What is this, why is OT making me laugh again? Stop trying to draw me back to posting! =DDaddyCoolVipper wrote:
I'd disagree but my genes are preventing me from forming an opinion other than the one I currently hold. Oh well, off to vote for the Conservatives; it's in my British blood after all. Except whenever Labour are winning. Genes fluctuate like that, it's quite incredible.
Wait, maybe B1rd thinks that his stubbornness is caused by a fucking genetic limitation instead of his ego lol.
forum
ITT 2: We post shit that is neither funny nor interesting
posted
Total Posts
56,159
Aurani wrote:
I love such comparisons that both the left and the right come up with. Listen, the entirety of the USA is a shithole and everyone there is to blame. Not the whites, not the negros, not the yellows. It's about their national culture being completely fucked up. From the way they raise their children to the way they function as humans - just fucked up.
Such mentality is slowly creeping up to Europe, where old traditions and life are being replaced by feces.
Traditionalism > cancer
can I get a source on that?
jokes aside
"Listen, the entirety of the USA is a shithole and everyone there is to blame."
How in the fuck is the entirety of the USA a shithole? Give examples. You could literally replace the USA with any country and that sentence would still be viable.
It's about their national culture being completely fucked up. From the way they raise their children to the way they function as humans - just fucked up.
Okay. Stop. Like B1rd said, you just sound like a stereotypical eurofag who is O B S S E S E D about the Americans they see on multimedia.
you're embarrassing yourself
"Not the whites, not the negros, not the yellows."
oooohh. nice. nice and edgy. you said negro and yellows. edgy. nice
Traditionalism > cancer
Are you implying that traditionalism is dead in the US? Oh no, it is very much alive in non-democrat states. Such states don't tend to be as obnoxious and loud as California or New York, though, hence why you probably think traditionalism is dead.
Traditionalism > cancerWhat even is the cancer in this case?
OT
OT never changes
my humble and uneducated opinion is that US politics needs a full overhaul to either move away completely from the current two-party system, or to somehow clear out both parties of the public and private corruption plaguing them in order to move forward
also, politics should not be a day job but that's not going to be changing at this point, so at the very least there should be transparency in where and how money flows in it. politicians are meant to represent the public, so the public should have a right to see what or who is influencing the politicians
but that's never going to happen so we get to watch the country slowly eat itself up instead
OT never changes
my humble and uneducated opinion is that US politics needs a full overhaul to either move away completely from the current two-party system, or to somehow clear out both parties of the public and private corruption plaguing them in order to move forward
also, politics should not be a day job but that's not going to be changing at this point, so at the very least there should be transparency in where and how money flows in it. politicians are meant to represent the public, so the public should have a right to see what or who is influencing the politicians
but that's never going to happen so we get to watch the country slowly eat itself up instead
I'm sorry I'm triggering you by talking shit about your country, but I'm not going to budge from a firm belief that you can't disprove. Prove me otherwise and we might have a discussion. I mean it's sad enough that every single stereotype about murrica is true, so why even try to defend it?Foxtrot wrote:
can I get a source on that?
jokes aside
How in the fuck is the entirety of the USA a shithole? Give examples. You could literally replace the USA with any country and that sentence would still be viable.
Okay. Stop. Like B1rd said, you just sound like a stereotypical eurofag who is O B S S E S E D about the Americans they see on multimedia.
you're embarrassing yourself
oooohh. nice. nice and edgy. you said negro and yellows. edgy. nice
Are you implying that traditionalism is dead in the US? Oh no, it is very much alive in non-democrat states. Such states don't tend to be as obnoxious and loud as California or New York, though, hence why you probably think traditionalism is dead.
If you want me to be a Eurofag, I'll be a Eurofag. Europe > Murrica
As for the yellows and negros, well, of course you're going to skip the fact that I said white as well. Apparently I can say white, but not yellow or negro. What is this, tumblr? Begone.
As for traditionalism - it depends what you see as such. If you go by the actual definition of it, then no, it's not dead. It's just some twisted and adjusted form of it that turned into what you can call the society you have over there.
I also wanted to add a note about the California and New York example you gave, but the bloody devs made it so you can't edit your posts unless you move onto the new forum, so they can go suck a dick.
Aurani, since this forum won't be existing much longer, I'd like to say that your entire online personality just seems contrived and fake, and I've never sensed any actual sincerity in anything you've actually said.
Well I hope you enjoyed sharing your opinion. I really don't pay much heed to opinions, because if I did I probably wouldn't be where I am today.
As for your opinion - I can only say that that's your issue, not mine. You ought to adjust your senses in that case.
As for your opinion - I can only say that that's your issue, not mine. You ought to adjust your senses in that case.
