#pushback (Discord ID: 477183088141533209) in Nothing Left, page 4
Security Advisory: Links in messages may lead to maliciously operated websites that could track your IP address and reveal your identity, or they may contain harmful files. The DiscordLeaks team does not check links and cannot make any statements about the safety of following these links.
Some ways to protect yourself are:
- Do not open files downloaded from links, and do not run any programs that try to download themselves to your computer.
- Use anonymization measures such as Tor Browser or a VPN.
If you are using the Privacy Badger or other privacy extensions, you may need to whitelist Discord and related domains in order for the images to load.
@AcidOverride yeah read that as well.....sooo is just me or is the ANC back tracking from their original modus operandi because they fear war.....or maybe that is just a complete lie and they are just saying this to calm the status quo
The article says "One of the ways EWC could be implemented".... What he is saying is that this is one of the ideas on EWC and not set in stone
exactly! again no clear and cut way forward...always curve balls to throw us of from the truth
@AcidOverride Do you think we are at a point where war is inevitable, or do you think cool heads can still prevail?
Second question, how do you think landowners would do in a war?
@Tom_Servo one thing is for sure.....the boere are not going to stand back and watch how a gov just takes land without compensation....it is not our way and our culture. we don't giving land for nothing....like my father taught me NOTHING is for free in life not even the air you breath....hope that answers your question
@Tom_Servo At some point the balloon has to pop... I think people are reaching that point where they have no other way to turn to. War is realistic in my opinion, however, when you look at the numbers, can a minority really make a real difference in a war? Lastly, People tent to really have an impact when their backs are against the wall and when you are fighting for your survival, you have a purpose and with purpose comes determination.
@Robzombie Doesn't really answer it at all actually... but I think you are prob right in what you do say
But those who do start a war will be labelled terrorists
@Roovdwalt funny enough, go to any boer now and tell him "but we are out numbered" that boer will simply reply "so were we in blood river, history tends to repeat itself"
@Robzombie exactly, and that is why I say determination plays a big factor in any war
I also believe Farmers are smarter and can outwit our useless military
@Roovdwalt It's hard to see a war result go any way other than to those who control the army here... I know our army isn't the greatest force anymore, but I reckon landowners are simply outgunned (forget the numbers).
Doubt much support would come from abroad. We aren't that strategically important anymore.
@Tom_Servo I disagree on support, I think they would get support. I am optimistic enough to believe some governments around the globe will come to their senses, maybe not immediately, but soon enough.
There are secret groups currently being commissioned (as well as voluntary) to protect farms. And I'm not talking about random guys with guns. Those who believe farmers are on their own, are mistaken.
Of course, I could also be talking rubbish. *wink*
From an outgunned perspective, I agree, but "n Boer maak n plan"
@Tom_Servo look we don't want war, it is literally the last thing we want, some boere came up with great alternative ideas to solve the land issue but gov doesn't want to budge.....so wat else is there to do...defend what you have....and @Roovdwalt is right those that will appose the gov will be labeled traitors and terrorists....ironically the NP did the same thing to ANC resistance in the apartheid. and if one boer stands up we all do.....its our culture again and our pride i guess
@Roovdwalt Maybe... but China is more interested in us than the increasingly isolationist West (economically). Any western power getting involved would be doing so without a real economic upside, plus China would prob side with govt... so there is that to consider
we could be the future balkans
I suggest disabling notification to mentions only
That is why I am an advocate for Firearms, we should all have them and we should be stocking them up... and on the plus side, we can do this legally and by doing it legally, it also means we are doing the correct training as well
@Rendier you should be able to mute the channel for yourself on the top right corner
also true, but it might chase new people away
50 bucks says this chat on war makes it into Adriaan's article.
@Rendier Some of us prefer the notifications on some channels, Maybe we should "Pin" a message to let everyone know how to disable notifications if it is bothering them
China will off course side with the ANC, they invested billions into our country and they want a ROI (minerals ring a bell)
plus you make a big mistake to think our army is going to be a resistance....despite popular belief that our army is mostly black is a lie, and should civil war break out the ANC fears that there will be a divide in our army as the white oukes won't fight (speculation) plus most of our armies heavy equipment is not in working order and mostly decommed....
