This is why I hate liberals

Just don’t come to Europe. Here its gone so far that muslim cops will allow crimes by other muslims even if there are witnesses and get non muslim people in trouble for complaining about that. Well to do muslims generally don’t feel they need to abide by traffic rules either and they’re often driving in cars apparently paid for by crime (20 year olds driving 200 k Benzes), so people aren’t standing up to them, because of this thing with the police, the one sided justice. In London you even have a muslim mayor who has decriminalized the physical abuse of children as long as it is done by muslims as an islamic act, and has sent to prison people who were peacefully protesting this. You probably will find it hard to even believe this. All the more reason, do not leave your country.

You’re right, I couldn’t live in Europe. That London mayor is a real goofball. How did he come to power? He’s banning knives now? What’s next; pointy sticks and pens? They’re a bunch of control-freaks (ie women) wanting to lock themselves in padded rooms for their own protection, but what kind of life is one void of risk?

And I’ve quit buying my favorite scotch (laphroaig) because they threw the guy in jail who simply trained his dog to perform a nazi salute and posted the video. I’ll buy something from Japan (even though they buy the peat from scotland). The Scots-Irish have sure done a lot to work their way onto my shit list lol

I’m sure I’ll resonate more with Gloominary once minority women come to power here and start stripping our rights for the purpose of safety, but that seems so far off considering who is in power now and I guess I’ll complain about it when it happens.

I don’t understand the European government’s affinity for muslims. I mean, I understand feeling sorry for someone, but to allow others to be raped and killed just because you feel sorry for the perp is way overboard. I don’t think that would happen here and if nothing else, the people would probably take the law into their own hands by converting trees into muslim swingsets.

It seems half of the US wants that kind of thing though. Trump and his voters are the only thing standing in the way of converting America to the newest latest Mekka. There are already very many muslims wearing hijab in the US, many no doubt mutilated down there, thus often mentally insane.

Islam is one giant Stockholm Syndrome. I never get why someone like you would join the party that wants to open the borders to them. But at least Im relieved you have the balls to speak out against what is happening in Europe. Still the people you appear to have voted for are the same ones who installed the first muslim nation inside Europe. The Clintons broke up Yugoslavia to do that. Our schools told us to cheer when the bombs fell on Belgrado.

I’ll have to take your word for it because I’ve not seen many muslims and if you offered bounty for each, it would take me forever to locate even one. The only muslim I have ever known was a guy I worked for from Turkey and he was one of the most empathetic and considerate persons I can remember knowing.

All religion is.

I’m kinda wishy washy lol. I change my mind a lot and next year I could be angry about something totally different, but right now the most pressing problem affecting me via people I care about is poverty, education, and healthcare. Immigration is WAAAAAY off in the distance. Around here, Hispanics are the problem and I have no problem with them. Their religion is Catholicism (better than fundamentalism), they’re family oriented, hard-working, and never cause me any trouble. I’d appreciate it if the white population would emulate them.

Yes it’s nuts!

Just today I read: EU Court Upholds Prosecution Of Woman For Comparing Muhammad’s Marriage To A Six-Year-Old Girl To Pedophilia zerohedge.com/news/2018-10- … r-old-girl

Why is the EU defending a barbaric religion against free speech? I can’t even pin this on female leadership because it’s a woman who was prosecuted for complaining about a 50 yr old man with a 6 yr old girl. I have no theories to explain this.

I doubt I voted for any of them. I never voted for any Clinton and was against Bill in the 90s. I support Bernie and other progressives and I see centrists as the worst evil because it’s boiling the frog slowly (acclimation to mediocrity). I’d rather have Trump, crash the economy, then get an FDR-type of progressive. A centrist will continue the crappy status quo and the issues most directly affecting me will never be resolved, but compromises will abound.

I firmly believe the way to fix all problems is to make people smarter and end their suffering, then they can see clearly to make good decisions. But most people want to make it harder on the poor and such evil inclination can only backfire. Everyone should be assured a quality education, healthcare, and some minimum standard of living. Beyond that, I’m all for competition and meritocracy. I don’t support trophies for everyone. I just want to end suffering; not make everyone the same.

@ Gloom at al

Politico has Demographic Drivers showing which demographic characteristics politically favor Democrats or Republicans, for instance PA:

politico.com/election-resul … nsylvania/

After going through each state I’ve concluded the republican party is predominately white, old, stupid, and often poor (in order of correlation, with old and stupid tied for 2nd place).

