Page #1
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6|
Started by #559941 [Ignore] 11,Dec,18 14:01
New Comment Rating: 0 Similar topics: 1.TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME 2.examining Trump Derangement Syndrome..Defined, symptoms.. 3.TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME DEFINED 4.Symptoms of Trump Derangement Syndrome.. 5.Signs you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome.. Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
It's wrong because Nazis stand for the opposite of what I base my socialism on,
which is very much related to humanism. I think every person has an intrinsic value and the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness and I think everyone has the duty to respect all people's intrinsic value and right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The best way to do that, is to not giving all the power and money to a few wealthy people, who exploit other people and the democratic system that people have organized to protect them against exploitation, to maintain and expand their own wealth and power. Socialism supports a more equal distribution of power and money, with the intent of not getting exploited. Socialism respects the idea that all people are created equal, capitalism doesn't. Understand that when you argue against those ideas, you are arguing against The Declaration of Independence,
The Bill of Rights and The Constitution. It will make you LESS 'AMERICAN' than me!
My basis for morality is completely different from the basis for the 'morality' of the Nazis, which was/is: only their race has any value, if at all, and people's only right is to serve the glory of the master race.
Do you understand the difference? Are you smart enough to digest that?
"You can say well it isn't as bad." No, because that makes you a Nazi. It's BAD!
"Like what the fuck, its either right or its wrong." So? What is it? SAY IT!!
"I showed this because it is the best explanation the smart ones here can digest."
What are you showing? That you can ask if Nazis are bad?
If you even have to ask, then what is your morality based on?
Sure, you can reduce morality to its basic premises and ask:
"What is the basis for claiming that Nazis were/are bad?".
It's fine to think about your basis philosophically, but if you STILL need to do that,
on such a basic level, then do that first and come back to debate me AFTER.
I have progressed well beyond that level, for decades, and I'm not debating people who are stuck at that level.
I don't see you discuss those semantics, when you say socialism is bad.
But, when it's Nazis, then you start asking questions, like "Are they really?".
I find that remarkable.
I support free speech. You can say whatever ignorant shit or lie all you want, as long as you don't break the law, which should be minimized to incitement, defamation, fraud, obscenity (with very wide margins), child pornography, fighting words (with very wide margins), and threats (with very wide margins).
I of course will use my free speech to compete with the ideas you put forth with your free speech. That's called 'The marketplace of ideas'. In contrast to some of you, and your straw-man of liberals, I'm not looking for a safe space to get my own ideas parroted back to me, but I'm seeking out people with completely different ideas and I'm discussing the IDEAS head on, with arguments, while minimizing cheap tricks like straw-manning and personal attacks. Some of you have the same principles, some of you prefer straw-manning and personal attacks. The last is only a sign of weakness.
Kevin Sorbo was a mediocre actor, but he was muscular enough to be Hercules. When he aged, his acting didn't save him. It happens to almost every actor and
even more actresses. Only a rare talent or being associated with roles that are
less dependent on looks saves some of them.
But, right-wingers and Christians have all been talked into a massive victim complex, which is easy to abuse as justification, when you lot get washed up. When they stir up that indignation strong enough, they will get asked for really bad conservative propaganda flicks, out of pure sympathy, for their fake battle against woke.
So, don't be sad, just like there is a good market for 'woke' movies, there is also a good market for right-wing propaganda movies and failed or washed up actors to appear in them. The market is way smaller, but in contrast to the movies you call 'woke', those right-wing propaganda movies are funded massively by wealthy conservative Christian fundamentalists. Not because they want to see that filth themselves, but because they want YOU to see it.
then you don't have an argument.
Anyone want a laugh, watch this...
only registered users can see external links
Just a cut job clip of Biden making a joke. HAHAHA, he's old!
There is hours of Trump showing his brain rot. Go look at that!
And if you weren't so stupid yourself, you would understand that even before
his brain started rotting away, he was already too stupid to be president.
His ideas to cure people of corona were a bright light in the lungs and
injecting bleach. Hell, I've never even heard you say SUCH dumb things.
And that's saying something.
TS6 shows you Nazis and you say that shows that progressives are Idiot lunatics. WHY??? Why are progressives in any way remotely similar to Nazis?
Give a fucking coherent argument for once in your life!
With the low bar you're setting, it can only be better than expected.
----- watching a few minutes -----
What the fuck! Are you kidding me? This is just some WWII movie?
