Law When Trump, Schumer, and Pelosi Meet...

This is some stupid shit I'm reading here. "excuse", my ass. He needs 10 Democrats because that's how it is. If he could pass it through the Senate with the Republican Majority, he WOULD'VE.
They're saying trump could pass it in the house then let them DEBATE it, which is how this whole thing is supposed to work. Maybe they could get the ten dem votes if they ya know tried at least to reach across the aisle.
 
And going forward, after white people secede their own territory, that's something to take into consideration this time. Now we know how dangerous it is to include a population of people that are completely immiscible with the rest of the population.

You always find someway to fit you were crazy “race realist” (racist) theories into threads.

I better go build a shelter, the race wars are a comin! Do I have to secede if I live with a non-white? What are the race war rules?

Did you hear this message in helter skelter? You’re not starting a cult are you?
 
You always find someway to fit you were crazy “race realist” (racist) theories into threads.

I better go build a shelter, the race wars are a comin! Do I have to secede if I live with a non-white? What are the race war rules?

Did you hear this message in helter skelter? You’re not starting a cult are you?

Wait what the fuck? It's crazy to acknowledge that different human populations are different? Or what do you think is the controversial point exactly?
 
Its obvious to anyone with a brain to see Trump embarrassed himself. Its hilarious how his cultist will spin anything and everything to defend their mango messiah.
 
Interesting, when Trump says he will take blame for a government shut down, he's just saying he will take blame. If it actually happens, he will find a way to dodge along the lines of "I said I would take the blame if I shut down the government, but Chuck did that. I didn't do anything wrong."

Mark my words.
 
Exactly right. Marxism initially was plausible with regard to attacking different classes in terms of wealth. Now, with the almost universal and obvious realization that decentralized markets and capitalism are far superior at producing prosperous societies and not demociding their people en mass, no one except the most dull buy it anymore. The people that still wanted to push for an equal outcome and classless society had to find another angle to exploit, and the racial angle was it..

As i said, i see the yellowjackets protesters being mainly white people, i see inequality rising in the entire white world and eastern europe is still the same cesspool of corruption as it has been for decades.

There is always something for the authoritarians to rally the masses to.
 
As i said, i see the yellowjackets protesters being mainly white people, i see inequality rising in the entire white world and eastern europe is still the same cesspool of corruption as it has been for decades.

There is always something for the authoritarians to rally the masses to.

I agree, although that doesn't discount that multicultural societies are dysfunctional.
 
Let's not delude ourselves.

Trump could say, "Nancy is a horse faced whore." and legions of fans would erupt with applause, and Pelosi could say, "Trump has a tiny cawk and a bad comb over." (which she kind of eluded to in the exchange) and legions of fans would erupt in applause.

This isn't "both sideism," (which is a ridiculously misused idea most of the time,) it is the reality that zealotry and indifference is consuming more and more of the cultural divide in America.

Hard to blame the home team, even if Trump takes a dump on home plate, "What do you expect... he was drunk!" we say of our "beloved" statist uncle. Cognitive dissonance for thee, not for me.

Here is the much harder question - how do we get people interested in critical thinking about the other team, and how do we get people interested in having standards of behavior?

The first ought to be simple enough - educate people on how to ask reasonable questions, and to listen first, act later.

The second ought to be simple, but would require a serious cease fire - be reasonable and... point out... bad behavior, if I do that about Trump or Pelosi in a den of the right or left wing, it "doesn't matter" how right or factual I am, the mob will turn off their frontal lobes and pursue the nonbeliever with torches and rope.

@Greoric @Kafir-kun @Trotsky @Ripskater @Hunter Simpson @Devout Pessimist @Cubo de Sangre

I would be especially interested in how to answer the 2nd question - how might we establish, or reestablish differences of opinion and reason in the fractured state of internal "tribal" discussions and divisions.

