

This is a repeat of Gamergate. One group levies legitimate criticism while the defending group focuses on a topic virtually nobody is talking about. It's cliche Motte and Bailey tactics.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +3 / -0

It's really amusing because NOTHING about this says they don't care about anything. Merely this one topic.

But as per usual, it's all or nothing for these terminally brainrotted losers.

10
AccountWasFree 10 points ago +10 / -0

Congratulations, you've discovered the reality of most internet companies. YouTube also makes no money. Twitch is a disaster. Elon showed that Twitter is trash and even before then it was known they solely survived off government grants.

The reality is that consolidated internet forums/sites are not viable. Centralisation is overwhelmingly a massive mistake. Where centralisation is possible in the physical world (though still not a good idea in my opinion), centralisation on the internet cannot be viably monetised to accommodate users that (rightfully) refuse to pay for these services.

But these companies somehow stay afloat? How? Most of the time, through investors with vested interests, or government grants. Why do these companies get grants? Who knows, but they get them. Almost like it's a scam, and they're able to scam taxpayer money.

Reddit is failing to pull off that scam, and so they're hoping that going public will bring in the money instead. But it won't. They'll get an immediate inflow, and then it'll continue to fail again. Like it always does.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +3 / -0

Try reading old pulpy romance stories. You'd be surprised how many involve some element of force. Not rape per se, but consent is a very distant consideration.

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +4 / -0

I love how this betrays how utterly stupid the woman is for seeking validation, while trying to blame the man for "failing" some stupid, arbitrary hurdle that she says is a "simple fixable problem", but everyone can see it's her own irrationality that put this "problem" there in the first place.

If you're dating someone and they need validation like that? Leave. Seriously, dodge the bullet. Because it's not worth it. Anyone who would take a good morning text as some weird ritual of adoration does not ultimately love you.

But then again, the idea of love is totally lost on most people and struggle to understand the idea of being comfortable with another person for constantly seeking validation and approval from the person who you are supposed to love.

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +4 / -0

At least my way is consensual, I mean straight to rape fantasies?

You'd be surprised how common rape fantasies are among women. Obvious "not all X", but it's much higher than most think it is.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +1 / -0

You're not wrong, but I just think that that era for Biden was some of his most charismatic too, which does take a level of intelligence to quickly read the room and behave accordingly. Now he can barely keep a thought straight.

8
AccountWasFree 8 points ago +8 / -0

Of course Theoden was once a good man

As you say, Biden was never this, but I truly cannot comprehend how people can look at footage of Biden from the 90s and early 00s, and not think this man is a husk that has lost a LOT of mental acquity. Hell, here's a random video from 1992, and he wasn't young there, that's still him at 50. This is not the same man we see today.

Biden was never a good man, but he was at least capable of intelligence.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm not bothered to go through it all, but last time I saw this, I think the majority of these things were either very much part of a team, outright lies, or patent squatting on an idea already created but altered and then never actually realised.

But this was also years ago that I saw this, so I could be misremembering. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +2 / -0

And how much did those parents both sacrifice for those kids, and how many luxuries were there? Do you think that they had all kinds of cable and on-demand services all the time? Do you think they had AC running practically 24/7? Hell, do you think they moved into established neighbourhoods? Definitely not! They sacrificed, scrimped, and saved, and because you were a child, you saw virtually none of it. You remember the good times. The comforts your parents afforded you.

I absolutely detest these kinds of posts, because they're so utterly blind to just how far we've come. These losers want the "securities" of the past (absolutely hilarious statement), but REFUSE to live to the same standards of decades gone by. That means less electricity usage, less sq/m in a house, less services, no subscription bullshit, and just a complete lack of most modern luxuries that have become common place. The harsh reality is that the vast majority of people absolutely spend far more than they need to. Even something as relatively mundane as their phone they spend too much on.

YOU need to lower your standards and look at the negatives (compared to now) of that time before demanding the positives.

13
AccountWasFree 13 points ago +13 / -0

It is, but I think we have to remember that there are people out there who don't know these things or how they work. Having an article like this is actually pretty damn helpful to show and share with people who are out of the loop on the finer details of this stuff. It's important that people know this, and just presuming that they already know it because a lot of us know it isn't beneficial in the long term.

8
AccountWasFree 8 points ago +9 / -1

Sucking off an ever expanding state is not based, and never will be, especially when those expanding powers will very quickly be used against you.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's what I mean by "writers that rely upon subverting expectations".

There's nothing wrong with twists. Twists are generally good. The problem arises when a writer relies solely on twists as their bread and butter as a marker of quality.

Twists are just one tool in a writers repertoire. Ignoring the other tools available can only lead to substandard stories.

view more: Next ›