That backs data from Pew showing the same:

assets.pewresearch.org/wp-conten … 48/2_6.png
assets.pewresearch.org/wp-conten … 52/2_8.png

It’s clear as day what we’re dealing with here: the 50ish 60ish Boomer with a GED and grey goatee arrogantly thinking he’s king shit. That is who the left is angry with and you can thank/blame old white men for the extinction of the white man. If they weren’t so arrogant, they could have embraced sensible policies that might have attracted intelligent people to their party, but old people cannot be reasoned with and stupid people cannot be reasoned with, like machines cannot be reasoned with.

Trump lost the election in 2020 because he lost PA, MI, and WI which means he lost the electoral college. There is no way he can win without those 3 states and all 3 went solidly for the dems. In the mean time more young people will turn voting age and more republicans will crash their harleys into guardrails or otherwise become an invalid taking up space in a nursing home unable to vote.

Science progresses funeral by funeral - Max Planck

When the dems finally take over, the constitution should be amended to prevent Toryism from ever returning. It’s like a herpes virus that causes big bubbles that pop then it goes into hiding for a spell before returning to inflict more pain.

@Serendipper

White Americans built the USA, so they know what’s best for it.

Old folks are wiser than young, young people tend to do dumb things, like drive drunk, or spend money they don’t have on things they don’t need, and young people tend to emulate old folks as time goes on.

‘Uneducated’ (or unindoctrinated) doesn’t necessarily mean stupid, I thought you and I just went over that a page or two ago.

The working class (not to be conflated with the underclass) votes for him because they know he speaks for them…at least more than democrats and mainline republicans do.

I’ve been aware of this argument for over a decade, and I agree with it…to an extent.
I realize we don’t have to work nearly as hard as we did, that there’s more than enough resources to go around, thanks to oil, gasoline and the machines that run on them, that food and housing are vastly overpriced, thanks to practices such as corporatism, illegal immigration, offshoring, intellectual property, rent, usury and wage serfdom.
I’m not a capitalist, and I’m all for giving the working class much more ownership of the economy.
However, what I’m not in favor of, is giving people who can work, but won’t, anything, nor should people who can’t work be having kids.
I’m not so much an egalitarian (equality) as I am an equitarian (fairness (what you put in, you get out).

While there is less work to do, there is still work to do.

Btw, I find it interesting how on the one hand, you say you’re a fan of Watts, but on the other, you ridicule republicans for championing common sense.
Alan Watts was very pro-folk wisdom, going with your gut, street smarts, he thought they were just as, if not more important than book smarts.
Alan Watts was all about uniting polarities, the yin and the yang, left and right, collaboration and competition, intuition and intellect, nature and artifice etcetera, whereas you’re all about trying to fashion a one sided coin.

Or is it because Nigerian Americans (but not necessarily Nigerian, Nigerians) have bigger and more sophisticated brains and/or a culture more conducive to economic and educational achievement than mulatto and other Americans?

While Trump is far from perfect, he’s trying to prevent illegal immigration and offshoring, two things that hurt the working class tremendously.

  • He’s lowering taxes for the ‘middle’ (or upper lower) class, and while he’s not increasing spending on the lower class, at least he’s not reducing it much at all, right?

  • He’s anti-mulatto and female supremacism.

Not the Boomers! They didn’t build anything, except gargantuan debt, while letting the infrastructure their fathers built crumble apart. They were coddled by FDR’s socialism so they can whine and complain incessantly about the very thing that bestowed upon them the comfy nest from which to bitch and moan.

You know how everyone complains about the Millennials, well the same was said about the Boomers; check google newspapers: news.google.com/newspapers?nid= … 26,1419977

Millennials can’t drive a nail or turn a wrench, but at least they have an education.

That’s just arrogance. Sure the old may know a thing or two that can be passed down, but once the youth is educated, it’s time to step out of the way and let them blossom. Being old doesn’t entitle one to be eternally smarter.

Mr. President:
I confess that I do not entirely approve of this Constitution at present, but Sir, I am not sure I shall never approve it: For having lived long, I have experienced many Instances of being oblig’d, by better Information or fuller Consideration, to change Opinions even on important Subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow the more apt I am to doubt my own Judgment, and to pay more Respect to the Judgment of others.
pbs.org/benfranklin/pop_finalspeech.html

If old people were so smart, they would say that ^

Instead, they say this:

The motto of conservatives is smart people are stupid and stupid people are smart.