1. Before a war starts, it can be avoided. I just don't think our government cares.
2. I think they (land owners) will do just fine if they band together.
How to Mute channels on Discord: https://support.discordapp.com/hc/en-us/articles/209791877-How-do-I-mute-and-disable-notifications-for-specific-channels-
My fear isn't war at all....my fear is the racial damages that this whole EWC/land issue caused and will probably cause even more because we have a non negotiable gov. Looking at social media, a lot of hate has sprung up in the last year because all sides refuse to sit around a table and talk about the issues in our land....how do WE come back from this while we are head deep in.
No-one debates anymore, and the ones that do don't have real power
yeah that and they refuse to be open minded and look at situations/opinions from different perspectives other than their own. hell do not even mention the words 'look at it objectively' to the left, as they will immediately throw in the "white fragility" card in your face
Someone should Pieter that comments like this are bound to make farmers with more than 120k hectares of land panic
he should be more responsible in what he says
"By 13:30 the rand was trading 3.35% weaker at R14.72 against the US dollar, bringing its loss this month to almost 10%."
10% for any currency in such a short time spells disaster
haha ou Pieter....he reminds me of someone....Adriaan maybe?
Ok so I missed a really interesting conversation..great
I will kick off today with same question as day 1.... Anyone have thoughts on which personalities or parties represent the center in SA or global politics?
wow, that is a tough question
it counts 50% of your year mark
Well I am emphatically saying, there is none. The scale is always tilted one way or another. Especially with the introduction, growth and popularity of far right and far left, this my my opinion of course. But I do not think I am qualified to answer this 😂
Just read the last 2 days comments. RE: Trump; i'm with jerm,a lot of people especially women hate him on a personal level rather than what he is doing as a president. It's all emotions at play. "Oh he said that about women" almost all men talk about women lol women do the same about men. Do the people who wanted to vote hillary even know what her track record is,i'm glad she lost and hopefully never run again for president.
Some of my female friends are worse locker talkers than Trump
Re: Land; In 2016 i predicted zuma will be out a year before elections 2019,early 2018 is what i said when zuma will be out and ramaphosa will replace him. I predicted the anc will target farms to seize portions of it and leave the "business side/farming" intact. It seems i need to give more of my predictions😂 The mineral resource connections have been made regarding the land also,i checked out a few of them and found mining of gold/diamonds even fracking in northern cape mentioned. The companies want prospecting rights,much easier when a farmer no longer owns it. As for thinking farmers sitting back like zimbabweans did in 2000 when their farms where seized,the government must be fools.
If a civil war ever breaks out,it will be a full on guerilla warfare,and who is the masters of guerilla warfare who teached the world?...thats right.. us afrikaners. The british couldn't defeat the boers by military means. 600thousand british vs 40thousand boers they only won because they put our women and children in concentration camps. Jan smuts even said the war can still continue,but we had to stop due to concentration camps.All i know is If there is one guy you dont mess with that is a south african boer
@gonzo especially if you've put him with back against wall.
@Roovdwalt There has to be a center... We might just not recognise it if we call anyone to the left of us a communist and anyone to the right of us a nazi.
ME : I disagree with BEE
THE LEFT : You alt-right white supremist
ME : I don't think Trump is good for the US
THE RIGHT : You liberal snowflake
so the question remains, who represents an oke like me... my views are not homogenous with either the right or the left... I agree with each on some issues, and disagree on others.
I can't be the only one - I feel like it is an untapped market politically
I used to think that centrist politics were noble and good, but I've since grown up.
I don't see the appeal in 50/50 in all things. I am in no way centrist about EWC. It is immoral and should be opposed.
any news on zapiro?
the arm thing
@Tom_Servo I think there are many on the center, but again, "personalities or parties represent the center in SA or global politics" I am not sure, as all I know are still leaning one way or another. How do we define center? Could also be someone that Agrees with BEE but also agrees with Trump? it a weird pendulum and difficult to define
I'm not sure what you're asking, @crazyBoer . He declined my invitation and I said I'd draw a cartoon about it. I've not done it yet, if that's what you're asking. I've been very busy with the farm list stuff.