You were even worse than I expected. This is the biggest straw-man,
combined with projection, you ever presented. (That is, when I assume you're Trump_supporter_2, because as Trump_supporter_6 you haven't said much yet.
If you're not, than exchange "you" with "everyone here".)
The Nazi's were not socialists, they just used a term that was popular then. They did massive privatization of the means of production and they took away democracy.
Those are the opposites of what what I stand for and what my Socialist Party stands for.
Meanwhile, Trump is talking about being a dictator. He says "for a day", but that's all he needs to wipe out the opposition and destroy democracy. The next day he will pronounce the empire of Trump.
What freedom are you talking about? The freedom to vote for the Trump family?
Not the freedom to be a Democrat, a liberal, a socialist or to support any ideas besides misogyny, xenophobia, anti-science and totalitarianism.
Not the freedom to have an abortion, IVF or contraceptives. Not the freedom to travel out of state for it. Not the freedom to teach kids evolution or that gay people exist.
Most likely, not to have any religion besides Christianity, although Trump is not really a believer. It would depend if he would find Christianity useful or if he would prefer to exchange Jesus for Trump. Some of you already did. Freedom of the press will be turned into freedom to praise the Trump family. Freedom of expression will be expanded to be as much hateful and calling for violence towards minorities as you want, but any critique of that and the empire of Trump will be criminalized, just like Putin does.
Trump is the one who says the KKK are "fine people". He is actually being friendly with Nazis, but you project the love for Nazis onto me.
Trump is using hate and fear of minorities, to get his base angry and exited, just like Hitler did. His prime target is not the Jews, but the immigrants, the Muslims and the transgenders, but after you all deported and exterminated them, the gays and any non-white people will be next. Then you will thank the Jews for wiping out all the Palestines from the promised land and take it for yourself. You only act like you support them, because of that, but you hate them just as much as any other minority. I see you lot say that often enough.
If you cannot show your ideas to be better than mine, without using straw-men,
then you are just showing that you don't have any real arguments.
if you watch the movie from the time frame he stated, 1:05 thru the end of the citizens response,it is quite a eye opener.
and a good explanation of things.
That literally has been said by every dictator ever, including Trump.
Indeed, it's a straw-man to say: "Your ideas are the same as the ideas of the Nazis
and that why your ideas are evil!"
I could say the same to you. Would that convince you?
It wouldn't, because saying things like that is only intended to demonize the other side.
It is intended to easily win an argument for your own side.
It's called a fallacy. It's a dishonest tactic to evade having to put up real arguments, most of the time showing that people have no real arguments.
It's like me saying:
"You want to kill all blacks, gays, Jews and atheists and that's why you're evil!"
I know you don't want that, but I can make believe that you want that.
That's the straw-man. It's a scarecrow misrepresentation of you, to make you look bad.
That makes it easier for me (if I would do that) to win a debate.
Do you understand 'that strawman thing' now?
Do you understand why it's dishonest to use straw-manning?
only registered users can see external links
When Trump is messing up the pronunciation of words, that's Phonemic Paraphasia.
It's always evidence of brain damage.
only registered users can see external links
His problems with ending a sentence and mixing stories, that's Tangential thinking.
only registered users can see external links
When you start mixing up PEOPLE (not names) that's a sign of advanced dementia.
only registered users can see external links
Not knowing who the president is, is a sign of disorientation, it's the type of questions they use in an emergency room.
only registered users can see external links
When he uses incorrect, but similar sounding words 'god' I/O 'gun' or 'oranges' I/O 'origins', that's Semantic Aphasia.
only registered users can see external links
biden is, and he meets all the above listed criteria. so why the hell is he still in office? Because he can be manipulated.
I will take Trumps screw ups over bidens any day.
The recent nuclear threat from russia, Trump would have personally told putin where to put his nukes.
We could agree that it's sad that the other dementia patient is president at this time,
but no one should want either of them to be president. Your side just keeps pointing
this out about Biden, but you're dishonestly silent about Trump. Trump is doing worse.
You point to things as Biden's screw-ups that are absolutely not his fault.
But I'm very happy that Biden is president now, because Trump is a dangerous fool.
His chaotic behavior could have ended humanity any moment, in situations like this.
"Trump would have personally told putin where to put his nukes."
What a stupid idea that cursing Putin would stop Russia's aggression.
Putin is an evil asshole, but he is a grown-up with brains.
