9
AntonioOfVenice 9 points ago +10 / -1

He shows that he was the perfect guy to play George W. Bush, because he has the same IQ.

31
AntonioOfVenice 31 points ago +31 / -0

In May 2023, a 22-year-old man pleaded guilty to killing a 19-year-old man, Horace Lorenzo Anderson, inside CHOP the night of June 20, 2020. He was sentenced to 14 years in prison, followed by three years in community custody.

When you kill someone, you get half of what someone got who wasn't inside their precious House of Lobbyists on January 6.

In June 2021, Isaiah Thomas Willoughby, 36, pleaded guilty in federal court to setting a fire outside the abandoned Seattle Police East Precinct during CHOP, also known as the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone or CHAZ. He was sentenced to two years in prison.

An arsonists got less than the Q Shaman, who used no violence and upbraided people for taking cakes from the fridge.

Ultimately, four shootings, including the killings of Anderson and 16-year-old Antonio Mays Jr., were reported in and around the CHOP zone. No one has been charged in Mays’ death.

Black lives don't matter after all.

-2
AntonioOfVenice -2 points ago +1 / -3

Muslims co-opt Jesus the same way Christians co-opt all the Jewish prophets. They still at least feign respect for him, which is why Iran protested against France's desecration of the Last Supper.

I think in this case, it's a statement against Christianity and Christian culture.

3
AntonioOfVenice 3 points ago +3 / -0

Just Muslim Arabs. If Christian Arabs chimped out over all the persecution they face, there'd be hell to pay.

2
AntonioOfVenice 2 points ago +2 / -0

My understanding of things is that almost all of the early non-native populations in white European countries (like the UK, France, Spain, the Netherlands, etc) came from their colonies.

It's true for the UK and France. Less so for those other countries. And Germany (effectively) didn't have any colonies. Historical ties and language probably helped a lot more than 'guilt' in letting them in (besides, guilt is for the people and not for the governments that make policy), as there is almost none of that in my experience.

Which is to say, I totally see the “colonialism narrative” existing as part of the root cause of the current migration crisis in Europe, parallel to those other narratives discussed earlier, and likewise built on “national shame”.

It would have been possible, but it is not the case. Colonialism is not a salient issue, and many Europeans remain proud of their colonial history. WW2 plays a much bigger role, even though we were the victims!

Makes sense and seems like an improvement over the endless adhoc adhoms which tend to be the default - that is, as long as it never gets to the point of an attempted gaslight (“this is what sane people think!”). Not to say you do that, but it’s an easy trap to fall into.

It is, and it actually is something I do. But mostly online. It's so much easier to talk to people in real life, because you know them, they know you, you like each other. People in real life don't call me an FSB agent or a Jew or a black (or a white for that matter).

Also, when you can't get through to people no matter how good your arguments, then it's easy to think the other side is just stupid or think or insane.

Someone will have “insane” (to normies) opinion X, Y, and Z, but if you mention conspiracy W to them you’re either a retard or a shill.

People who believe in one 'conspiracy' are more likely to believe in others as well, but I think something that so called 'conspiracy theorists' tend to do poorly is judge the likelihood or feasibility of 'conspiracies'. It's as if their default mode of explanation is a conspiracy, as it is in the Middle East.

2
AntonioOfVenice 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't deny that. It prevented a greater threat from emerging at the cost of a lesser threat - to US hegemony. That is a win for US hegemony.

4
AntonioOfVenice 4 points ago +5 / -1

That is incredible.

Also, have you noticed that it's 'racism' when you bring up Hispanics when the talk is of illegals, or vice versa, but they do it at will?

Many of those 'Iowans with better food' don't like illegals...

BTW, Mexican food is Gawd-awful. Who are these people? The only Hispanics whose food I find acceptable are Brazilians and Argentinians.

2
AntonioOfVenice 2 points ago +2 / -0

Best example today is israel, ironically (?) enough

There's not much pride left in any Western country, except for things that ain't so.

Yeah I think there are a lot of parallels all around the world on this one. I just read someone comparing the slavery Narrative in the US to the colonialism narrative in Europe to the indian mistreatment narrative in Canada and so on and so forth - but now I can’t find it. Unfortunate, because it was spot on with the parallels.

I can't say I see much of the 'colonialism' narrative in Europe. Maybe the UK, and even there it's not even close to the German, American and Canadian stories.

The fact that you can claim that tree roots are mass graves and get away with it in Canada speaks volumes.

Ahh, that makes sense. Yeah I guess more broadly this issue is “hyperbolizing / straw manning” the opposition. I see it so often where all people who call themselves “left leaning” are smeared with the worst possible framing of the word. “Everyone’s a deranged commie, they’re all satanists, they want to kill babies” etc etc

Speaking of that, I've found it highly effective to criticize woke policies to people who are on the left, by simply not referring to those policies as 'left-wing'. People get defensive when they think you attack or criticize their tribe. But if you talk with them like "sensible people are against X", they can be with you.