@Jerm Centarist does not mean 50/50. It's weird that you think that
Would you mind defining centrist?
I'm simply using the idea of centrist of being "in the middle". If I'm wrong, then I'm happy to use a different definition.
Well imm gonna play some old nes games.
I think being in the middle is a fair description... I think another would be compromising
it seems as though the far left and far right seem to agree on everything... regardless of how unrelated those issues might be
That's why I don't worry about left-right labels.
I support rhino horn trade. I support lifting of all prohibitions on drugs. Does that make me left or right? I don't care.
Its not about the label as it is about the representation
maybe I see the center as the grey area
where a lot of issues can often fall
Just ground your worldview on a set of values and principles. Everything falls into place after that. It's far more honest too.
but because outrage generates more activity, truly exploring the grey area is not rewarded
For me there are things on the left that I support as well as the right. That is why I hate the scale, maybe one way to define it is to have a set of values for the center? But again, it is one of those things that no one can ultimately stand for every center value... I agree that it is a grey area.
For me, most things are really that simple. Humans have a tendency to make stuff more complicated for no good reason.
Does me schnarfing a line of coke affect your life? No? Then come and persuade me not to do so. But don't use the state to come into my home at the expense of everybody else.
I would agree that we overcomplicate some issues, but most are geniunely complicated (if we are doing a truthful examination of the issue)
lets use the Alex Jones issue as an example
I am all for free market
but when companies have grown to the scale of FB, Twitter etc.... then they end up having unfettered power that can no longer really be regulated by the free market
Dont get me wrong Alex Jones is a warped douchebag
but should private companies have that kind of power...
@Tom_Servo I agree, and it is still tricky to me. We want private companies to have their own voice, but we don't want them to have the only voice.
same thing happened to the Guptas here
how did all the banks find the same thing at the same time
or colluding with each other which restricts free market
that was an orchestrated move... and we are all fine with it because it serves our purpose.... but pvt companies often need to be regulated
@Tom_Servo Yes, they should. But only if the market gave it to them. If they receive protection from the state, then no. The Guptas received state protection. Alex Jones is hated by the state.
The banks are only private in name. They're not actually private.
@Roovdwalt isn't collusion or monopoly the inevitable outcome of successful capitalism.
hence regulations start coming into play?
I am against regulating private companies, I do not want to stop innovation. But I agree that power can get to their heads and if there is a way to have them free without them colluding, I am all ears.
Collusion can happen in a free market, but it's hard to say since we don't have free markets in the free sense.
Monopolies can only exist when the state prvoides protection. Monopolies can't exist in a free market.
@Tom_Servo Private companies are regulated by the market and don't require state regulation.
huge amounts of capital investment have made it impossible to disrupt the existing "production" means
Facebook is protected by the state.
Let's go back a few steps, to keep clarity.
"huge amounts of capital investment have made it impossible to disrupt the existing "production" means"
Where did the huge amount of investments come from? And why did they happen?
And why did they invest?
I havent polled every investor
but I assume they saw value in the company
The answer is because it looked like a good investment because it is a good product.
So, now they get lots of investment and people go "no, we need to stop that because now they're too big".
No. Compete. Create a new product that will take it down.
so Alex Jones should do that?
is that a realistic comment?
this is the grey area I am talking about
Apple was almost bankrupt in the 90s. Microsoft had 93% of the computing market. Apple then found a new way into the market. Apple is now sniffing 1 trillion dollars in value.
free market can result in some unintended consequences
in this case a situation where free speech is regulated by corporations
dont get me wrong, still our best system by miles
My problem is that you cannot regulate "Bias", because we all have them, you like green I like blue, who decides which is right? If Facebook is left leaning, we cannot control that and we shouldn't be regulating them "to not be left leaning" what we should have is an honest mission from Facebook, describing their values and being open about it. If that is the case, people like Alex Jones knows the platform is not for them. Facebook should NOT be able to come after years of you being on the platform and say, sorry, we have changed and you are no longer welcome here.