You don't pick a thin-skinned clown-baby to deal with a man like that.
And that's my description of Trump in his better days. He's even worse now.
It's sad that people, who think international politics should be handled
like teenagers on a schoolyard, think they are smart enough to vote.
OF course I would rather Trump be 47 years old and polite. But he aint .BUT worse case scenario, he is the lesser of the 2 evils I will have to pick from. the days of voting for the good man for the job are gone, if they were ever here in the first place.
No normal wealthy man with a good education and a good family life is going to be willing to risk it all and run for Prez anyway. Look at the hell they catch from which ever side opposes them.
OF course I would rather Biden be 47 years old and polite. But he aint .BUT worse case scenario, he is the lesser of the 2 evils I will have to pick from. the days of voting for the good man for the job are gone, if they were ever here in the first place.
No normal wealthy man with a good education and a good family life is going to be willing to risk it all and run for Prez anyway. Look at the hell they catch from which ever side opposes them.
Sorry, Phart. It was easier to copy/paste. BTW, as far as I can tell, Every past and present president has been rich.
Succes in obtaining money doesn't require the same skills
as being a leader who wants to improve the lives of people.
To be wealthy, requires nothing but selfishness.
To be a leader of a country who benefits its citizens requires dedication to the needs of everyone else, instead of yourself. It requires empathy, wisdom, patience and courage, instead of narcissism.
Are you saying good people who are not rich would be a bad president?
And:
Not being rich and being unsuccessful are two different things
Practically, in your country, so many people respect wealth and disrespect
the common man, that it would be almost impossible.
If you don't have the drive to work, and earn and invest, it is highly unlikely you have the drive to lead. Leading requires risk taking same as working and investing.
if you lead and your followers fail, you get to take the blame.if you work,invest and loose, you take the blame.
and be a sedentary welfare bum with no goals or hopes or dreams.
The 1's that don't take any risk are the 1's laid up at home, having never worked, on dope bought with money from stuff they stole and etc.
Lower and middle class people don't have that luxury. If their experiment doesn't work out, they are stuck working off the debt from their gamble for years to come.
Life is not without risk. That's not what you were talking about, so don't muddle the discussion. Poor people are taking way more risk of getting killed in a work accident than a manager, a CEO or an investment banker. There is a difference in the type of risk. Some people have a 1 in 10,000 risk of getting killed on the job. Other people have a 90% chance that their investment doesn't work out. That 10% that did find their gamble paid out, might have been smarter, but a big percentage of them was just lucky. And once they've had their first lucky break, the risk goes way down for the next gamble. The previous experiment provides inside into what works, people think they are smart and they have a financial buffer that allows a risk, without going broke.
Most people who are rich or wealthy started out with rich or wealthy parents. Most of the few that made it from rags to riches started out with a lucky break. Only a minority of rich and wealthy people are actually the very smart and talented people that you think all of them are.
And then some of them were just as morally deficient as those dope dealers and stealing people you talk about. Many start by scamming people, taking the pensions from old people. Then there are the legal, but morally deficient rich people who make money from payday lending companies, investment apps and g@mbling sites. They make money from gullible people. Their money making strategy causes incredible damage to society and should be regulated to death. But, I'm sure you don't agree and you respect people who get rich that way.
"The 1's that don't take any risk are the 1's laid up at home, having never worked, on dope bought with money from stuff they stole and etc."
There are people who are useless. But that's not the 50% of people who will struggle to survive all of their lives.
We cannot all be the owner class. Some people need to do actual work.
That actual work needs to be rewarded, with enough money to afford a place to live, healthy food on the table, healthcare, some luxuries and providing your kids the best education that they are capable of.
The only reason why it's not controlled to do less damage,
is because some people get wealthy from abusing the system.
Some people get wealthy from drugs too. People who use drugs should know better too. Still, you want to keep fighting the war on drugs, which hasn't worked at all. What's the difference for you?
Why is abusing stupid people who get addicted to drugs illegal and why should abusing stupid people who put themselves into debt with crazy high interests rates, which they never get out of, be legal?
Limiting predatory loans WILL work, because they are legal.
Regulation is the solution. (it's already legalized and taxed)
If you have a problem with stupid people making stupid decisions, banning the stupid decisions will only make things worse,
because they'll get what they want or need from an illegal source.
That's because praying on stupid people is very profitable.
