@Deleted User So you see SJWs as corrupt, but also seekers of fascism just like you? Also who is 'our' in this context?

@Deleted User Can you tag who you're responding to? You're getting dogpiled and I'm not sure if you're addressing me :p

I've always been fascinated with the difference between Nazis (neo or otherwise) and communists. As a libertarian, they both seem like the same thing to me, because they both sit opposite to me as far as respect for capitalism. I figured it was probably similar to the difference between minarchists and ancaps. Basically the same shit, but the differences are super huge in their minds because they're really closed to all the little details.

But a fascist state can take what it pleases when it pleases, right?

No? So no nationalizing roads or banks or railroads or anything?

@Deleted User Wow so it's even closer to the minarchist/ancap divide than I even realized.

@Deleted User Ah! I see where the miscommunication is. To me 'capitalism' means the ability to freely trade and do business, keep your property, let the market decide, etc. To you it seems 'capitalism' means the financial industry.

As a fan of economics, I've always hated when people fetishize GDP.

@Deleted User So am I right in believing your brand of fascism would never do away with money, or seize great amounts of taxes or appropriate people's property for government programs?

Right... you see, when someone says to me that they're perfectly in favor of free markets and low interference of government in private business, then to me that's saying that you're a radical capitalist. It seems to be a semantic issue.

Oh. So the state will be in charge of what people do with their property and money, and will, at their discretion, change how you behave with it?

Not just to a minor degree, but as a matter of central planning?

Boy I'm confused.

Like I said, I think it's a semantic issue, but to me directing people's behavior morally, and allowing them to do what they want with their property are contradictory views.

So you would describe things like "You're not allowed to sell an exploding 'hoverboard'" as an example of a centrally directed vision for the moral control of the market?

So entrepreneurship is encouraged, unless you're a gay pride parade organizer, then your business gets scuttled?

But when I said 'the government gets to take what it wants when it wants,' you said no.

Ah. That's the problem. I didn't mean to imply whimsy. I meant to imply unchecked authority.

You lost me.

Maybe you're dwelling on the 'unchecked' bit. I meant 'unconstrained'

Not 'unreviewed'

Yeah. No limits on power.

No that's what I'm asking.

I'm not telling you what fascism is. You're the expert here.

The understanding I have from what you're giving me is basically 'Powerful people can decide to do literally anything.'

I'm probably just dense.

Why don't you tell me what the limits would be?

@Fulcrum010 Heh it's fascinating stuff.

@Fulcrum010 Heh I don't talk to Neo-Nazis very often. And he honestly has a chance to really make me understand where he's coming from here, but I think I made him mad. -.-

@Deleted User Don't worry. You're just presenting something very alien to people. You gotta have patience.

So, I see when I talk about constraints on the power of government that you mention constitutions, and that makes sense because it's a lot of how the nuts and bolts works in the west. But I think it's better to look at moral philosophy for your constraints. Lockeian type stuff.

Honestly this might be part of my confusion, because I don't see the lines in which government should be constrained as some sort of edict made by powerful people. I see it as a consequence of nature, or 'natural law,' as they say. That means there is no contradiction between 'having any laws at all' and 'there is no excuse for law X Y Z'

Because there is a delineation there that transcends.

'Rights' basically.

There must be some meme here I'm not familiar with :p

@Deleted User I'm not sure what you're saying... but I like the subject change. <:think_hitlerdidnothingwrong:378717099952177162> I don't think people can expect to get along just because they Christian and European. I can point to World War 1 and 2 as evidence that in fact the more European and Christian you are, the more likely you are to be at each other's throats.

Guess that would explain the name of the channel.

Personally I consider politics to be stuff that politicians do, and that the stuff we were talking about in <#372507611284766722> was philosophy, which is basically all Sargon ever talks about when he's not talking about politics.

But the birds have spoken.

Yeah.

I think collectivism is a lot like religion. It's literally impossible to fully support it.

