FreeBSD/OpenBSD
One is pozzed, the other isn't, but I can't tell you which is which.
To be fair, the United States by virtue of having a massive standing army and an entire terrorist organization puppeteered by it (namely NATO) and pushing smaller countries around is essentially interfering in the lives of their citizens. Retaliatory violence is always justified and thus, it would be justified for Iran/Russia/Ukraine/Serbia/any country we're bullying to try and get a president elected who will not absolutely destroy them.
Not that I like this scenario, but you have to consider all perspectives.
Cryptocurrency is large-scale technology. Any libertarian that's read kaczynski well tell you it's a pipe dream and if you really want to evade taxes, just buy a machine gun and a couple grenades and prepare for a standoff.
I wonder why many of the smartest people of this generation and the previous have doubted the six gorillion :thonk:
Hell, even based Jew Murray Rothbard doubted the six gorillion, and he sure got a stain on his reputation.
I understand that holocaust numbers are hugely exaggerated, but the number killed, even if minuscule compared to what we're "taught", would be significantly lower with less strict gun laws, and probably close to a handful if people actually had the right to private property.
Duncan Lemp died to "laws". Never forget.
The entire tobacco industry revolves around denying people exclusive control over their own bodies so that they will keep buying their highly addictive drug no matter how much damage it's doing to their health, property, and finances.
This claim cannot be made. To take tobacco or a cigarette or whatever is one's own choice, as an action. It is up to them whether they wish to make this action or not. It is not that you have a right to exclusively control your own body as such, but rather that nobody else can claim to have this right. Indeed, a drug addict is not in full control of himself while he is on 800 different drugs, all in lethal quantities, but nobody else is exercising such a right over him. There is nobody to punish.
Even if that was not true, converting the drug into an aerosol and spreading it around the room is still a violation of everyone else's right to not partake in their drug habit.
Everybody else retains the ability to leave the room. The absence of doing so amounts to agreement with the consequences of the smoker's actions. To understand why, consider the case of a man asleep in bed with his wife; he starts to make sexual advances, and his wife does not resist or express discontentment in any way. Can she now later say she was in fact raped? Of course not. The husband had no way of knowing if she liked this, especially if this was the first time he had made such advances with her.
Turns out dictators tend to like preventing people from exercising exclusive control over their own bodies. Almost like the concept, being an a priori truth, threatens their very existence.
Indeed. As with the horribly misnamed "Great Leap Forward" in Mao's China.
I highly, highly doubt that the number of Jews who died in the holocaust would be even a 3% as great if they had the right to keep and use any weapon they acquired by making it or buying from somebody who acquired it by these standards.
Exactly, even though sex ed may officially start in grade 8 or 9, I count "real" sex ed as being able to whack it to the diagrams.
Firstly, this is not an actual lawn sign, only an edit of the previous one.
Secondly, I don't actually believe 4 of these, and of the two I do agree with, neither matters (IQ differences are real but IQ is gay to begin with; traps are gay but so is all anime)
Bruh stop I can't handle the based.
So for the lazy, Anglish is basically my suggestion, but it goes even further.
It brings back germanic pronouns, grammar, even orthography. It removes not only french influence but all influence, even that of the Norse vikings or greeks.
So ornithology is not birdology, but birdlore.
Fucking based. Or should I say; Statheled (thanks for the new word)
I will continue my journey into this con-dialect. Thanks for the kind initiation fren.
Their proper anglo-saxon names?
Think about it. Do you want to eat beef jerky or cow jerky?
Same goes for fields of study. Ornithology? Sorry, Latin is in the trashcan, remember? Your Ph.D. is now in Birdology (Greek has nothing to do with French so it gets to stay.)
I already tried this with the Celtic languages, but then I realized that I've literally never seen any of the (approximately 7) English words from a Celtic language.
Before you ask, it was when the IRA splintered off and many of the splinter cells became Marxist. Earlier IRA was just based anti-colonizer but apparently, you can't hate one kind of slavery without wanting other kinds of slavery.
Gold is the ultimate investment. Stop valuing muh piece of paper or muh bits, instead value actually scarce and imperishable store of worth
It already ended freedom, wealth, and all but destroyed economic education.
The only thing the FED should end is itself and all advocacy for it.
Combat right-wing extremism.
Yeah, those violent right-wing scum that. . . half-jokingly tell you to read some based greek/german philosopher you've never heard of. Hmm.
But they also think that. . . people are better at governing themselves than anybody else is at governing them. Hmm.
What about how they . . . don't like it when people push things on others that they don't want. Hmm.
