3
subbookkeeper 3 points ago +3 / -0

Didn't King John consummate a marriage so early it led to the Magna Carta because it was so shocking? And no other King has taken the name John because of it?

6
subbookkeeper 6 points ago +8 / -2

I often think the 2nd amendment is a mistake because it allows you to live in essentially the same society but because you still have "muh guns" and are allowed to shoot them on your farm and pretend you're better than the UK.

It's a difference without differentiation.

You keep thinking that because you have guns pointed at the door so to speak, the government will come in through your door rather then your window.

39
subbookkeeper 39 points ago +39 / -0

If only you could somehow upload to two places at once. Styx is really good at this, use youtube to advertise for your other places.

1
subbookkeeper 1 point ago +1 / -0

yeah great quote, good idea in theory. Has it ever happened at any place or any time in history?

2
subbookkeeper 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not that it's much of a consolation but this is at the state level, victoria which had the longest covid lockdowns in the world I believe.

2
subbookkeeper 2 points ago +2 / -0

But when you say "enough" was it more or less than other wars? I don't doubt that it existed, but death by US issued fragmentation grenades would presumably leave obvious injuries and would be trivial to track and tally.

16
subbookkeeper 16 points ago +17 / -1

They're not going to come to your door, they'll arrest you at the store or during a traffic stop.

3
subbookkeeper 3 points ago +3 / -0

how many officers died in Vietnam compared to enlisted? and was that % higher or lower than other wars?

6
subbookkeeper 6 points ago +6 / -0

I don't really trust any accounts of the time period but it seemed that the vietnam war was to "fight communism" and it backfired because the communists were at home and used to to create a social revolution movement against the government.

Now the marxists are even more entrenched within government and wider society. So a similar outcome would benefit them even more.

Why wouldn't they institute the draft again? especially when they can force large amounts of White Men from rural areas into war zones. It's a draft, and if they literally have a hunger games style system they can pair it with a social credit score and doing "pro social" or "environmentally sustainable acts" or some shit can get you removed from this months drawing you'd have the draft as a wonderful social weapon. Imagine if you kept your carbon score under a certain level for the month got you an exemption. (Of course you'd have to sign up for a digital ID and not use cash etc to even attempt to qualify) How do you think something like that would float in todays political environment.

2
subbookkeeper 2 points ago +3 / -1

Libertarians are just marxists that wont cheat and force the world to bend to their ideal utopia.

7
subbookkeeper 7 points ago +7 / -0

The last season of game of thrones.

Elaboration not required.

9
subbookkeeper 9 points ago +9 / -0

This is part of the plan, the overarching marxist "plot" needs a revolutionary proletariat to attack the state in the first wave of the revolution. "Workers of the world" just aren't interested in that so they need a new one. They tried blacks in the 70's but they had their own ideas, so now they are using "queer" people as the vanguard. These people are human bullets. The more carnage and chaos they create the more it benefits marxists because they are in position to "restore order"

11
subbookkeeper 11 points ago +11 / -0

Not impossible at all, since they are so efficient, which is how they got so big, small disturbances cut right to the heart of giant corporations.

A missed earnings target is enough to start a cascade, not even a loss just a missed earnings target is enough to disrupt share prices. Which means the board had to start doing "stuff" which if you're head of a well oiled efficient machine, is unlikely to improve.

1
subbookkeeper 1 point ago +1 / -0

Imagine how bad she had to screw up to owe child support.

The husband definitely stuck his dick in crazy though.

I almost feel bad for how badly this has torpedoed her life though, she will never get to see her kids again after this.

16
subbookkeeper 16 points ago +16 / -0

Reminder Gofundme will cancel the fundraiser once someone notifies them of it. GiveSendGo is far better.

2
subbookkeeper 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think of Heinlein and service-based citizenship.

A man of culture.

it probably involves a lot of people de-banking and forming parallel systems that operate in an autonomous, self-contained and self-sustaining manner and just naturally growing those out - just my gut feeling

I am glad to see the discourse start to reach towards feeling for plans and/or ideologies to see us through.

2
subbookkeeper 2 points ago +2 / -0

Regardless, more bankers should die in wars, you can't partake in a war via funding without sharing some of the risk. It's pretty obvious (to me at least) that this is why they fund both sides. Can't take out the source of the enemy funding if it's your funding too.

I try to avoid hyperbolic conclusions from things like this but I just don't see a solution to this.

2
subbookkeeper 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ok I did watch it, thank you.

Probably pedantic point but I see a difference between money lending and receiving interest in return for the risk of not getting the money back. And private central banks convincing governments that the money they create is worth paying interest for.

Frankly I do believe some people sat down and said “let’s create a financial system which operates as an inescapable black whole from which lendees will never escape, while the lender’s event horizon grows ever wider.

Was this done as an alternative method to fund wars? Because traditionally wars had to be paid for during the war, paying soldiers with fake money that you then have to pay money to bankers in the future with the proceeds of your country (after you've won the war so have additional treasures) seems like a win win decision at the time. Because if you lose the war you're debts are the least of your concern. Not that it's any consolation to today, but it may have started out as an innocent and reasonable solution to paying for wars. Which get more and more expensive as technology and scope improves. (not making a moral judgement on this, just pointing out that it happens and if you want to continue existing as a country you have to fight larger and larger wars or be conquered)

Paying for the war in the future, but getting war material today is a better choice than paying for the war with whatever you have today as that will always be less.

Great video regardless of pedantic differences.

6
subbookkeeper 6 points ago +6 / -0

Most people are known for one thing "Their lane"

And ok'ish "outside of their lane"

James Lindsey is a walking meme of 100 in anti marxist but a 0 in anything else. (I presume he's pretty high in Maths though)

2
subbookkeeper 2 points ago +2 / -0

Good to know the exact case name. I presume that was the first test case of the civil rights laws?

5
subbookkeeper 5 points ago +5 / -0

I believe it stems from the google AI recommending eating 1 rock per day which is obvious nonsense. Someone pointed out that it was an Onion headline. I don't believe it's confirmed but if I lose a ring down my toilet and it appears in my "spring water" bottle I'm going to have some questions.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›