Please stay on the line, your call is important to us.B1rd wrote:
Aurani, since this forum won't be existing much longer, I'd like to say that your entire online personality just seems contrived and fake, and I've never sensed any actual sincerity in anything you've actually said.
I'm sorry I'm triggering you by talking shit about your country, but I'm not going to budge from a firm belief that you can't disprove.I can't disprove that some parts of the US are shitholes because they are, I never denied that. What you said is that the entirety of the US is a shithole. Wouldn't you be kinda salty too if I said the entirety of your country is a shithole even though you knew it's not true? I'll just drop this link real quick
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/11/america ... -2017.html
A lot of these states happen to be "tradionalist" states, and the quality of life is high while crime is relatively low. Can you call such states shitholes since they seem to fit your criteria?
I mean it's sad enough that every single stereotype about murrica is true, so why even try to defend it?By that logic, that means the GOOD stereotypes are also true, so why would that be sad? :\
If you want me to be a Eurofag, I'll be a Eurofag. Europe > MurricaDid Muhammed rape you into saying that? Haha!
As for the yellows and negros, well, of course you're going to skip the fact that I said white as well. Apparently I can say white, but not yellow or negro. What is this, tumblr? Begone.Because saying white is as racist as saying yellow and negro, right? Just drop the act. If you wanted to say actual racist slurs, you could have just said cracker. You could have just said "black" as well, but it HAD to be negro. Real classy.
As for traditionalism - it depends what you see as such. If you go by the actual definition of it, then no, it's not dead. It's just some twisted and adjusted form of it that turned into what you can call the society you have over there.Is it possible to be more vague than this? Begone.
First quote: I was making a point that murrica is a *CULTURALLY* shit place - not that it has bad standards of living or that it offers no attractions. Being a melting pot of cultures makes for a weird amalgam that I would rather stay out of. That's my opinion on it, and I'd rather raise my child in almost any country in Europe than over there. I mean it's enough to say that I'd rather let my child grow up in Israel where rockets hit every now and then than constantly wonder if the kid is gonna get mowed down by some mentally ill person with enough of an arsenal to conquer some Middle Eastern country.
As for Muhammed raping me - real classy indeed. Try being more mature if you want to give me shit for responding to your childishness in a childish manner.
As for the negros - I always say negro, even around people of that colour, and none of them have ever said anything against that, because I never meant it in a racist way. The only people to EVER get triggered by such things are those who spend too much time on certain pages on the Internet. I neither meant to be racist by saying negro nor yellow. If I wanted to be racist I would've said chingchong and nigger, or thief - whichever you prefer. If you're trying to be the sjw Internet police, you can sod off. I'm not into that sort of shit.
As for Muhammed raping me - real classy indeed. Try being more mature if you want to give me shit for responding to your childishness in a childish manner.
As for the negros - I always say negro, even around people of that colour, and none of them have ever said anything against that, because I never meant it in a racist way. The only people to EVER get triggered by such things are those who spend too much time on certain pages on the Internet. I neither meant to be racist by saying negro nor yellow. If I wanted to be racist I would've said chingchong and nigger, or thief - whichever you prefer. If you're trying to be the sjw Internet police, you can sod off. I'm not into that sort of shit.
Since when did "negro" become un-PC?
Both America and Europe have culture, albeit different sorts of culture. European countries have thousands of years of history, their own languages, cuisine etc, America has a legacy of fighting against the British Empire and forging a new country. Though I really love classical European food and music, but I'd have to say I prefer to live in America, it's the embodiment of the European classical Liberal tradition, which didn't really succeed in overturning the established powers of Europe, but found fertile ground in America when the founding fathers essentially founded a country on those ideals with the constitution. Though the American establishments have been corrupted a significant deal, I think the original culture of freedom is still fairly alive.
Not that I've been to America of course. Though if you're gonna berate a country for not having culture, then Australia is probably the worst in that regard. We didn't even have a war or anything, just sort of got our independence in an undramatic fashion.
Not that I've been to America of course. Though if you're gonna berate a country for not having culture, then Australia is probably the worst in that regard. We didn't even have a war or anything, just sort of got our independence in an undramatic fashion.
B1rd wrote:
We didn't even have a war or anything
...In connection with the Emu question I have this to say: it is a shameful
spectacle to see how the whole democratic world is oozing sympathy for the
poor tormented Emus, but remains hard-hearted and obdurate when
it comes to helping them which is surely, in view of its attitude, an obvious
duty. The arguments that are brought up as an excuse for not helping them
actually speak for us Australians and Aboriginals.
For this is what they say:
1. "We," that is the democracies, "are not in a position to take in the Emus."