The solution is prohibiting the damaging type and providing a
less damaging alternative, legally. Then most of the stupid people
will take the alternative and most of the damage is prevented.
The pay day loan system is sort of the legalized version of mafia
loan sharks, who break your legs if you don't pay back. The current alternative is less damaging, but NOT ENOUGH, because you just legalized the mafia. They won't break your legs, but they still scam people with contracts and interest rates, with the goal of taking everything they own. That's like legalizing the drugs cartels.
That's stupid, the solution should always include regulating the providers too. It's what my country did wrong, when they permitted
the sale of cannabis, but not the suppliers of the coffee shops.
And when they legalized the personal use of XTC and cocaine,
but not the suppliers. That resulted in a massive crime network.
And the idiot politicians still won't correct their mistake.
You shouldn't have Don Corleone manage the pay day loan business and not let El Chapo provide the legalized weed, XTC and coke.
I have the same solution for similar problems.
Your solutions are wildly different, depending on your feelings.
I don't see how cuddling dope heads would ever "help" them in a way that would ever prompt them to stop drugs.
"Well if I over dose they will just give me Narcan, let's party" .
1 of our emt's locally got cussed out 1 night by a dope head. He was od'ing and medically almost dead.They shot him with Narcan and when he came to he cussed out the emt for ruining his great high.
so grateful don't you think?
The solution is, if you get caught using drugs,you go to jail.if you get caught selling drugs you are charged with murder and attempted murder and put in jail.
NO BAIL , that is most of the issue,so much money in drugs bail can be 2 million dollars and they will be out before the ink drys on the paper charges.
I have NO sympathy any more for dope heads. Only the family's and children that suffer because of them. Starving kids cause all the money went to dope, homeless kids because the parents go to the clinic and shoot-up in front of doctors for safey. Hell no, no sympathy for them.
As for pay day loans, there have always been loan sharks.nothing new but the clothes they wear.
Title loans are another thing.But the dope heads figured out how to cheat title loans. They get a title loan in 1 state,scrap the car in a state that does not require a title to scrap the car, they get to buy dope with both the loan and the scrap money from the car. Leaving the family without transportation to the dr and so forth
and people are capable of self motivation. just to lazy.
only registered users can see external links
"no one is helping them" Is throwing them in jail 'helping them'?
I wasn't even talking about the drug addicts themselves or 'helping them'. I left completely open the choice between sending them to a state-funded rehab clinic, locking them up or just euthanizing them. That's a completely different question.
NOT EVERYONE WHO CONSUMES WEED, XTC OR COKE IS AN ADDICT.
And even if they were, which they are not, that's their responsibility.
The use of drugs shouldn't be illegal. It should only be illegal when you harm other people, like when driving under the influence.
The only argument I was making is that it is bad to exploit addicts.
It is bad when drug dealers do that and it would be bad if we let Pfizer do that. That's why I always say "legalize, tax and regulate".
Just like g@mbling and alcohol consumption are regulated (at least in my country) to prevent addiction, that should be the same for drugs. A drug addict is not more helpless than an alcohol or g@mbling addict. Why should they not go to jail?
(g@mbling is a censored word? Why? It's legal in your country)
Just like dope heads, people in deep debt from pay day loans and people addicted to g@mbling or alcohol, put their family in ruin.
So why do you have such different ideas about controlling drugs, pay day loans, alcohol and g@mbling? None of your arguments against drugs are different from the arguments against alcohol and g@mbling. You also have not shown any difference between exploiting people who borrow money at predatory conditions and get into huge financial problems from it and people who consume drugs and get addicted from it. Why is one legal and the other not?
Why should an owner of a liquor store not be charged with murder and attempted murder and put in jail? Do you know how many people die from alcohol and alcohol related traffic accidents?
I repeat: I have the same solution for similar problems.
Your solutions are wildly different, depending on your feelings.
My solutions are better. Your solutions don't work at all.
As for putting drug addicts in jail,that should greatly reduce or eliminate the chance of getting drugs , which would allow them to sober up. Let them suffer withdraw, water and beans,let em suffer.that way they can get a grasp of the suffering they cause familys when they kill someone driving doped up or drunk.
Taxing and regulating hasn't helped our alcohol or **** issues as much as the democrats claimed it would when they pushed for it to be legal. It just puts money to blow into their coffers,that they then budget to "help" the addicts" that their easy access to the objects of addictions created.