Risk-taking is not dumb. What’s dumb is being unable to assess the risks. Intelligence is perception and lack of intelligence is blindness.

“someone with an IQ of 140 is about twice as likely to max out their credit card.” bbc.com/future/story/2015041 … ing-clever

It’s called aging.

That’s true for the individual, but not on the macro. I would not characterize an uneducated population as being smarter than an educated population.

What he does is drive smart people crazy which is what dumb people like to see.

DkBGe7RUwAAnSGa.jpg

This entire administration is like Revenge of the Idiots.

The enemy of the white race is the knuckleheaded boomer giving white people a bad rep and causing everyone else to hate all white people, including other white people.

You contradicted yourself:

You just admitted there is not as much work needed as before, yet you insist people must work to survive even if working is not necessary in order to survive (because of the machines). So, you cannot stand the fact that someone might get something for nothing and you’re willing to hold back society and hurt yourself just to hurt someone else more. THAT attitude will be the demise of the white race. Mark my words! It’s an unreasonable position and too many Millennials see it.

The poor do all the work while the rich get all the rewards. The one thing that NEVER happens is getting out what you put in.

And there are plenty of people willing to do the work without having to compel others with threats of starvation.

Common sense is not intuition.

Common sense is looking outside and concluding the earth is flat because look: it’s common sense! Can’t you see the earth is flat? Nasa has the stupid college educated people with no common sense!

Common sense is denying that humans came from monkeys because: why are there still monkeys? It’s common sense! All those college people can’t see what’s obvious.

Common sense = opinions of common people.

Intuition is knowing people who appeal to common sense have no expertise in the field: I can’t prove it, but I have a sneaking suspicion.

If you could pass along some evidence of him saying that, I’d appreciate it greatly. What I hear are constant referrals to experts: he speaks on the behalf of economists, he speaks on the behalf of the ancient Chinese or Indians, he speaks on the behalf of physicists, theologians, Jesus, but I can’t recall him referring his audience to gut instincts. Alan’s claim to fame is sucking up everything humanity has said, digesting it, then regurgitating it in an easy to understand and entertaining fashion.

I spent years trying to get republicans to embrace a decent minimum wage and social programs for the poor in order to unite the sides, but they viscerally hate the poor. I spent years trying to get them to defend free speech, but they’re too determined to destroy themselves by dogmatically supporting their own censorship. There is no saving these people; they’re far too bullheaded and hellbent on causing their own extinction.

I mean, I don’t want the crazy dems to takeover either, which is why I’d rather the conservatives see reason and stop prohibition and provide for the sick and poor, but they’re machines incapable of seeing past their dogma. And because of their bullheadedness, we’re going to have to live with gun bans. Republicans shot themselves in the foot with their hate. Surely it must be the height of stupidity to cause your own extinction. What could be dumber?

I don’t agree. I think the production should be in the place where the people can do the work cheaply and efficiently. There is no sense in paying fat american wages for reduced quality and then having crappy products costing twice as much. This is one of the cases that I vote to let the free market dictate instead of protectionism. There is no sense in supporting grossly inefficient practices.

I know there was talk of reducing social programs, but I haven’t followed up on it. But he’s raised taxes on the poor via his tariffs while he’s cut takes on the rich. Plus his SCOTUS pick, Gorsuch, broke the tie (5-4) in support of sales taxes on internet purchases, which is another tax on the poor.

It’s unnerving that so many women are coming to power, but that’s what happens when people vote “anti-old-white-guy”.

Look at the vote in GA:

Old white guy: 1,973,110
Black woman: 1,910,395

GA is about as backwoods hillbilly as it gets and she’s almost governor. Can you believe it?

politico.com/election-results/2018/georgia/

If you want to save your race, you better figure something out quick because what you’ve been doing doesn’t appear to be working. Preaching hatred of the poor, sick, and brownies isn’t resonating well with the voters.

The RNC should immediately end all prohibition, advocate a minimum wage, offer some type of universal healthcare and education or it can bend over and kiss its ass goodbye.