Facebook has every right to censor him. It's not his platform.
so you are okay with censorship if it is corporate sponsored?
I think it's absurd to censor Alex Jones because it makes him more famous.
Well, a private company should be able to do what it likes, in that sense.
I don't like it.
But it is what it is.
this is one of those grey areas
a supremely successful company, that becomes a vital part of freedom of expression should not be bound by their own terms of service... should be bound by consitutional definitions of free speech
it is kind of anti free market
but it is pro free speech
and there are tons of these... but it seems political discourse is more about winning an argument than exploring a solution
Not every private company is "bad" why punish all with regulations that can cripple especially the small business.
My problem with the Alex Jones issue is that all these platform colluded to get him out, I have no problem with him being banned though, but the fact that it was some secret agreement between all these players who frankly should not be concerned about what other platforms are doing.
Okay, so then at what point does Facebook lose its policy right?
@Gonzo no company is good or bad... it is a machine. The market can attach a value to morality and in that sense the market is "good" or "Bad" .
But people are generally dense, that is why we dont write a constitution by referendum
@Roovdwalt That's exactly it. Mark is known to be a leftie and Obama buddy. He doesn't like anything "right wing". Google is in a similar position to him. They even fired a dude who said that women and men are different.
@Jerm Not saying I have the answer... but it is something I have been wrestling with, because I do not think it is simple
It IS simple. The government has made it complicated.
and I feel certain corporations are starting to have power beyond manufacturing and supplying goods. They are shaping society, and that is a problem
The moment a company is in bed with the state, you no longer have capitalism / free market.
@Tom_Servo I agree that they are shaping society. At the end of the day that doesnt matter, because we all as individuals have a choice to be on that platform or not. There are alternatives (Maybe not popular) but at the end of the day we have a choice to be on or even contribute to these platforms
What's wrong with a company shaping society?
@Roovdwalt Jones has been banned off all platforms now.. What options does he have?
Again he is a cuckoo nutcase and I disagree with him on literally every single thing he says... but if he has not broken the law (not terms of service), then why should he be deplatformed
If people don't like it, then they can go elsewhere.
didnt they have their serverrs shut down by microsoft
in the wake of this
if they host jones
They are up again because they went to someone that would help them... free market
I think you might feel differently if you were deplatformed by FB, twitter etc...
and again, I am not saying free market sucks... just saying that some things are complicated
Like I said, keep things simple.
1. Is the company operating freely?
2. What state restrictions apply to the company?
3. Is competition hindrered?
There is always an alternative in my opinion.
its is only simple if you willfully choose to ignore the complications
It is complicated, you are right
It is only complicated if you willfully choose to ignore the simplicity.
but not impossible
Everything is about people. Once you understand human behaviour, it makes everything simpler.
I'd suggest reading some Hayek, Friedman, and Sowell.
If you argue that a company must be regulated by the state, then you must also explain how you arrived at the regulations and why you believe the state is the most efficient regulator. Based on, well, EVERYTHING, the state is a very inefficient regulator.
State and regulation shouldnt be in the same sentence
because again, is blue right or is green right... and I dont want the state to decide that
I smoke (I don't, actually). My wife doesn't want me to smoke. Which is more efficient:
1. She threatens not to have sex with me until I stop smoking.
2. The government increases sin tax on tobacoo.
Like I said - I dont have the answer, but I can say that the power to silence held by these companies is not healthy
you are blind if you dont see that
You're right. It IS unhealthy. I've never said otherwise.
@Jerm I agree with you on the tobacco.... although I will include the caveat that if smokers are shown to put more of a burden on state funded healthcare, then they should contribute more toward that healthcare
I agree it is not ideal, but it does open new avenues like Gab... The people will move when they cannot be heard and their followers will follow
State funded healthcare shouldn't exist. Here is an example of the government making things complicated.