What part of it is so hard to understand? IF they can't get the drugs or alky or buy lottery tickets, how would they get addicted in the first place????
And then they come out with a criminal record and no future.
They will be addicts 10 minutes later again.
You have tried this for decades and decades. It doesn't work.
The US has the worst drug problem in the world. Try something else.
It's only your feelings of 'let them suffer', why you say that.
You don't say it for alcoholics or g@mbling addicts.
Ending the alcohol prohibition did do lots of things. It took away the revenue model from the mafia. The fact that they turned to drugs after exactly proves my point.
It is impossible to keep people away from drugs or alcohol, unless you create a repressive police state which is worse than the drugs and alcohol problem. Duterte tried it in the Philippines and murdered thousands of people, way more than ever died of overdoses. I thought you liked 'small government'? Do you think that a repressive police state like that would respect the freedoms that you like? They will search your house every time they find anything suspicious in your area, because that the only way to keep all drugs of the streets.
People who don't have hope for a better future will always find something to destroy themselves. Actively worsening their future, by jailing them for their mistakes, assures they will never recover. Only the hope for a better future and some help, can be successful in turning these people into contributing members of society.
And again, most people who use drugs don't get addicted. I know a lot of people who used a plethora of drugs and they are all doing perfectly fine right now. Your preferred system would have destroyed them.
People who get into drug addiction have character flaws that would get them in any other trouble too. Those people either need constant mental healthcare, or we accept they are unable to be contributing members of society and minimize their damage.
You might want to put them in jail forever, but that's more expensive than trying to help them. Sometimes it works,
sometimes it doesn't. I want to give them a chance.
Just look at countries where drugs, alcohol and g@mbling are criminalized and tell me if you want to live there. If you do, maybe convert to Islam beforehand, because I cannot think of any countries besides those. It's not a good sign if your ideas about freedom have so much similarities with Islamism.
People not being able to cope with lives little issues (or big issues) is indeed often the cause for them using alcohol or drugs. That's the wrong reason, but you can't solve that by giving them more issues to cope with. The better solution is to reduce the amount of huge fucking problems that people face every goddamn day of their lives, if they didn't win the birth lottery. Some countries successfully do that and achieve a better quality of life for most of their citizens. Some countries don't and turn the lives of their citizens into a living hell. I know in which country I want to live and that's what I support politically.
The end goal might be socialism, but even if that never amounts to it, in the meantime they are working hard to achieve more justice, freedom and quality of life for the citizens. I cannot say the same for the politicians that you support.
Do you understand the failure of your system, when you say that?
People should be able to participate in politics, based on an constituent of voters trusting someone to represent their ideas, not based on their wealth. Because then, they most likely just represent their wealth; their own self-interest.
Democracy is about representation of voters, not representing the self-interests of one wealthy person.
We have a prime minister and it costs NOTHING to run for that function.
You just need to be a member of a political party, climb up through the ranks to be placed on #1 of their election list and then get the most votes with that party.
For any outsider who wants to be prime minister, they need the signatures of 580 voters, $491,73 to register and deposit $12.293,32 to the State, which they would get back, if they can reach a minimum of votes corresponding to 75% of 1 seat.
Political campaigns cost money, even in our country, but a poor man has the exact same chances as a rich man, because people cannot use their own money to run for any office, in my country. It at least requires a political movement, with people supporting it, to get into any office. That's a safeguard to prevent any wealthy despot to just buy themself into power.
He didn't lead himself to prosperity, his father did.
Anyone would be able to maintain the wealth he started with.
I want the people in politics to care about people, not themselves.
The 'leaders' I choose, voluntarily give away most of their salary from their elected position as representatives, to the Socialist Party. What they would have normally earned, would lead them to prosperity, but they choose not to, because that would divert them too much from the people they represent; the working class.
They accept a compensation that is enough to live on, afford their own house, educate their children well, have some luxuries and go on 1 or 2 vacations/year.
That's the minimum that our party wants for everyone who contributes.
Most of the parties management is highly educated and intelligent,
they could lead themselves to prosperity, but chose to be public servants.
That's the type of person I want to REPRESENT ME, NOT LEAD ME!
I don't want ANYONE to lead me, I want to participate in DEMOCRACY.
And that's what I'm doing, regularly.