@Serendipper

If you think Mestizos, Mulattos and Muslims are going to treat whites as kindly as whites treat them today, when we’re the minority, and they have most of the wealth and power, you got another thing coming.
Mestizos and Mulattos will say, the only way we can achieve genuine parity, is for whites to be brought to the brink of extinction the way Native Americans were, or enslaved the way African Americans were, and many, or most Muslims will say, finally we can finish the Islamization of the west our ancestors began.
Mass immigration (especially illegal, but also legal, and multicultural rather than assimilatory) can easily undermine a nations integrity, a prime example being Rome.
Just as the Roman empire fell to German immigrants, who weren’t assimilated, the US and EU may very well fall to Mexican and/or Muslim immigrants.

Color, like the millions of other ways the races differ from one another, from cranial capacity to what diseases they’re susceptible to, is relevant.
Some colors are better for surviving in some, many, most or all environments than others.
While every race has its strengths and weaknesses, and what constitutes a strength or weakness is somewhat dynamic, some races are a little, or a lot stronger than others.
There’s no such thing as absolute parity between the races, just as there’s none between individuals.
It’s not a case of if, but how much stronger is X race than Y.

If that’s the case, than both are equally irrational.
When disparity is earned, and/or when it benefits who, or what I care about most, than I’m in favor of it, and conversely when it’s not earned, and/or when it detriments who, or what I care about most, than I’m opposed to it.

Firstly, while white countries can easily dominate most non-white countries when they choose to exert themselves, for they’re more wealthy and powerful, I’m not so sure whites start more wars, or kill more people in war than non-whites.
Secondly, by terrorism, I meant mass murder committed by civilians for political gain, not by militaries.

Tell that to victims of Islamic terror living in India, and all over the third world.
No it wouldn’t’ve happened if we had a Muslim ban.

Muslims have been trying to Islamize Europe, Subsaharan Africa and South Asia for over a thousand years.
You seem to be under the impression that only whites oppress others.
I’ve got news for you, not just a couple or a few, but millions of individuals within other races want to subjugate, or destroy whites, and others.
In a roundabout way, you’re the white supremacist here, for you believe only whites have been, are, and will be able to oppress other races.
Reasonable whites have to take steps to prevent, and prepare for a time when they may be oppressed again, which, by the looks of it, may not be far off.

Perhaps Paddock’s terrorism can in part be blamed on white genocide, third wave feminism, the breakdown of the family, and the overthrow of western civilization, maybe all that helped drive him to it.

The Irish aren’t known for committing terror against anyone other than the British, because they were oppressed by Brits for centuries, Brits took Northern Ireland from them.
However nowadays, the Irish rarely terrorize Brits.

And uneducated?
You seem to think education is the answer to everything.
At one time, Arabs were (far) more educated than Subsaharan Africans, Europeans and South Asians, but that didn’t stop the former one from trying to takeover the latter three, did it?
Like they took over North Africans, other West Asians and Central Asians.
And look what humans have done to nature, as we’ve gotten more educated about it.
Often we study things precisely because we want to learn how to more thoroughly dominate them.

Education can teach us there’s limits to how much we can consume, but it doesn’t necessarily stop us from consuming things to the limit, or beyond, hence modernity.

Less reproduction isn’t good enough, they shouldn’t reproduce at all, certainly not as much or more than people who work.

While the average person living in poverty may have 4 kids, and the middle class 2, the upper class may have 1.9, so there may be a cut off, where greater affluence increasingly doesn’t impact birthrates.

Decline in birthrates may have more to do with greater access to contraception than affluence itself, which means we should be promoting contraception instead of affluence, as affluence harms the environment.

Greater affluence may still harm the environment more than reduced birthrates helps it.

People who’d rather not have kids when given the option will die off, while people who’d rather have them will remain, so the population may bounce back.

Some classes and races, for cultural or genetic reasons, may have more kids than others, so even if we were to lift them out of poverty, they’re birthrate may still exceed their death rate, again, see how eastern Europeans, Russians and Chinese are poor, yet have a low birthrate, and yes, while the Chinese have come a ways, they still have a long, long way to go to catch up with the west and Japan, assuming they can that is, some (sub)races may not be able to, Chinese GDP per capita is still several times lower than the west and Japan, I mean China is still trailing Brazil, Mexico and Russia.

Poverty can reduce population if you’re so poor your kids starve, which’s not what I’m suggesting we do, just saying, I’d rather, relatively reduce their numbers humanely.

Just so you know, I edited the above post a little.

@Serendipper

I’ll appeal to the thousands of scientists who say we’re on brink of mass extinction.

If a one child policy worked for China, it can probably work for our underclass.

