Because they tend to think countries don't need societal cohesion

Turning point USA celebrated when Nick Fuentes got banned. They don't really care.

Im more or less libertarian and i believe in the need for societal cohesion

I just dont think culture can be government mandated

Its a community thing to uphold

Yeah, but many with the "I just want to be left alone" mindset ignore that when you leave society alone

it goes to the left

Either way we are kinda just circlejerking here

What we need is what are we doing going forward

We're not circlejerking if we are discussing and occasionally disagreeing lol

Circlejerk is agreement with no substance

I just didn't want to get caught up in just complaining like those I get upset with

The best way to stay optimistic is to keep looking for how to improve it rather than pointing the problems

Culture can certainly be influenced by government interference. It seems our government has been largely indifferent when it comes to cultural matters, only endorsing new changes (i.e. gay marriage) when they become wildly popular.

In Hungary, the govt. initiated a massive fertility program that increase fertility rates.

I do what any one man can. I talk about shit. I hold certain values publicly, both politically and not. For better or worse my friends know i stand for personal responsibility for example, and i back it up. I have a good marriage and will teach my children

Screenshot (Feb 26, 2020 7:24:31 PM)

I stay up to date and educated and write to politicians

I am among friends now

A picture of Eric carimella

In China, for the worse, the government destroyed old Chinese ideas such as Confucianism.

So, it's highly plausible that culture is influenced by government, among other things.

Im not saying it cant be im saying it shouldnt be

Even when corporations decide to push gender theory?

Correct.

Ideally that corporation would go woke go broke

If not, its one thing to be influenced by Mao telling you to submit or die, its another to be influenced by some mandatory seminars and subliminal ads.

Gucci, for example, hasn't seen a major decline in profits, yet they recently launched an ad campaign whose central idea was "gender-fluidity".

If people gave it a second thought they wouldnt be influenced

Either that or they want to be influenced for another reason

The average person isn't culturally conservative, so it's not like they care if Google promotes globo-homo.

You cant outlegislate ignorance. If you can combat it at all, its through the community

The objective wouldn't be to out-legislate apathy. It would be to prevent companies from pushing destructive cultural changes.

Too idealistic for today's government, obviously, but a conservative culture is superior to a liberal one.

sperm banks are degenerate and need to be banned, change my mind

If the PEOPLE cant be trusted with preventing companies from destroying culture, what makes you think outsourcing that responsibility to the government is any safer? If people are apathetic the govt will use that power to corrupt culture as well

And how so?

By pushing open borders?

oh shit yall are actually having a intellectual debate nvm

Sperm Banks should be considered child abuse actually

Unless you are married

A company has economic reasons for pushing degenerate liberal things, because consumerism and open-borders generate huge profits.

Putting a kid in a scenario without a father is so beyond fucked

Imagine being that selfish

I do agree, to an extent, that a government could be culturally destructive, like in China.

A govt need only keep corporate interests domestic, not control the attitudes that make corporations capable of pursuing certain things

you know what caused companies to become so evil

at least partially

Making them legally have to maximize profits

if they aren't fully owned by one person

I'm not advocating for a general or vague cultural filter, I'm advocating for a specific ban on certain destructive things.

It's possible, like with smoking for example.

We stopped smoking ads, and it had an effect on # of smokers.

Hard disagree. Theyre not always maximizing profits anymore anyway, they pursue personal agendas. Soros is technically influencing them as a person, much like we have the power to do in the aggregate.

I mean, their personal agenda barely costs them a fraction of their total profits.

They have money to spare, especially to influence the nation.

Well ChrisTiam, i hope someday a govt doesnt decide conservatism or gun ownership are "destructive" habits that need to be banned.

Like I said, specific bans on the ability to PUSH habits, not the habits themselves.

Whats common sense for me is not common sense for another. Lets sort it out as a community, not enforced under punishment of law

Like it or not, half the nation would find you destructive. You dont want to give the govt the power to act on that sentiment right now

Heck, a solid quarter wouldnt mind to see you dead

"Its not illegal to own a gun, but advocating gun ownership is pushing a dangerous habit, ban it"

A generation later, guns are banned anyway

The government would be able to do that now if Democrats had complete control.

The reason why this hasn't been done is because of plurality.

Well its unconstitutional... not that they care i suppose. But the answer is 1776, not flipping back and forth on who forces who to do what

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFUvLNL7E8Q

This was aimed at younger audiences, as described by GUCCI themselves.

The fact that companies are allowed the freedom to push this propaganda at children is why I hold my position.

The government, in theory, has as much power as the people gives it.

I know, for a fact, that many people would be angry if the government banned propagations of gun culture

However, even in a pluralistic society, I don't think, for a second, that anyone defends what's shown in this video.

A lot would be angry if you banned that too. But what matters is any normal person is disgusted just like you and i. How do we keep society normal? Community values

I don't know if that's enough, is all I'm saying. My generation, at such a young age, doesn't really care for traditional values.

I actually share your concern. I dont know if its enough, but from my perspective its all i got

Most people are too apathetic as well, most boycotts fail miserably because no one commits anymore.

Democracy is the worst form of government, except for every other form of government <:trumpmoji:624684793036275730>

Democracy meaning republic ofc

The constitution can be suspended using a national emergency iirc

patriot act lets the government ignore citizenship if deemed a terrorist

lmao

"rights"

We have rights because we aren't a threat

Not do be all doomer on you, but that's the current state of the government

They own the laws and the means of enforcing them through courts

Selectively

But hopefully we change it after the second term

We did a lot to fight their courts already in the first term

Actually the reason we have rights is precisely BECAUSE we are a threat. Try to take them away, you have a problem. If they disarm us, different story.

FBI raids you if you are a threat

and the court gag orders you

They also ruled the US govt. can ignore constitutional rights during wartime when they imprisoned Japanese-Americans in WW2.

That case is overturned btw. Koramatsu

They'll just put you on a FBI suspected terrorist list instead

Well i guess when enough fuckery is afoot, the people act out, Zephfyre. Like by electing Trump

That is true

There is a natural breaking point for Americans imo

Like Pearl Harbor

Like 9/11

Like 1776