Best you can do is pick one of the infinite sects and support that, and reject all the rest.

Individualists just go one sect further.

I've been thinking lately about the SJW-ifying of movies and games and TV shows and such.

I think I'm going to stop accusing creators of doing that unless they admit it.

Like Ghostbusters is still on the table for criticism because they're proud of it, but if I just pick up something like Gone Home and they're not saying the reason why they chose a lesbian romance is in order to promote social justice, then I'm just going to assume the best of their motives until proven otherwise.

And honestly even if they do admit to having a SJW bias the art could still be good, like Buffy The Vampire Slayer.

I think it's really sad that I'm forced to wonder, every time I pick up a piece of art, 'Is this SJW propaganda designed to manipulate me?'... I don't want to wonder that! I just want to enjoy it.

But I think I'm going to start erring on the side of enjoying things for what they are.

The thing I am *much more* concerned about are the things that they're *removing.* Like if you want to make a story about a black person struggling with the fact that he's in the inner city and everyone is a thug who's on welfare... you wouldn't be allowed. That just wouldn't see the light of day.

Feminizing the Ghostbusters is nothing compared to the crime of suppressing some raw and interesting story.

Sargon's next game night? http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/dungeon-classes

I think Sargon should cut Laurier University a little slack. At least they'rr apologizing. It's good to doubt their apology but they should be acknowledged thar they're at least trying to publicily side with us.

http://4.images.southparkstudios.com/blogs/southparkstudios.com/files/2014/01/1010-NICEE.jpg

You mean you guys didn't give a hundred dick skins at your wedding?

I'm a gun noob thinking of getting my licence here in Canada. I'm wondering what kind of rifles are best for home defense.

In practical terms, I would have to get something over 470mm long. Everything else is hard or impossible to get.

AK-47s are banned, AR-15s are all but banned.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/transcoded/4/45/%27Rule%2C_Britannia%21%27_%28United_States_Army_Strings%29.oga/%27Rule%2C_Britannia%21%27_%28United_States_Army_Strings%29.oga.mp3 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧

I'm happy Trudeau got reelected. Sure it would be nice if the joint wasn't run by a cuck but I think there was a bigger victory that got overlooked here.

He wore blackface multiple times, pandered around in wheelchairs and Indian garb and other horrible affronts to political correctness, and he ran anyway. He didn't retire in disgrace, and then he actually won.

This is awesome. This is how the world should be. We've seen this with Trump's election too when the 'grab 'em by the pussy' thing had no effect on election results, but it goes to show you that it's not just the right-wingers. Everyone except the radical left is sick of political correcness dominating our elections.

This is proof positive that there is a massive disconnect between what the media and twitter thinks is a career ending political gaff, and what is actually a problem in the eyes of the electorate. It's actually quite heartwarming to think that we're not alone. There is a dominant silent majority out there who is sick of political correctness, and it's completely non-partisan.

Well, if you want I can give you other examples. Like my home town Toronto elected a crackhead :p

I think there's loads of evidence that people are able to tell the difference between a politician's personal life and their professional life, and they can more or less set aside their personal life and focus on the issues that are important to them.

If only people knew about this fact in the past. Like, Clinton could have just said, "Yeah I fucked that intern. Can we talk about my actual job now instead please?" and contrary to everything the media was feeding us, that would not have destroied his career.

I think it's time for politicians, businesses, and everyone else to shed this lie the media has been feeding us for hundreds of years.

Politically incorrect gaffs, personal character flaws, etc. will not cause customers/voters to leave. Fact. We have loads of proof now that people can focus on job performance and ignore people's personal lives.

The bloody president of the United States loves bragging about grabbing girls by the pussy. What more proof do we need?

Trudeau has actual photos of blackface. He even admitted it and *then ran anyway!*

And yet people continue to act like it's the end of the world if somebody important says a naughty word on Twitter.

Despite all the evindence to the contrary, all the evidence that nobody except the media gives a shit.