According to Canadian psychologist Philippe Rushton, whites and east Asians are more K selective (nurturing offspring over quantity of offspring) than other races.
I mean, is it any wonder only East Asians (Japanese and South Koreans) have been able to emulate the west’s success?
They have the biggest brains and highest iQs.

And environmental laws prevent unnecessary prosperity, as they ought to, unnecessary prosperity is the enemy of the environment.
We shouldn’t consume a hell of a lot more than we need to.

It’s a fact brown people have 2 or 3 times more kids than whites and East Asians.

Disparity isn’t necessarily bad, the sustainably productive should be better off, and we should prioritize ourselves and our land over theirs, because we’re us and they’re them.

China is poorer than Mexico per capita, yet they’re having less kids.
Races, and cultures aren’t the same, it’s folly to treat them as tho they were.

One exception doesn’t disprove the rule, whites gave us the modern world, some races haven’t given us anything.

Thousands of scientists beg to differ.

Tell that to the thousands of species that’ve gone extinct, and the thousands of species that’ve been subjugated, thanks to man.

They also told us we’d cure AIDS and cancer by now, and I’m still waiting for my flying car and my ray gun.

Young folks tend to get more conservative as they age.
There’s a time to progress, and a time to conserve, in the 21st century, now more than ever, we need to find creative ways to conserve, not only the environment, but what remains of our race and, some of its customs, not progress.

Resources allow creative people to be more creative.
Creative people should have more resources than uncreative people, if we want to increase creativity.

It was founded on legal, European immigration till 1965.
And indigenous is somewhat of a social construct (well, perhaps everything in science, and thought is, but perhaps this in particular).
How many millennia, or centuries does something have to be confined to a land, with no, or ‘little’ external influence before becoming indigenous?
Europeans have been settling the Americas at least since the Vikings over a millennium ago.
And so called ‘Native Americans’ are more European now than Native American after centuries of miscegenation with us, which’s why I call them mestizos.

Whites tend to work hard, and they don’t cause too much trouble…at least within their borders, that’s why we’re prosperous, and others are poor.

East Asians are more comparable to whites in many ways than many other races.

The point is whites can do it, we don’t need illegals.

That’s cool. I’m waiting for you to get caught up before I dig in. In the mean time I have to work on a giant reply to Iambiguous. I shouldn’t put it like that because this is fun; not work :slight_smile:

@Serendipper

If someone doesn’t develop their land soon, say within a year, even if they’re paying taxes on it, it should be returned to the commons.
From there, either government can develop, or designate it a national park/nature reserve, or another private entity can develop it, or it can be left undeveloped until someone does.

I just meant that someone has to, umm, unambiguously, if you will, develop land, in order to own it, not that it should belong to whoever claims they can develop it most.

Might is to right what apples are to oranges.
Might is about what you can do, right is about what you, or others think you, or others ought to do.
Not everyone with might does the same thing with it, psychopaths have different considerations than men and women of compassion and conscience (which’s not to say men and women of compassion and conscience can’t also be selfish, or that compassion and conscience are necessarily incompatible with selfishness, or that compassion and conscience can’t manifest differently in different people or circumstances).
You’re talking about what you think is right all over the place, irrespective of what the bourgeoise, bureaucrats (qualitative might) and proletariat (quantitative might) think, I don’t know why you won’t talk about it here.

If that were true, non-politician republicans would win every term.
And if republicans didn’t value education, every republican politician would be uneducated.
While republicans may not value formal political education quite as much as democrats, because more republicans are rural, and weary of leftist state education (whereas more democrats are urban, and weary of the rightist church), they still value it, it’s a wild exaggeration to say they don’t.
And what Trump lacks in formal political education, he makes up for in worldliness.

People vote differently because of the electoral college, for example, a lot of republicans in California and New York didn’t even bother voting, for they knew their vote wouldn’t count in all probability.

So did Trump, accusations of racism and sexism, Russian collusion, tax evasion, etcetera.

I think a lot of people wanted a woman for a change, they were just too worried about illegals, Muslims and offshoring to take a chance on one this election.

She beat the other democratic candidates, who didn’t have all those issues, and Trump beat her, so he probably would’ve beat them too.

That tells you republicans were less concerned about guns and so on, and more about illegals, Muslims and offshoring.

He’s smarter than that plodding, mumbling, stuttering Obama.

Mestizos, Mulattos and others commit more crime than whites, per capita.

Firstly, at this point in time, a class 1 or 2 society is science fiction.