But apart from persuasion, people here seem to think that when I point out that "a lot of leftists aren't X", I'm "defending" them. As if you don't need to have an accurate view of your opposition, and that hyperbole in any way serves your cause. They can afford to demonize us because they are in power, and they don't need to persuade us, just the people in their influence that we are Bad.

99% of people think they are the good guy. The vast, vast majority of those people are reasoning their way to that position, though it must obviously be the case that the vast majority of those are using faulty reasoning in some way(s). Therefore I try to treat the faulty reasoning as the enemy, not the dunce who’s been duped, because I know that often enough I’ve been that dunce.

And same for me, of course. Hell, I bought into a lot of the very crap that I now find abhorrent, and I think that is why I have a somewhat better understanding of what leads people to believe such things than people who have always seen feminism/BLM for what it is.

5
AntonioOfVenice 5 points ago +5 / -0

I don't know if that's true, and it's irrelevant anyway: if the heart attack is caused by someone intentionally hitting you with his car, it hardly exculpates the guy driving the car. But if he was driving for his life, and that does seem to be true, it at the very least negates their claims that "he drove into people to kill".

1
AntonioOfVenice 1 point ago +2 / -1

Stop spreading that bullshit. Germany didn't even have enough settlers to properly resettle her eastern territories lost after WW1, which were partially ethnically cleansed by Poland, let alone the vast territories of the USSR.

Who talked about 'resettling', let alone during a war? Fact is, the Germans wanted to starve the inhabitants of the USSR and brutalized them - as well as Soviet POWs.

Operation Barbarossa was a preemptive strike against the bolshevik threat not an invasion to gain territory.

OK, you're retarded.

What the hell are you even talking about?

What seems to be confusing you?

24
AntonioOfVenice 24 points ago +24 / -0

Wasn't that Daily Stormer fellow taken off the entire internet, because he mocked that sainted figure who got killed at Charlottesville after the driver may or may not have gotten panicked by people threatening him?

You only need one functioning eye to see what is going on.

2
AntonioOfVenice 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is worse - but also less hilarious - than the 'sure my daughter's dead, but at least we have tacos' guy.

Can you link me to that? I'm very interested.

how can you blame people condemning your child's killer, while not even condemning the killer?! And even running defense for the killer.

The only real crime is opposition to the regime.

19
AntonioOfVenice 19 points ago +19 / -0

These people are obviously whacked.

My favorite examples of brainwashing is when it's normal people. Like Cannon Hinnant's mother, whose first inclination was to assure us that her 5-year-old son hadn't said anything 'racist' to the guy who murdered him.

If a grown white man murders a 5-year-old black boy, the white man is a racist. If a grown black man murders a 5-year-old white boy, the white boy is a racist.

1
AntonioOfVenice 1 point ago +3 / -2

They weren't nitpicking. They were straight up lying in some cases.

For example, the guy claimed that Germans did not plan for the large numbers of POWs that they would capture in the USSR, and that these ended up dying. Now, this isn't right, because the Germans wanted the population of the USSR dead anyway (see General Plan Ost).

They claimed that he was talking about the Holocaust, which is false. They also claimed that it is wrong that the Germans often started murdering people because of overpopulation and because they couldn't feed them, which is acknowledged by mainstream historians.

They don't care about that guy. They want to discredit Tucker, who is a threat to the ruling class.

1
AntonioOfVenice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because the pragmatism is to the benefit of the politicians and to the detriment of the people, not just in Germany and Russia, but America as well. I'm not sure what ordinary Americans are getting out of the fact that their country is the hegemon and bullies the rest of us.

1
AntonioOfVenice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Most Europeans do not know that Hitler declared war on the US, and think that they 'liberated' us out of goodwill or something.

2
AntonioOfVenice 2 points ago +2 / -0

Japan would have been nuked even if it army had been squeaky clean, which obviously it was not.

The nukes were not 'revenge'. They were an exercise of power. An attestation to the fact that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, just like the Japanese did in China.

3
AntonioOfVenice 3 points ago +3 / -0

'Revenge for Pearl Harbor' was just what 'fighting for democracy' is to the current war. It's the, no disrespect, motivation for the stupid people. In both cases, maintaining American hegemony is the motivation for the ruling class, which would have existed with or without Pearl Harbor.

2
AntonioOfVenice 2 points ago +2 / -0

Imagine for a moment that the US 'kicked the Russians when they were down'. Meaning, aid the Germans to extend their dominion to the Urals.

Germany controlled Europe from France, through Norway, Switzerland, Greece, and was allied with Italy, Spain, Hungary and Romania. Basically, the entire post World War II 'NATO alliance' sans the UK.

This is formidable power. Now add to that the industrial capacity and agricultural riches that were poorly exploited by communism and collectivizaton. Add to that the power of Japan and how it was (at that moment flailing at) conquering China and planning to take European colonies in Asia.

Just put the hypothetical Nazi victory in Russia vs. the postwar USSR and its satellites on a map. I'm not sure how you think that would have been less of a threat to US hegemony. Add to that: the actually rich and industrialized parts of Europe were controlled by Germany, and they did not have a self-defeating economic system (or at least less of one) to implode.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›