If you want healthcare, then you choose to pay for it. It should be voluntary. Problem is that it isn't. NHI will be forced onto everybody and then people will choose to still pay for private healthcare after that. It's compounding the matter and not very efficient. It's like paying a tax on top of a tax.
your arguments are really very similar to arguments I have with communists.... Communism presents the following problem. Yes, but this is not pure communism that problem wouldn't exist in pure communism.
if we can both agree that something is problematic, why can't we discuss all possibilities of addressing it
even if one of those thoughts might be in conflict with an existing belief?
I'm anything but a communist. I support individual freedom. That means I support your freedom to do as you please. There's nothing remotely close to communism there.
you defend the free market using the same logic that communists use to defend communism
I gave examples to highlight my point. I noted the problem with state healthcare, for example.
- in this particular case
Let me make it even simpler.
I dont know why we got to healthcare frankly... I am raising the issue of FB and free speech.
your argument is that FB is not really operating in a free market
so the problem wouldnt exist if we just did it right
I have a guitar. I want to sell it and somebody wants to buy it.
The trade can be as simple as that. But the state interferes in that trade by forcing itself into getting a cut of the sale. It then takes that cut to expand its own authority.
more like... you have 90% of all the guitars.... someone else has the other 10% but none of them can be tuned properly. You refuse to sell me one of your guitars because you dont like the music I will play
or we can skip analogies and look at the actual case I put forward
@Tom_Servo You only think about the big guns without thinking about the consequences for the start up. Strict regulations will make it much harder to to even start your business.
it is easy enough to understand without a metaphor
Facebook having the right to choose who gets kicked as opposed to being told who to kick are two very different political spectrums
FB got big because the market liked it. Now that it's very big, suddenly it can't have a say over its own behaviour?
@Gonzo This is a valid concern... and I am not dismissing it... as I said, I dont know what the solution is, but I think the solution lies outside of a pure free market solution
I dont think we have had a "pure" free market anywhere
sometimes this has worked out well, and othertimes badly
but I think it is naive to believe that a pure free market can realistically exist. (a lovely ideal, but not realistic)
@Tom_Servo I dont think there is an example of a pure free market (Not on a big scale anyway)
Facebook funds political parties. The fact that the state allows this is what starts making things complicated. This obviously affects Facebook's political influence later on. And this is an example something simple being turned into something complicated.
@Jerm so facebook shouldnt have the freedom to have a political view
how dare you limit the market this way 😬
They should have the freedom to a political view, but I think they should then be outspoken about it
I am being faecitious
Well, Facebook is just a group of individuals, so obviously they have their own interests. They should fund out of their own, rather than on behalf of Facebook.
but if shareholders dont agree with how they spend money politically they could disinvest
or use gab
are you even slightly seeing my point here?
nothing exists in a vacuum
theory is just theory and reality is sometimes messier
doesnt mean we should throw the theory out though
I see your point, but it's not very strong. You're not happy with FB's size and want them to be more regulated by the state, but can't clarify exactly what your criteria is.
Again it comes down to choices and our little negotiations in our heads , do I use Facebook or Gab? Facebook gives me reach, but Gab gives me political freedom... We make these choices as individuals and most prefer reach to political freedom for some strange reason
@Jerm nope cathy newman... I am concerned about the power Facebook has over free speech and am not convinced that free market theory will address this adequately
@Jerm sorry unneccessarily rude - being said with a smile on my face
Also, free speech does not exist.
That's the first problem with the arguments around free speech.
People need to define it.
You aren't allowed to speak smack about my fiance in my home. Therefore, your free speech is curtailed.
You can't shout "bomb!" in a place. No free speech there either.
A business newspaper won't publish my cartoons about sports. No free speech there either.
if a printer refused to print your newspaper despite your willingness to pay then this would be comparable
A printer doesn't have to print your newspaper.
your house is not vital to public discourse
so no problem
It's not your right to get their business.
@Jerm, I agree, you will chase someone out your home and that is your right, but you should not be able to fine/arrest someone for offending your fiance
if printers had their own TOS, and refused to publish the Rapport because they were carrying one of your cartoons
Like I said, it's not your right to get somebody's business.
back to work for me....
As a matter of interest, when last have you changed your mind on an issue?
i think this convo is getting out of hand.....
That's why I'm not longer in the mainstream anymore. 😂