ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
No bio...
User ID: 822
'There can't be any "members" of Antifa. It's just an idea, not an organization, bro.'
"Corruption" is just an idea too; that doesn't stop us from punishing those who advance its cause.
Man I always complete forget that the Zumwalt exists
Yeah, it's a stealth ship, that's how it works.
But that gets too close to the truth of the matter: illegals are an invading army, and they were actively aided in their invasion of the US by the people in power at the time, English Civil War-style. (Which is why the domestics responded, correctly, by voting for the guy who promised to send his army after them.)
That the foreign soldiers should be treated differently than the domestic soldiers (Blue's other pet demographics, as they carry out the violence they wish they were doing to those with something to lose) would just be too much, because it would open the door to using it on other useful-to-Blue demographics (or "racism" for short). It's also not something you can really turn against Reform as easily, because Establishment benefits disproportionately from the ability to make the process the punishment- that's not something you could do if you have the right to a speedy trial a more efficient tribunal system, and certainty of being punished for bad laws speed-camera-style generally results in an stronger impulse from the population to reform them.
and they should have a plan to protect children just in case
Why? Those children serve as the hair trigger for the tripwire force (they've learned well from Hamas), and you don't even have to arm them for them to be effective in that role. Aggressively putting them in danger like that is kind of the point.
At least if they do get killed you don't have to wait very long for their replacements- it takes 14-16 years for a militarily-effective male to grow, but little girls can play the part of "cry for the cameras while being on fire" in as few as 5 or 6. Lightning fast by comparison. (Dead babies aren't quite as photogenic.)
you might end up with a legitimate secessionist movement
It's kind of already here. It doesn't have as much support in the cities (NDP voters [progressives] are 95-5 against, UCP voters [traditionalist-liberals] are 60-40 for, UCP is majority party) but it's clear to every Westerner (and Easterner, for that matter) under 40 that they'll never be permitted to win an election in this country- outside of one 4-year period they never have.
It's treated as absurd, as if QC has the exclusive right to agitate so
QC is different because they don't actually need to hold the executive to get what they want.
AB, by contrast, has to hold the executive; if it doesn't the Easterners just team up to block everything. Older AB residents are probably made happier by the Carney regime's recent overtures about more development... but those aren't really his policies, and even the CPC voted for those bills. I don't think it's as reliable a signal of "well they're going to vote LPC at the first opportunity", this is the bare minimum that the LPC believes has to happen for the country not to splinter.
every single conservative leader is prima facie suspicious
This is because, from the only politically relevant perspective in Canada (Easterners), they are foreigners.
I can't really overstate that enough. Western Canada is a foreign country to them, and that means their political parties are foreign too- CPC and NDP both. The NDP collapsed because it was indistinguishable from the LPC (and is why its only seats are out in the West).
You never vote for a foreigner in a crisis, Trump is the Worst Thing Ever to the Eastern Boomers, QED.
This isn't that complicated, unless you're of the opinion that Canada is a political monolith (which polls tend to do, for reasons that at least rhyme with manufacturing consensus).
Why should anyone bother voting Conservative if it just means tax cuts and infinity immigrants?
That's why they lost the last 2 elections. This is why PP continues to have that mandate, by the way- at least he's saying Reform things this time rather than "but we should bend over backwards for whatever Karen of Toronto wants". You can't win that way, you see.
The NDP was the other counterbalance for reform, but they're arch-Conservatives now, which is why they're so indistinguishable from the LPC that most of their MPs are LPC now.
we may see Canada simply become a one-party two-bit petrostate.
If the petrostate part of the petrostate isn't smart [or powerful] enough to prevent that, and content with losing elections for ever, then it will be so.
it will create a decade-plus backlog of appeals in a system that is already not fit for purpose.
Nonsense, this is the system working as intended. Who's going to hold it to account? Clearly, voting doesn't matter- whatever party rep you selected is just going to go LPC anyway becuase fuck you, that's why.