Secondly, I don’t want to put all my eggs into one basket, having one culture, nation and race makes us vulnerable, because if they fail, we won’t’ve anything to fall back on + we can’t as effectively specialize.

Thirdly, a multiplanetary species may diverge from itself, perhaps all the more so than a monoplanetary one.
If humans colonize other planets, overtime, some of these planets may become isolated from each other.
After millions, or thousands of years, they may become so different biologically, and culturally, inviting nonindigenous humans to live among them wouldn’t make any sense, because nonindigenous humans wouldn’t be as adapted to the environmental, and societal conditions as the natives, or they may not want them for other reasons: lack of jobs, space to accommodate them, because they’re inferior, or just unattractive…

Nativism is inevitable, perhaps all the more so in outer space.
Splitting off from one another isn’t necessarily a bad thing, there’s trade-offs.
And if you think it’ll be beneficial, you can still trade with others, while keeping them at bay.

There are trade-offs to virtually every course of collective, and individual action you can take.
You need context, in order to effectively determine what is right and good.

Worker’s rights?
The poorest people in society don’t work at all.

I say a society is only as rich as the sustainably productive are sustainably prosperous.
And both the unproductive (the underclass, and the overclass), and the unsustainably productive (them who mainly needlessly produce/consume) should be less prosperous than the sustainably productive (them who mainly needfully produce/consume).
What I’m proposing here is a little bit different than the traditional left/right paradigm.

I thought you said disparity/exploitation = growth?

economic growth isn’t necessarily a zero sum game, at least for humans, individuals and groups can work together to more effectively exploit nature than they could alone for the benefit of all, or exclusively, or predominantly for the benefit of the (most) (sustainably) productive.

Immigration is now negative, even if it’s European, in terms of crowding and polluting North American lands.

My community is now majority brown.

I’m not eliminating them, I’m preserving them (mine and theirs), mass immigration eliminates heritages.

I want to be surrounded mostly by people who reason and look like me.
The races differ, not just on the outside, but on the inside, their personalities, differ, the way they think, differs.
And to that you can add cultural differences.

I get what you’re saying, there’s more genetic diversity in bringing races together, because of the hybrids they’ll beget, than keeping them apart, but still there’s pros and cons to diversity.
A homogeneous population will produce fewer kinds of cancers/diseases, requiring fewer cures/treatments, whereas a heterogenous population will produce more kinds of cancers/diseases, requiring more cures/treatments.
A heterogenous population will have more body types, with heterogenous nutritional and toxicity requirements (convoluted, difficult), whereas a homogenous population will have fewer body types, with homogenous nutritional and toxicity requirements (simple, easy).
It’ll also be harder to get your diverse population to agree on anything, from what temperature a mall should be, to morals, values, politics and law.

Homogeneous Japs and Jews are still very successful, in spite of their shortcomings.

And birthrates wax and wane, living in an overcrowded land probably makes you less psychologically inclined to have kids, as it should.
As Japan’s population shrinks, they may become more inclined to have kids again.
Japan’s population needs to gracefully shrink to 10% of what it is today anyway, which’ll take a few centuries, and if it doesn’t correct itself on its own, external measures can be taken by government, without adding foreigners.

  • as I said a little earlier, advanced contraceptive techniques and sexual liberation are new things, when given the opportunity, some genetic lines will choose to self-destruct, but others will reproduce, and they will exclusively produce reproducers, so the pop will probably bounce back, evolution finds a way.

@Serendipper

https://www.cornandsoybeandigest.com/issues/soil-wealth-why-north-america-feeds-world

Plenty of places had grasslands.

The Aztecs, Incas, and especially the Egyptians, west, south and east Asians had plenty of domesticated animals, and plenty of other places probably could’ve had domesticated animals as well.

Whites are so proud of themselves and their ways they’re committing biological and cultural self-genocide.

The fit shall inherit the earth, according to Darwin.

Sometimes it’s beneficial to open your borders, and minds to foreigners, sometimes it’s detrimental, foreigners bring good and bad, again it depends on the context, and your preferences.

North Africa was a desert when Egyptian Civilization sprung.

Interesting how civilization arose in the harshest place in Africa, where Caucasians lived.

We’re citizens, and we pay taxes, they’re illegal, and they do not.

We, are entitled to this country, and so are legal Hispanics for that matter, illegals are not.

Or we could do what both Trump and, some of what Bernie proposed we do to raise wages.