Real critical thinking and theory to those who do not want to listen, without reflexively thinking pro-Trump, anti-Trump, or anything about Trump, -- no Trump involved - but rather, "I want to convince the intellectuals, leaders, silent majorities of voters, and the open minded to influence, or push the partisans, and activists." How would you build that backbone? How would you instill that maturity? How would you have the order of political reason be restored over the wishes of the political ego? Please give any thoughts you have.
Well you touched on one possible way
The second ought to be simple, but would require a serious cease fire - be reasonable and... point out... bad behavior, if I do that about Trump or Pelosi in a den of the right or left wing, it "doesn't matter" how right or factual I am, the mob will turn off their frontal lobes and pursue the nonbeliever with torches and rope.
At some point people have to start holding their side to a higher standard if they want to elevate the discourse.

I also think trying to find common ground with those who we seemingly are always at odds with. Sometimes if you want to affect serious change the way to do so isn't to try and convince society to act in the service of specific political policy or project but rather to find out on what issues is there a very broad, near consensus level public support and then to agitate in service of that. When you do that you're not preaching to anyone but merely trying to get them to act on what they already believe is right.
 
I agree, although that doesn't discount that multicultural societies are dysfunctional.

I dont disagree, what i disagree is that culture is immutable and strictly related to race.
 
@Rod1 And to go over the white nationalism and libertarianism (in terms of a limited state) relationship; a white super majority looks to be a necessary but not sufficient condition for libertarianism.
 
I dont disagree, what i disagree is that culture is immutable and strictly related to race.

Sure to the extent that you can find outliers, but its rather plainly obvious when you look at the aggregate that different races, different human populations, value things differently and verifiably prefer eachothers company over others.
 
Sure to the extent that you can find outliers, but its rather plainly obvious when you look at the aggregate that different races, different human populations, value things differently and verifiably prefer eachothers company over others.

I dont know, as a latino man i have experienced that the genetic component isnt necesarily a big factor on culture, we share a lot of cultural traits among quite different populations, what i find is the determinant factor in culture is the economic background of an individual.
 
That wouldn't have to be true mate for the above to be true.
The above isn't true though, just like the idea that libertarianism as a realistic option in modern times.
 
If you heard what he said (which you didn't 'cause you were lodged in Pelosi's starfish), Trump stated that of course it can be passed easily in the House BUT THEY NEED AT LEAST 10 DEMOCRATS TO APPROVE IT IN THE SENATE!

Think, McFly! Think! <LikeReally5><LikeReally5><LikeReally5>
You forgot to factor in that Trump was lying. <seedat>
 
The above isn't true though, just like the idea that libertarianism as a realistic option in modern times.

Respectfully, you're just making shit up. A society's homogeneity is a massive indicator for social harmony.
 
Respectfully, you're just making shit up. A society's homogeneity is a massive indicator for social harmony.
No, I'm not. Also there are homogenized communities that are hugely dysfunctional. Also, I would agree that if everyone were the same version of npc there would be less quests to complete.
 
I dont know, as a latino man i have experienced that the genetic component isnt necesarily a big factor on culture, we share a lot of cultural traits among quite different populations, what i find is the determinant factor in culture is the economic background of an individual.

You Only have to look at all the different societies of the world and observe how different they are. To that end actually, if there's ever to be a limited govt/libertarian state its almost certainly going to be super majority white. Hell look at the free state project and New Hamshire. Why? Because it's a Caucasian cultural phenomenon, obviously not shared significantly by any other group. (And yes of course you're going to get outliers.)

So again, to the extent there's ever a libertarian like state it will functionally also be a white ethnostate (ethnocommmunity?) explicitly or otherwise.
 
Last edited:
No, I'm not. Also there are homogenized communities that are hugely dysfunctional.

The absence of absolutism isn't a discount to the point my man. Look dude, I could snowball you with fucking data on this. In-group favoritism is a real thing. And the more you try and pile people with different values under the same rule of law the more problems you're going to have.

Observe the western world right now, or the experience of your people, african americans, throughout the US's history.
 
Back
Top