Yet in these empires there are not 10 people to the square kilometer. While
Australia, with her 135 inhabitants to the square kilometer, is supposed to
have room for them!
spectacle to see how the whole democratic world is oozing sympathy for the
poor tormented Emus, but remains hard-hearted and obdurate when
it comes to helping them which is surely, in view of its attitude, an obvious
duty. The arguments that are brought up as an excuse for not helping them
actually speak for us Australians and Aboriginals.
For this is what they say:
1. "We," that is the democracies, "are not in a position to take in the Emus."
Yet in these empires there are not 10 people to the square kilometer. While
Australia, with her 135 inhabitants to the square kilometer, is supposed to
have room for them!
I mean, you have half of that equation correct but I find it unlikely that you'll figure out the second half in our lifetimeB1rd wrote:
Aurani, since this forum won't be existing much longer, I'd like to say that your entire online personality just seems contrived and fake, and I've never sensed any actual sincerity in anything you've actually said.
no need to feel bad, it took me a long time as well
also
I mean you're free to say your opinion, but I just don't understand why someone would say that to someone else apart from it being a poor attempt at trying to get them pissed? "Listen, you are FAKE news, I know it because I know you better than you could ever know yourself!"
y'all dumb thots, stop being mongrels towards my baby serbian angel.
fuckin wild ass kids
too bad your qt bby angle can be quite annoying at times!Milkshake wrote:
y'all dumb thots, stop being mongrels towards my baby serbian angel.
Love you, Aurani <3
Milkshake wrote:
BABY ANGLE
Thanks! It's doing great in school too, I'm glad it's not obtuse.
Well I'll admit I overdid it by claiming the ENTIRETY of it was shit. Some places and people there genuinely make me want to visit it, and when I say visit it, I mean *actually stay there for quite a while*. Yes, most crowded places there are filled with the same people I mentioned in the argument we had, but the rural places as well as some towns are absolutely filled with nothing but beauty and niceness. I'll try not to be more reasonable, but it's definitely not some kind of act or fake personality or whatever Bird was on about.Foxtrot wrote:
too bad your qt bby angle can be quite annoying at times!
Love you, Aurani <3
<3
History lesson for B1rd and anyone else who admires the Nazis.
I'm only one minute into the video and already there's bullshit there. The fuck do the Jews have to do with American gun control? He's taking ONE incident in modern history and uses it for his own argument. I'm VERY interested in hearing what he has to say because this is actually just laughable.
"How many Jews would've been put in ovens if they had guns" - that's not how it fucking works lmao
No civilian, no matter how deranged, would've shot someone who told them that they need to come with them because they're under investigation or another specified reason, and by the time the Jews DID know where they were going (aka going to be murdered) they were facing actual soldiers so yeah, good luck giving a random civilian a gun and telling them to shoot 5 fully equipped soldiers with professional training. Even if we make the assumption that they COULD shoot and possibly get rid of their captors, we're talking about a 1 in a thousand case, and even THEN, where is that person going to go? You have to remember, they kinda LIVED IN GERMANY. You couldn't have left Germany without a reason by the time they started mass-killing the Jews. The Jews who did run away, ran away before that started happening, but after they started mistreating them.
tl;dr Most of them didn't see such a thing coming, and even if they did, they would've been powerless to stop it, because owning a gun has shitall to do with being taken prisoner and burned in an oven in a concentration camp.
Now let's see what the vid has to offer
"How many Jews would've been put in ovens if they had guns" - that's not how it fucking works lmao
No civilian, no matter how deranged, would've shot someone who told them that they need to come with them because they're under investigation or another specified reason, and by the time the Jews DID know where they were going (aka going to be murdered) they were facing actual soldiers so yeah, good luck giving a random civilian a gun and telling them to shoot 5 fully equipped soldiers with professional training. Even if we make the assumption that they COULD shoot and possibly get rid of their captors, we're talking about a 1 in a thousand case, and even THEN, where is that person going to go? You have to remember, they kinda LIVED IN GERMANY. You couldn't have left Germany without a reason by the time they started mass-killing the Jews. The Jews who did run away, ran away before that started happening, but after they started mistreating them.
tl;dr Most of them didn't see such a thing coming, and even if they did, they would've been powerless to stop it, because owning a gun has shitall to do with being taken prisoner and burned in an oven in a concentration camp.
Now let's see what the vid has to offer
Yeah, it's incredibly sad to see people pushing that argument. They're either completely ignorant as to the historical context of the Jews in Germany at the time, or they're being deliberately disingenuous to pander to people who politically already agree with them and see no need to check the factual accuracy of what they're hearing.
I'm going to assume the latter, because people like Ben Shapiro pull this shit so often that it all being accidental ignorance just seems ridiculous. You can Google this stuff in five seconds.
I'm going to assume the latter, because people like Ben Shapiro pull this shit so often that it all being accidental ignorance just seems ridiculous. You can Google this stuff in five seconds.