Altho perhaps it’s best each state mandates its own minimum wage, like each Canadian province mandates theirs.

everyone knows made in China or Mexico stands for cheap, low quality, potentially hazardous, toxic products.

And if you go out of your way to buy from China or Mexico, you support child slave labor.

Democrats want to turn the US into the world’s largest safe space, free from all accountability, free from all social and political dissent.

We’ll need lawyers present during copulation.

Again, cutting taxes for the middle class.
Fairer trade.
Helping to prevent further illegal immigration and offshoring.
Forcing other countries to fend for themselves, instead of relying on the US for financial and military aid.

And while I’m mostly in favor of universal healthcare, Obamacare was unanimously pegged as a disaster, it needed to be dismantled.
The US is always going further into debt, and it’ll keep going further until the federal reserve is abolished.
Trump has at times talked favorably of raising the minimum wage, and he knows most Americans, including his base, are in favor of raising it, I highly doubt he’ll reduce it.

I’m uncomfortable with Jewish bankers, but overall, I think he’s been okay for the poor, unemployment is down, wages and working conditions are up, even the democrats admit the economy is his strongpoint.

If no one did any work, we’d all starve.

You’re talking about running everything on machines, terraforming planets and economic and social re-engineering, and I’m the one trying to force my ideals on nature?

Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn’t, a one child policy worked for China.

I mean are you saying prohibiting theft, rape and murder doesn’t work, are you an anarchist then?

If so, then why’re you pro-Bernie, shouldn’t we instead let the system get so bad it’ll implode, so we can build our anarchist utopia in its ashes?

Democrats are no better.

Hitler had a lot of bad ideas, along with some good ones.

Because allowing criminals and drug addicts to have and raise kids doesn’t cause suffering?

I’m not advocating we prohibit anyone from doing anything, I’m just saying society shouldn’t just hand people money, without expecting anything in return, it shouldn’t be completely unconditional.

If you want something form us, we have the right to expect some things from you in exchange.

I don’t associate interregional brains with creativity anymore than intraregional brains.

That sounds more like intuition to me than creativity.

Creativity is intelligently making a new discovery, or making something new and useful or interesting.

This can be done intuitively, holistically, and haphazardly by synthesizing a ton of data simultaneously, without being able to show your work, how you got there, or it can be done reasonably, reductively, and methodically by analyzing a ton of data in a linear, sequential, step by step fashion, or some combination of the two.

Gays are more feminine, and so they’re more sensual, fashionable, and perhaps more creative at some artistic things than straight men.

But probably worse at philosophy, science and engineering.

If you look at most philosophers, scientists and inventors, they’re unkempt, and their attire is pretty plain, drab.

Gays are probably good at pop art, but poor at the sort of art Beethoven, and Goethe are known for.

I think I’m pretty well rounded.

We don’t know that, life may not get another chance, but even if does, it may not resemble us at all, and it’ll probably always be behind where we could’ve been had we not destroyed ourselves.

If our exploration of ourselves, life and existence is putting us in grave danger, than it’s best we refrain, until we figure out how to proceed safely.

There’s no rush, we may not ready for certain kinds of knowledge.

When someone invents a replicator, than I’ll concede, we don’t have to work, but until then, we do.

I see what you’re saying, but while we probably shouldn’t have to work as much as we do, everyone who can work, should have to do some work, until there’s no work left to do, which’ll be somewhere between thousands and millions of years from now, if not impossible.

She wants special considerations on account of her race, religion and sex, in a majority white, Christian country, it’s absurd.

@Serendipper

This’s an exaggeration.

While perhaps the Boomers didn’t grow the economy or make as many scientific or technological breakthroughs as their forefathers did (which, btw, is an indication we’ve picked much or most of the low hanging fruit, economically and so on), the economy, science and technology continued to progress under the Boomers reign.
Boomers by and large managed to maintain, and expand on their forbearers accomplishments.

Here’s a list of Boomer inventors:

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUS182429596720101222

For better or worse, perhaps Boomers were more socially and artistically revolutionary than the generations that directly preceded them.
On the other hand, perhaps the beatniks, existentialists, Dadaists, jazz, flappers and the nuclear family get overlooked for just how revolutionary they were for their time.

I’m neither especially anti, nor pro-boomer, or any generation for that mater.

On the one hand, middle class boomers tend not to want socialism for their kids, on the other hand, I guess they tend to give their kids more of a helping hand than the generation before them on a private, individual level.