Yeah okay, but at least we can all agree that th-they . . . oppose rampant corporatism and consumerism. Hmm.
Maybe right-wing extremism isn't even a boogeyman frens. Maybe the real right-wing extremism was literally the friends we made along the way and the laughs we shared.
Maybe the violence and bigotry are coming from the left, either in honesty or astroturfing as fascists (a position nobody I know unironically holds).
Honestly, I actually kind of wanted this to be radical RWDS time. I don't want to see politicians killed, but the fuckers are too full of themselves. A couple (actually) peaceful sidewalk marches with signs like "ALL POLITICIANS ARE BASTARDS" and "3% TAX ON TEA = REVOLUTION. 60% TAX ON INCOME = ???" might put an initial bit of fear into the politicians, but until they see one of their own disappear for a week and come back with a bloody nose and PTSD they won't do anything.
Make politicians scared of people, don't make people scared of politicians. Make America the biggest tax haven on the planet
People like Walter Block and the late Murray Rothbard who recognize these elements must be promoted. There are others but their names escape me at the moment.
Numerous observations: Black Lives Matter is a violent marxist organization, and looking at the context around this sentence, they are clearly voicing support for this organization. The statement itself is not at fault, as black lives really do matter, however, as already stated, in context, this statement is a red flag.
"No human is illegal" is a leftist slogan which states that "illegal immigration" is not distinct from "legal immigration". On the surface, this appears true. However, once you look a little deeper, you immediately realize the glaring problem: criminals are, by definition, illegal. A criminal immigrant (by the laws of the country he wishes to go to) must therefore at least be considered an illegal one, unless he is directly approved by the nation itself. The existence of the state apparatus clouds this issue some, but with the torchlight of logic, it is possible to look past this fog also.
"Love is love" is a slogan of the L+ Lobby. Like the phrase "Black Lives Matter", it is a true statement on its own (as a simple assertion that whether a person is homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual, their feelings are their own, and their bedroom is their own), but in context, this is a statement of support for a lobby that tries to systematically demolish the freedom of association human beings have.
"Women's Rights are Human Rights": This is true, but it makes no sense to put this on a yard sign, as there is no objective measure by which women lack legal rights that men have. Social rights may differ, like for example, women lack the social right to be persecuted for rape and false rape allegations, which is a right men have in abundance. However, social rights are not lobbied for like this, they require precise, sharp argumentation in a civil-discourse setting.
"Science is Real" is not true. Science cannot be real, as it is a construct of the human mind. Science is meant to aid us in our understanding of the world, not be a blind faith. Scientists should want to be doubted so that they ca absolutely BTFO the unscientific doubters with nothing more than facts, or admit defeat and reqork their systems like absolute chads, but instead, hedonistic Statist culture (although the two are inseparable) has turned pop-science into science worship
"Water is Life" is not true. Hydration is necessary for human beings as they exist today, but there are many organisms which do not require water, and there is such a thing as overhydration, and deaths thereby, though it is much rarer than its counterpart, dehydration. In response to OP, I have a few more things to say:
Global warming, as a narrative, is false, but the keeper of the yard sign would likely believe in it, considering their sign contains "Science is Real", which is a common alarmist/Malthusian propaganda phrase, which means they likely unquestioningly trust whatever bowtie-man says on TV because he has a Ph.D. (yet another reason Rothbard should be required reading; bowtie man with several Ph.D.s spitting facts right there) however, it is undeniable that the world is getting warmer. this is simply not reason to be alarmed as: it is a natural process, which humans will survive.
This means alarmists most of all, believe rising sea levels will make this world an ocean planet by last week. However, you cannot then take the statement "Water is life" and say "Then isn't global warming a good thing?" As it is not an argument. The keeper of the sign obviously does not mean to say that all water is good and that there exists no such thing as "Too much water", and in fact, the intended meaning here is not a discussion- you also think water is necessary for survival. Claiming that saying "water is life" means you must like floods, then, is not civil discourse, it is nitpicking terms. You know damn well what he meant and you don't need him to be clearer.
Explain Epstein.
Not a Qtard, just have some common sense.
Exercise my 2nd amendment right? For the purpose it was intended?
Honestly if I had a time machine, I'd go back and radicalize the founding fathers. This country would be an ancapistan.
Socialism is simply collective control of the economy. Anybody who understands prices, and how humans act and interact, can tell you that interfering with the individual economy is a huge mistake. This system of anti-propertarian sentiment is also unjustifiable when logic is applied.
I would like to see a Matrix room for KiA2
Wish I could updoot more than once