From the way you type that minimum of what the party wants, it appears to be a high maximum to me if you want them to represent the working class. Some jobs are Not worth what others are. A engineer that designs your bridges is a working man, the burger flipper is a working man,but it takes alot more dedication and effort to be a engineer, so his salary should reflect that,but with your system, it wouldn't be permited. So after a generation or 2, what would be the incentive to invest the time and effort to be a engineer when flipping burgers gets you the allowed limit?
Then when old Trump died, Donald took the whole inheritance for himself.
When you have that kind of money, you don't have to do anything. You just buy your way into several businesses and live the good life from the dividend. If Trump had done just that, he would have been more wealthy than he is now.
You think living like that is the maximum? OMG, it's so sad what they have made you think.
Even a burger flipper creates enough added value to live that life, if they got a fair piece of the cake. But, I told you before that flipping burgers is only a thing of capitalism, where wealthy people get their money by exploiting nature, workers and your health. It doesn't help society and it doesn't create much pleasure for people. It's bland food that only gives you a buzz, because it's full of fat and sugar and your body is programmed to like it. It's sort of an addiction. It's only capitalism that makes you think that giving people obesity and diabetes is good, because of the jobs. It's not good, it only serves the wealthy and harms society. Socialism would provide restaurants where you could eat a burger, but it would be more expensive than eating healthy, way more tasty, less harmful to nature and pay the workers a wage to do all the things I described.
Why? Because that's the smart choice, that serves everyone.
You don't want me to eat a hamburger but don't mind if I go shoot up some drugs?
THat is not utopia that is looney ville.
I do admit it requires some more skill to make veggies taste nice.
I just want to have the real cost of food represented in the price.
And I don't want factories to turn literal garbage into food.
I'm not saying I want to criminalize eating meat, I'm saying that the damage to nature should be included in the price. That will result in you having financial incentives to eat more healthy, because locally grown plant based food would then be cheaper than meat, especially beef.
Where we are heading, at this pace, you won't be able to afford beef anyway, in a couple of years. The price of all food will go up, whether we do something about climate change or not. Many farms in your southern states are already not able to afford the costs of water and food for their livestock. Clean water sources are drying up, pastures require more water each year and grain goes up in prices because of dwindling water sources too. Cows drink and eat a lot for your piece of beef. The calculations for the amount of beef produced vary from 4,000 to 15,0000 l water/kg of beef, probably based on the areas where they raise the livestock and grow their food. When water sources become scarce, the price goes up, affecting the prices of all products requiring water for their production. Eventually, we will be forces to just consume food that is produced with the least amount of water, which will eliminate beef the first. Pork is a little bit less wasteful with water and chicken is the most water efficient piece of meat. But chickens still eat more grain, than when we feed people on just grain. The longer you lot delay the inevitable sacrifices humanity has to make, the tougher the sacrifices will need to become.
It is freedom to be allowed to do things up to some level of harm you are causing with it. At the moment, eating beef causes a lot of harm to civilization. That should be reduced, because the level of harm is unsustainable.
I'm not talking about achieving Utopia, I'm talking about the continued existence of humanity.
Ignore the person running,ignore the party, I am posting this to show you it takes MONEY to run for president.
"You have got to pay for signature collectors,"
"Legal fees also are a big expense for independent campaigns trying to get on the ballot. That's because third-party candidates often challenge state ballot access laws, and face lawsuits filed by the major political parties."
Thats just 2 quotes from the page.
NOT to mention, third partys are seldom if ever allowed to debate on tv with the other 2 parties.
third party hasn't got a chance except in low density,small county or town offices.
that confirm their prejudices.
And who might you be? Are you a reincarnation of Trump_supporter_2?
If so, what did you do to your account?
which coincides with the disappearance of Trump_supporter_2.
And you pick up discussions exactly where Trump_supporter_2 left them.
There are actually more liberals than people like you in the world.
I don't believe you even really think what you are saying. You are either gaslighting or you think it's funny.
This is a site for adults, discussing adult subjects. Every sexual orientation and fetish is represented here. If you are not mature enough to handle that, you don't have to be here, you can leave.
You're obviously the same person, with a new account.
Your new account is just as empty as your last one.
It shows you have no intent of actually engaging in this community.
You listen to fake news and you think you are very smart but the truth shows in you every single time. Shows you have an incompetent weak mind. Easy diverted and brainwashed. So what can I do about it?
so I wouldn't have to repeat myself.
I you cannot tell the difference between a Canadian and a Dutch guy,
that shows YOU have an incompetent weak mind.