Everyone knows it *now*, but if you asked somebody five years ago, "Hey. If I showed people this picture of me in blackface because I did it multiple times in college... do you think that would hurt my political career?" everyone would say, "Of course it would!"

But everyone would be WRONG.

Wether you're running for the left or for the right. In both cases, that's wrong. It doesn't hurt you at all. People can tell it's your personal life and they ignore it.

I don't know about you guys but I celebrated that.

Not long ago almost everybody getting elected to high office was a lawyer or a political scientist. So that means people used to be smarter?

Say what you will about Obama, but he's definitely not stupid.

Be that as it may, your theory is people elect stupid people because they are stupid, right?

So back when they used to elect smart people, that must mean they used to be smart?

I don't know why people care how white the population is.

Those other races shouldn't care either.

Why wouldn't I tell Indians or Chinese people that they shouldn't care what color their neighbor is?

@jackmaninov If you say so? But I still am left in the dark, with no idea why in the world anybody would care.

Seems kinda mean that you're in posession of all these good reasons to believe like you do and you just don't want to share for some reason.

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/GQ6jWICUKfc/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn25BEF1HIg

Shoe is really upset that the Democrats are rigging things against Bernie, and I agree, it seems they are.

But then she remains a Democrat for some reason. This is so fucking incomprehensible. If you don't like how they run things, just quit.

But she's bitching about how they're violating the "will of the people" or something, and then whining about how it's a "libertarian excuse" that they're a private entity and can do what they want.

Jesus that is the ENTIRE POINT of having political parties. If it was just direct democracy where the members select the nominees, then why have a party at all? What possible reason is there for having political parties in the first place except to have them run things as they see fit.

Just fucking quit the party if you don't like it. Start your own.

These people love Canada so much, and Canada has three or four parties every elecetion. Just fucking do that. It's not that hard.

Imagine a world where the government came down and told parties 'You just accept whoever gets the most votes." That'd be a fucking disaster. The first thing people are going to do is join the party they hate and vote for an asshole.

Well yeah. It should die because the Democrat party members should wise up and go make their own party.

This is like that one bitch we all know whose boyfriend mistreats her and she keeps fucking him anyway.

Burn your Democrat cards, go make a "Hardcore progressives" party, and join that instead.

--debaterules

I see a chick smoking cigarettes or with a tattoo and I think, "Mmm there's a girl with impulse control problems." 😋

Those tramp stamps might as well say "Insert here 👇 "

Well, even though I personally find tattoos unpleasant, I also find them beautiful in a way. It's a reminder to the world that your body belongs to you, and you can treat it like a piece of art if you want. Gives me a little warmth to know that people will respect the decisions of others, even if they're doing permanent things to themselves.

It's like a really colorful and interesting way to me reminded of that.

I'm more off the wall than a drunk Mexican.

There's an opposite to Jewish?

Oh? What else, if you don't mind me asking?

Like a northern native American?

We're having a big dispute where I live with a native tribe.

Trudeau isn't doing shit about it.

Yeah. It'd be like if the queen of England weighed in on American politics.

The thing that annoys me most is that they're not just protesting about the stupid pipeline, or trying to persuade poeple. They're resorting immediately to force, and barring peaceful people from going about their business.

The cops need to fix that immediately. That's what cops are for.

And this is coming from a libertarian so it takes me forever to say, "Yeah unleash the cops on that shit."

But they crossed that line.

@Obrimos ... So were the pics hot?

🍆

LOL yeah lots of people fled Hong Kong to Canada when the switch-over happened back in the 90s or whatever, so there's a huge oriential population in major Canadian cities, especially Toronto and Vancouver.

I was in school when it was going down, so I've spent almost my whole life rubbing shoulders with orientals. Hong Kong people seem fine to me.

Little bit passive, though. Sometimes I wonder if white folks seem wild and unrestrained to them.

I prefer not to look at feet at all.