So basically, Ben Carson said something wrong? That's an awfully roundabout of saying it.
I agree with Ben Shapiro; even if the Jews didn't have a chance of defeating the Third Reich, self defence is still a right and moral good, even if you die in the process. Much better than dying like sheep.
I agree with Ben Shapiro; even if the Jews didn't have a chance of defeating the Third Reich, self defence is still a right and moral good, even if you die in the process. Much better than dying like sheep.
Awfully convenient though to suddenly shift the subject to guns.
Yeah okay this guy is actually supporting my point and isn't against it.
In my opinion, I don't have anything against owning guns, but under SERIOUSLY HEAVY regulations, or if not heavy, just extremely annoying to deal with.
I would love to use Serbia as an example of that, where you actually need to go through fifty thousand loops, sign a shitton of documents, join a shooting range and go through actual training, get 3 licences and pass a psycho test to get a gun (and no random stores to buy military-grade guns either, those have to be bought with yet more paper signing and other shit).
I would love to use Serbia as an example of that, where you actually need to go through fifty thousand loops, sign a shitton of documents, join a shooting range and go through actual training, get 3 licences and pass a psycho test to get a gun (and no random stores to buy military-grade guns either, those have to be bought with yet more paper signing and other shit).
Sounds good to me, too. I'm pretty libertarian to some extent; I think freedom should be a decent priority. I don't see why Americans seem to think that freedom to buy and use guns should extent to any fucking lunatic though; restrictions that try to ensure that they're in the hands of good people are just common sense, from my perspective.Aurani wrote:
In my opinion, I don't have anything against owning guns, but under SERIOUSLY HEAVY regulations, or if not heavy, just extremely annoying to deal with.
I would love to use Serbia as an example of that, where you actually need to go through fifty thousand loops, sign a shitton of documents, join a shooting range and go through actual training, get 3 licences and pass a psycho test to get a gun (and no random stores to buy military-grade guns either, those have to be bought with yet more paper signing and other shit).
America's violence problem isn't due to lack of gun restrictions, It's due to a multitude of factors, like the drug war, gang and ethnic violence as I've pointed out before. The mantra of "guns don't kill people, people kill people" applies because there are heaps of countries with high gun ownership that don't have the problems America does.
Serbia actually has one of the highest rates of firearm ownership in the world, and has a lower homicide rate than many other European nations.
Serbia actually has one of the highest rates of firearm ownership in the world, and has a lower homicide rate than many other European nations.
B1rd wrote:
It's due to a multitude of factors, like
...lack of gun restrictions?
Why are you arguing with a strawman, B1rd? I don't think I've seen anyone- EVER- argue that gun violence is solely caused by a lack of gun restrictions. Think before you start rattling off propaganda talking points for once, would you.
That's why you create restriction to filter out people like these from having guns. Drug addict? No gun for you. Engaged in ethnic violence? No gun for you. Part of a gang? No gun for you. And so on.B1rd wrote:
America's violence problem isn't due to lack of gun restrictions, It's due to a multitude of factors, like the drug war, gang and ethnic violence as I've pointed out before
Are you using the new forum? Traitor.
Did you spontaneously drop 20 IQ points? Because that's a really bad interpretation of my post. Violence doesn't originate in guns, it originates in people. And you see this in my point about all the countries that have loose gun restrictions but have low homicide. As I've pointed out, gun availability has little effect on homicide rates, and you're a lot better off targeting the root causes rather than going on a crusade to violate people's rights. Since gun control has never proven effective at lowering violence. Like in Australia, where the gun buyback did pretty much nothing (except for spiking up the burglary rate by a fuckton), and New Zealand which didn't institute the same measures has the same decline in homicide that was already happening before the gun restriction.
Did you spontaneously drop 20 IQ points? Because that's a really bad interpretation of my post. Violence doesn't originate in guns, it originates in people. And you see this in my point about all the countries that have loose gun restrictions but have low homicide. As I've pointed out, gun availability has little effect on homicide rates, and you're a lot better off targeting the root causes rather than going on a crusade to violate people's rights. Since gun control has never proven effective at lowering violence. Like in Australia, where the gun buyback did pretty much nothing (except for spiking up the burglary rate by a fuckton), and New Zealand which didn't institute the same measures has the same decline in homicide that was already happening before the gun restriction.
I don't have a problem with restricting firearms from irresponsible people, problem is it's a really bad idea to give that decision making power of who is "responsible" to the state. I'd rather than responsibility be upon the community and firearm distributors. Although in current society it's basically illegal to deny service to anyone so there's your problem.abraker wrote:
That's why you create restriction to filter out people like these from having guns. Drug addict? No gun for you. Engaged in ethnic violence? No gun for you. Part of a gang? No gun for you. And so on.