Well, less steam download stats then. Every little bit helps.
Sheesh, OneAngryGamer helping me dodge bullets as always. I'll wait for the crack, then.
What about that CCP Copypasta?
"动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 劉曉波动"
It's supposed to contain every word or phrase the CCP has banned.
Well if they don't like the word liberal, why did they steal it from us? It's not even like we just sat there, this was a conceited, deliberate attempt in the 19th and 20th centuries to steal the bloody label, why they would want so damn bad it is a mystery. Now they're throwing it away like a used condom.
I'm not even mad, I'm just amazed.
Firstly, mucho gracias for the answer.
Secondly, even muchoer gracias for not using YT links and being an Invidio.us chad. Choke the Cabal.
It is. Site owner is also a pretty good person AFAIK.
https://invidio.us/watch?v=Dm32QynLGnE
Please use Invidio.us links, as Youtube is a cucked platform.
Nah. The entire movement is about "Get politics out of video games, and keep politics out of video games" and i adhere to that even when I'm playing with my fellow volchad friends.
Do you believe the richest 1% are really as rich as the video says, compared to everyone else? If so, do you think this is fair or unfair? Why? If you believe it's unfair, what solutions do you support?
They are that rich indeed, and it is very unfair, but the cause of this is not capitalism. The crypto-socialist Sir John Maynard Keynes is responsible for a lot of the reprehensible actions of government in pertinence to the economy, namely such things as incessant money-printing, abandonment of the Gold Standard in favour of Fiat, forcing low interest rates, and importantly, Trump's bowing to the Sickle and Star with his subsidization of farming. Did you know that Benito Mussolini said about Keynes's book "The Death Of *Lassiez-faire"" what amounts to, "lmao based and stickspilled", and that it is the very same fascist economics that are in use today, all over the world, without exception?
It is the government that creates more money to pay off it's cronies, thereby also devaluing the savings of the common person. The government monpolizes law enforcement and allows unions, leading to huge negative results for the consumer as wrongdoing government employees, notably public school staff and law enforcement, keep their jobs and pensions because the alternative is them going on strike and oh no now all the parents are writing angry letters, and muh voots are gone.
Leave alone this, the government socializes more and more every day, and says it's just capitalism. Protectionism, locking people in their homes, forcing people to comply with a strict code, lying to the masses, I bet you Stalin is cumming uncontrollably in Hell right now.
People who live in extreme poverty (e.g. families sleeping in cars) despite seeking jobs or having two jobs: why do you think people find themselves in that situation, and what would potential solutions be?
Government keeps entry into certain industries locked behind strict liscensing, legislature that reads like an Office script, and inconsistent law enforcement.
And if, once restrictions on minimum wage, employment standards, government-approved business, and so on and so on are removed, and sound, private money is adopted, we will have a truly free market. At that point, it is no longer my problem, because that person sleeping in his car now has the choice to learn a skill and sell it at any price he should choose, and now, I have no responsibility for him, because I neither leech off of his tax dollars, nor does he off of mine.
Employers having more negotiating power regarding salaries, because they don't have much competition when hiring workers, meanwhile employees are competing with thousands of other candidates: fair or unfair, and why? If unfair, what could be done to solve this?
Unfair, and again, solution is less government.
I often heard strong supporters of capitalism say that "Everyone can be rich if they work hard enough". Except there's a need for all kinds of jobs, even those that pay little, and there's no need for billions of people doing the jobs that currently pay millions. So even if everyone worked twice as hard tomorrow, nothing would change. In other words, it seems the system isn't designed to allow everyone who works hard to make a comfortable income - even if everyone worked twice as hard starting tomorrow, the poor would stay poor and nobody would earn more. How do you guys feel about that? I'm especially interested to know why if you disagree.
This actually hinges on the point above, and I wanted to address both at the same time to make it easier.
Once you remove business regulation, a company does truly become the spirit of a company: the pooling of capital. Anybody can make a company now, at least, anybody with resources and an idea. More competition among employers will undoubtedly lead to more power to the worker to effectively choose his salary. And since "money" in the fiat, socialist sense that it exists in right now, would be entirely gone and replaced instead with "sound money" and private trade, I would be paid what my employer and I would agree my labour was worth; if our opinions differed, I could find another employer, and the employer another employee.
I'd also like to know how people here feel about the argument that if you need someone to do a job for you, no matter how easy it is or how little training it requires, you should pay them a proper living wage. Otherwise, you're just exploiting them until they become unable to work due to health issues, at which point you discard and replace them with someone else. In other words, if you need someone to work for you, you should make sure the job lets them sustain themselves. Again, how do you feel about this and why?
If you don't like my wages, don't work for me. There's other companies.
Social safety nets: I heard the opinions that everyone needs to be responsible for themselves. But is it really in the best interest of society to let a worker with years of experience and education end up on the streets because of a difficult period in their life they couldn't get out of? Why or why not?
I would employ such a worker, even at a loss, because that loss would not be permanent. Eventually, I would coax him out of his foxhole, without spending too much, so that I now have an experienced employee indebted to me not only morally, but in labour. I would pay such an employee dearly!
Violent
Speech.
bruh
Karen act.
Accurate. Pretty Karen move to just make "muh racism" illegal.
Reactionaryism, from what I've seen, is when you take a set of political views and just blindly oppose them. This leads, usually, to fascism, because it's "diametrically opposed" to marxism, the most cancerous, inhumane ideology of all. In reality, the ideology least related to and most feared by marxists is the principle of Liberty above all, which is why they constantly downplay "libertarians" as walking oxymorons and such, claiming to have destroyed liberty, and the fascist go with it because, well, they oppose "liberty above all".
And so, comically, as the marxists see the growing fascist movement, they become reactionary towards it so as to attract centrists who believe in "live and let live", and thus, when the fascists say gay people are subhuman (in reaction to the supposedly left-wing idea of equal sexual rights), the marxists say they are in fact superhuman, and when the fascists say that black people must be killed (Reacting to the left-wing idea of egalitarianism, conflating it with equality before the law), the marxists retort saying it is in fact white people who must be killed (all the while both groups ignore that in their race war, it is the italians who will win either way)
Hilariously, the groups devolve into bastardized interpretations of themselves and the one-upsmanship extends so far that it becomes a contest of who can prove the people who believe they have redeeming qualities wrong the fastest and hardest, whereby the fascists kick jews out of their circlejerk for being Jewish, and black people flee the marxists as they realize they are being treated as pawns in this larger reactionary bar debate.
Fuck Reactionaryism
All my homies hate depending on a third party for your political opinions
hoppe-sama.xyz is 4chan if it was actually free
The PLA actually had a skirmish with Indians on their northern border about a week ago now. They loopholed a peace treaty (the wording was that "no bullet may be fired", so they beat the Indian soldiers with barbed wire bats and nail guns) and so they retaliated (Inkeeping with the peace treaty, Indians bashed their fucking skulls and ripped our their spinal cords.) and won the skirmish 60:1 with only 20 of IN's guys dead.
What? There's absolutely no precedent for this; no good game has a price that extravagant.
The only games that have prices like that are "muh big aaa please buy the game because its my picture look my picture now consumeproduct.win", which are better off pirated anyway.
Thank you for the response! That last paragraph is hilarious, but it's not trans people I hate per se, but the injection thereof.
Mass infanticide sounds pretty based though.