There is no 'NEWS' that supports socialism. The choices are limited to publicly funded broadcasting services, commercial broadcasting companies, independent YouTubers funded by views and commercial YouTubers and YouTube channels funded by donations. The publicly funded broadcasting services are incredibly centrist. They'll allow some programmers to make more left-wing and more right-wing programs, but none of that even comes close to socialism, or your MAGA extremism.
The commercial broadcasters are all owned and funded by large corporations. They don't allow any ideas that threaten their power. Many of the commercial YouTubers are funded by the same large corporations, but they lack the journalistic integrity. They'll either express their own ideas that are useful to their corporate donors or they'll lie for their corporate donors,
if they'll pay enough. None of those corporate donors like socialism, because it will the end the power and wealth of their wealthy owners.
About 75% of my media consumption is apolitical. It's things like this:
only registered users can see external links
Or this: only registered users can see external links
So, how is that brainwashing me? They are debates where both sides present their arguments and evidence and it's up to the listener to decide what they think holds the most truth. How often do you consider the arguments of the other side?
The one who is brainwashed is you; everything you think favors the wealthy donors of your media, who put those ideas in your head. You're a gullible sheep to them. That concerns your right-wing views and your religion.
Your religion has primed you to accept everything they tell you, without criticism or independent thought. It's all useful to the powers who control you.
And you are doing nothing but projection.
"the truth shows in you every single time."
Thanks!
At least I try to be mature and authentic. Can you say the same?
Socialism gives all the power to the government. The government can do whatever it wants through corruption and abuse of power. They control businesses. They can tax any percentage they want to. Is this your current position telling me I don't know?
I don't think you read my essays so I will use less words. obviously your reading comprehension is strongly limited. I will use less words and those words will have the smallest amount of letters so hopefully your 2nd grade reading skills can assimilate properly.0000 You do not understand democracy. The USA is not a democracy. It never has been. Never. The constitution is based on striving for moral correctness but it has never achieved its objectives by far. As long as you have abuse of power, lying, stealing and removing guns with freedom of speech the country is done. Our cities are destroyed and unlivable now.
when you give me a detailed definition on moral correctness, democracy and utopia and doing the right thing striving for democracy we can debate but as long as you continue with your brainwashed 1 dimensional brain of thinking or stupidity there is nothing we can do
I just can't believe that you start off stupid with the starts of our debates and you appear to get even more stupid every single time more and more..
The bullshit comment about you in one country and kebmo in another country is used for deception, just like you say I'm one with more than one account and was Trump 2. You do not have to prove your residence on this site just like verification is used to prove you are real. Stop trying to insult my intelligence, you will lose. And it doesn't matter. I don't give a shit if you were the pope. It makes no difference. So in conclusion "Spare Me Child"
I want to discuss like adults but if your reasoning and reading comprehension is limited there is nothing to be done here.
No, you are brainwashed into thinking that what your saying is true.
What kind of bullshit is it to compare moral correctness to political correctness? I want politics to represent my morality, not the other way around. I have explained enough of my basis for my morality, and how I expand on it to for my political opinions. You just say that yours is based on right and wrong, or moral correctness or altruism, without showing any link to your political ideas.
Definitions are useless, if you cannot show your words to contain any meaning. Definitions are for describing the meaning of words. We should have the exact same ones, because that's just the rules of language.
You can just go to Cambridge Dictionary and search those words.
I'll agree, most of the time. There are some words that are used very broadly. The definition is than not very useful. The term 'socialism' is overused, to mean almost nothing anymore. If idiots think it's the exact same thing for Stalin, Hitler, Cuba, Venezuela, Iceland, Finland or my Socialist Party, then the term itself can't hold it's own.
I'm also not going to define terms that you pulled into the discussion.
They are not useful for me, to explain my ideas. If they are useful to you, it's your burden to show the significance of them. If defining them does that, go ahead. It doesn't explain anything besides what you think those terms mean. If you think the term 'democracy' means something else than what society has agreed it means, saying 'the US is not a democracy' might be correct for you, but not for the rest of society.
"Socialism gives all the power to the government."
If that is your definition, than understand that I want that government to
BE THE PEOPLE! I want everyone to be involved in deciding how to best organize that government. That's power for the people to control what you call the government.
It's exactly the opposite of the straw-men you keep repeating.