What's even more insane is that legacy Canadian media appears to be supporting this push for his deportation to be waived.
Media system working exactly as it's intended to.
the Liberals have managed to somewhat skillfully defuse immigration as the bomb around their neck
Immigration was never a bomb around the LPC's neck, though: it helps exclusively their voters, and that's the only Canadian that matters.
See, LPC voters care about two things, and two things only: the price of their house, and flapping their jowls at the US (and any liberal reforms in that direction; the LPC is a Conservative party, not a classically liberal one). Carney is objectively the best candidate for those things, and that's clearly good enough for a dictatorship.
but the sheer number of them in such a short span of time, let alone to form a majority government, is entirely novel.
Yes, the government just straight up refusing to respect the results of the election is extremely novel for Canada.
Question is, of course, if anyone's going to care about that; or if the people that do care the most (i.e. people who don't live in Ottawa) are simply going to decide to quit. Sure, oil prices being higher helps those people in particular, but who knows if that's going to last.
Which means the Internet is the final frontier (in both the 'infinite probability space' and 'the last one that exists' sense), and to a point is still beyond the reach of the Karen. (Which, of course, is why the states proposing this are who they are.)
The thing that people tend to miss is that it is vital to the health of any society that Karen must be oppressed, because she deserves to be. But then again, that's just the mission statement of/justification for [classic] liberalism.
My eight year old neice doesn't have a smartphone, but kids at her school do and have shown her videos of ISIS beheadings.
Ah, older siblings. Where would we be without them? (A better place, perhaps?) Perhaps more interesting is the apparent fact they're able to correctly spell 'beheading', given their typical performance on the more pedestrian spelling tests and the lack of auto-complete.
Kids have been grossing each other out and watching absurd nonsense since forever. Porn is kind of like that [for them] too, for that matter, though I get that women (and their simps) complain about normalizing the concept that women have sex, occasionally on camera- which is naturally/by instinct what they're trying to stamp out. Of course, these women will then turn around and assert that a 7 year old boy willing to play with the dollies is trans and needs immediate medical treatment.
I'm less concerned about teenagers and more concerned about very small children.
I believe you are incapable of telling the difference between the two. That property affects young adults (and by extension, older adults) more negatively than it does small children, for obvious reasons, but it's fun to do that to them so people see that as a value-add. It's neutral at worst; it's not like they vote.
The free for all status quo simply allows those norms to be set by tech companies, rather than by parents.
Or rather, currently the norms are set by reality, not parents. Naturally, parents are very angry and Stressed(tm) out about this.
yet decline to call this sexism
It's only sexism if it's against women.
It remains a gynosupremacist statement, however; X-supremacy was what "X-ism"s were invented to prosecute.
I think his arguments were retarded, but really his biggest flaw is that he was unwilling to talk about literally any other topic
And this is different than the GP's "natural order is man > woman, anything else is Satan"... how, exactly? (Though I get that JuliusBranson, whose alt that was, was/is just kind of like that- and to be fair mangoodwomanbad generally isn't used as a self top-level post, or when it is, it's not quite that naked.)
The trick about arguing against discrimination against children this way is that it's kind of like arguing against discrimination against those poor in worth more generally- and it might be justified simply on those grounds- it's simply what's in the water and thinking about it too much means you're only in it for the miscegenation, so to speak. (Actually, I guess tomboys also count as miscegenation under those rules.)
Sure, but feminism and communism (the two most common ideologies of this type) can take a very long time to break that society, especially if that society is lucky enough.
We do have one example of how fast things fall apart, of course; South Africa's trajectory is a pretty clear object lesson on that.
- Prev
- Next

No, corruption is the idea that your personal goals are so important that you're willing to break the law to accomplish them. Antifa, therefore, is simply corruption by another name.
It isn't illegal to be a member of the Mafia either, but they're never punished for that; they're punished for the evil, corrupt actions that naturally arise from that idea taken to its logical conclusion.
More options
Context Copy link