And while I’m in favor of more socialism, it’s not all good.
If we’re not careful, reallocation of money and property can become corrupt.
Taxes can be raised more on the lower classes than the upper, and spending more on bailing out megabanks and corporations than individuals.
State corporations can become just as competitive, cutthroat, ruthless and rapacious as private ones, charging too much for their goods and services, and paying their workers too little.

each generation is always a little less mechanically inclined, and a little more academically inclined than the previous, at least that has been the overriding, prevailing trend for the last couple of centuries.
One generation isn’t really superior, there’s trade-offs.
For the most part, each is a product of the times they came of age in, rising to the challenges of the age in which they live.

While the young tend to be a bit more publicly educated than the old for better or worse, the old tend to be a lot more experienced.
It’s not as if higher education wasn’t available to the boomers.
It’ll take decades before the young become as experienced, and by then, the young will be the new old, and the old will be some combination of senile, and dead.
I’m not saying old people are necessarily wiser than young, but they tend to be, and all other considerations being equal (like intelligence, which’s of course something different than knowledge and experience), they are.
I’ll say there were things that were true yesterday, that’re no longer true, or as true today, so the older generation do have to step out of the way some.

This is a half truth, the older are wiser in that they’re both more aware of how much they don’t know, and in that they know more than the young.

I don’t think it’s so much that old conservatives have no respect for public education, as they realize there’s a hell of a lot more to learn about life than what’s taught in school.

Foolhardiness is, and the young are eternally earning their reputation for it.

Or does experience, and the wisdom gleaned from it inclineth one to conservatism?

Nor would I, but still there’s a lot of bollocks taught in public education e.g. gender studies.

I think the republicans were better than the dems this term, normally I can’t see much, if any difference between them.

If you think democrats aren’t also in cahoots with the megabanks, military industrial complex and multinational corporations, think again.

I don’t identify as right wing, there are things I’m far left, center and far right on, I prefer to be flexible.

And if you seriously hate white people, you need to go back to your country of origin.

Minorities hate people because they envy them.

@Serendipper

Again, with or without machines, if no one works, no one eats.
The machines aren’t going to build, repair and fuel themselves, they’re not going to farm your food, bring it to your home and cook it for you, they merely assist us in these activities.

We need more fairness, not to exchange one class of parasites for another.

If you force them at gunpoint, probably, but you shouldn’t.
And how long can that go on for?
The quality and quantity of essential goods and services will plummet if individuals don’t have to earn them.
Hitherto parasites lived in destitution and squalor.
If they’re given the good life, and the opportunity to have as many kids as they like, you’ll debilitate and dumb down the population, and you’ll wind up with a society say resembling the one depicted in the film idiocracy.

But they are both examples of non-academic thinking.

Common sense no longer tells us the earth is flat.
It is the collective wisdom of common people, and it evolves as people become more, or differently experienced, as people (re)interpret their experience, as people reinforce their (re)interpretation of their experience by talking to each other, and as people are publicly, privately and self-educated.
Rather than thinking of it as necessarily in opposition to mainstream academia (yes, I said mainstream academia, there’s alt academia, just as there’s alt media and alt everything), it can be thought of as complementary, and supplementary (altho there’s nothing necessarily wrong with being in opposition to mainstream academia, as it can be mistaken, or corrupt).
And academia evolves, not only on its own, but by interacting with, and learning from common sense.
I’m an epistemological pluralist, I don’t look to one (sort of) institution for insight, or one method, I employ a variety.

Intuititon is what we do everyday, millions of times a days, because we can’t think through every decision we have to make linearly, sequentially, because we can’t consult a book or a professor all the time, for they have limits, and life itself has none.

Just about his whole shtick is about mushin, wu wei, Zen, hands-on, go with the flow, play it by ear, swim with the current, think on your feet, not sure how you missed it.

I’ll try to dig something up for you.

I’m in favor of a decent minimum wage and, sustainable social programs for the poor.

Nowadays at least, republicans are more libertarian than they are Christian fundamentalist or fascist when it comes to free speech, it’s democrats who’ve become authoritarian, merely criticizing, hell, insufficiently praising minorities, women or something loosely associated with them is an intolerable act of terrorism to them.

I’m surprised to hear you say that, you’ve done nothing but praise dems and rebuke and ridicule republicans.

I see, so you’re in favor of guns, and presumably not a (liberal) feminist?