Meanwhile, you support Trump, who only wants people to cheer for him and do as they are told. Then he picks a bunch of loyalists for his GOVERNMENT, to rule over them and you, with an iron fist. He will be the leader of the COMMUNIST EMPIRE OF THE SEPARATED STATES.
He will rule it like Putin and Kim Jong-un, because that's what he likes about them. "We wrote beautiful love letters to each other!"
And you are sad little sucker for not seeing it.
You want a government that controls women's bodily autonomy.
You want a government that reduces sex to only reproduction.
You want a government that takes away IVF, if they do want a baby.
You want a government that controls who people may love.
That's 'giving all the power to the government'.
If the large majority of people want gun restrictions, that's DEMOCRACY!
The Constitution is a blue print for how to be a democracy.
You are correct that it wasn't the perfect expression of democracy, but a compromise, to the southern states who didn't want a democracy at all. That's why they introduced the Electoral College, which provides stronger votes for southern states. The better options, which were similar to what we have in Europe, were not agreed upon by those southern states.
So, you have a flawed democracy, but at least it was the first one.
There is some 'moral correctness' in it, but the GOAL of organizing a government that way was providing people with rights, so they wouldn't want to support some king from England or France, coming over to take power, which is harder when you distribute power over more people.
When you just have a king, the enemy can easily behead the king and announce themselves to be the new king. Trump wants to be king or emperor and you're the gullible idiots who would give away your own power to that king, because you think you have less power now.
The only argument you have is; it's not really a democracy anyway.
Yes, it is, the majority just doesn't agree with you.
"As long as you have abuse of power, lying, stealing and removing guns with freedom of speech the country is done. Our cities are destroyed and unlivable now." Absolute nonsense!
Maybe you should use Russia's system? Didn't Tucker Carlson show you how nice their subways, grocery stores and super market carts are?
That's a guy from your side, literally trying to sell you COMMUNISM
and then you accuse my side of it. You cannot make this stuff up.
"The bullshit comment about you in one country and kebmo in another country is used for deception, just like you say I'm one with more than one account and was Trump 2."
Of course you are, do you think you are fooling anyone?
You are saying the exact same things that you said as TS2.
You still lied about it though.
It's all PROJECTION; you accuse others of what you are doing yourself.
Everything has been presented to you and plain. Yet you refuse to show transparency. Basically you are a con man that lacks total transparency to influence people you know is a lie.
I don't think you are stupid but smart with evil intentions. Your name appears to be consistent with a chronic fake maker throughout the years of the site in past. It doesn't make any difference to me. I could care less. You have not shown transparency. But I do and speak the truth.
personal attacks, but you say I'm the con man and refuse to show transparency.
Irony is lost on people like you.
Just like my son. If I come to him with 4 oranges and show him with oranges where 2 +_2 =4. And he still doesn't believe me. it creates a thick wall. The same thing with. I swear if the story is true what you are saying I would agree with you.
You say you are telling the true but you're not yet you refuse to have an opened mind. You want socialism but nothing has ever worked with socialism in history yet you are adamant.. How conning is that trying to fool me into thinking what you are saying. Keep in mind this is not a personal attaco. I'm here to find truth. you want to accuse trump bring sound proof so far you don't have anything,
I give you my word it has not too much weight of your poor characcter, but heavy weight as a liar tactics to brainwash children and othr people hopefull so that americans hhave brought people under the bus. but ouu cover wor him yt blame trump which is a disgracce.
I have an open mind to arguments, based on evidence and logic, not to a bunch of inconsistent claims, that you don't even provide the sources for, or any other reason to accept the truth of them.
Just like pure socialism, pure capitalism also has never worked in history before. There are still many socialist policies that HAVE WORKED to pull many people out of poverty and is still working in many countries, to provide their citizens with a much higher quality of life than the US, that doesn't have much of those policies.
But, you do you, and support politicians who want to destroy social security and medicare. Maybe old people will stop voting for Republicans, when they see their life made impossible. Or they'll just die and then they cannot vote for Republicans.
You can of course take care of your parents, like people did before 1935.
Then you can hope your son will do the same for you, when you are old.
But, if he doesn't believe that 2 oranges + 2 oranges are 4 oranges, I don't think he will be ABLE to take care of you in the future. Did he get one of your chromosomes in duplicate?
In any case, what type of economy I support has no relation to anything else we are discussing. Any subject requires it's own arguments, based on evidence and logic.
New Comment Go to top