Messages from @Jerm (Discord ID: 475266228093583375)
269 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Page 1/2 | Next
Over time, admin roles will be assigned to those who can be trusted the most. @AcidOverride is the kingpin here.
Please use the link from Twitter and feel free to invite more people.
Chat about whatever you want. The tagline of this room gives some theme ideas. It's all yours.
I think the IRR is a very important organisation, only wanting the best. They focus on data primarily.
@Robzombie yes you can trust them. I trust them. I know them personally too.
IRR is not political. They're completely independent.
IRR are currently overhauling their funder base. They've been pushing for it in recent weeks. They're moving away from corporate funding, towards independent funding like AfriForum. You should join the IRR. It's dirt cheap and they are very important.
But before you join the IRR, become a Jerm patron. It's about 50 bucks and I already have 35 patrons, and they're helping me draw cartoons that no editor or cartoonists wants to go near. I'm going to be touching on race and IQ; identity politics; leftism; etc. Then you can join the Patreon channel too (closed to the public). 😋
@Tom_Servo I'm not deplatformed. I have a lot of work, thankfully. (I'm the busiest I've ever been.) But there is still a bunch of satire that can only be published with the help of patrons. And I'm trying really hard to get satire back to its roots.
Here's my first race-IQ cartoon I've done, funded by patrons and collaborated with the patron alongside my signature.
@Klipkop (Clip-Cop) No, I don't think so. But I do think radical leftism is fashionable and its adherents tend to be very vocal.
This cartoon was also funded by patrons, and rejected from every publication. Still went viral on social media though.
@AK EFF wants to do away with favouritism by favouring women.
Friends, please invite others and help grow this group. The link is pinned to the top.
Scribbly is, in my opinion, one of the funniest cartoonists in SA. You must follow his work.
@Tom_Servo We have a long and colourful history. He's seen as the cleancut popular kid of cartooning, while I'm seen as the punk-anarchist kid (true story - I was labelled that a few months ago).I'm going to make a video about it soon. I'll post it first to my Patreon page.
It's well established that Zapiro has multiple prestigious art degrees. I failed art at UCT.
Anyway, I'm on a deadline (for Rapport). Will pop in again later.
@Robzombie Zapiro is left by his own admission. In fact, he has said publicly that he is "progressive".
I'm the only cartoonist defending Israel's right to defend itself.
@Scribbly_G is one of my favourite local cartoonists.
@Gonzo No, he's afraid of debating me one-on-one.
The green is Muslim-majority countries.
The red is the horribly oppressive Israel.
I said earlier that if I get another patron today, I will draw a cartoon about Zapiro declining my debate invitation.
I got another patron today.
Which means that I will start working on my promised cartoon.
Who here is a patron? I want to add you to the Patreon chat room. (It's a private room.)
Those who are patrons, please can you follow this step:
"You can also head over to your account settings page and click on the Connect to Discord button to connect your Discord and Patreon accounts."
My apologies for the back and forth. I colour in pictures for a living; not this kind of stuff.
@Dusty I'll have a look at it. Please forgive me. This stuff isn't my thing.
@Andre If you're a patron, then apparently you can connect via your Patreon settings.
""You can also head over to your account settings page and click on the Connect to Discord button to connect your Discord and Patreon accounts."
Please tell me what you see there.
And please post in the Patreon room so that we know it works. We shall be chatting about secret stuff there. 😃
Since nobody is allowed to discuss this, I put it into a cartoon.
Donno is a cartoonist only as a hobby, and is one of the best cartoonists in SA, I think. I've met him. Great guy. Wonderful work.
Please share away. I really don't mind at all. I'm not precious about the stuff being on my personal timeline.
What book(s) are you currently reading? And by that I also mean "listening to". I'm a fan of audiobooks.
I've got 12 Rules For Life as an audiobook, if anybody wants it. It's in Google Drive.
It's something about lobsters and standing upright.
I'm supposed to be working on my deadline, but here I am. Not working on my deadline.
I'm quite religious and carry my bible with me.
The 48 Laws Of Power.
If you haven't read it, then you're a heathen.
@Ros I'll share a link with you privately, if you want it.
When Jordan starts crying while reading, things get serious.
No. Jordan doesn't ever clear his throat. He likes to live on the edge.
Invite them here. They're on the same side as us, so it might be nice to have some crossover.
I'm actually supposed to be doing a video with Willem soon. I turned him down a few weeks ago.
All these chat rooms are good. We need to start gathering the disciples so that we can go out and preach the gospel.
Please share far and wide. This is a leaked document from the Department Of Land Reform, listing farms to be taken. Some owners have been contacted already. One of the farms is even a stud farm.
I have been informed that the list isn't fully legit.
1. The list comes from the Dept Of Land Reform
2. Whether or not it's a final list, is uncertain.
3. The fact that it comes from the government is the most important part.
4. Details are less important.
5. There shouldn't be a list at all.
The state doesn't have enough money to compensate farmers at the full price. Which makes it a land grab.
I've been getting some more info. I'll share it with patrons, since that room is closed to the public.
This is written by a farmer who wants to remain anonymous.
On a side note, I'm a bit babalaas today. How about you?
From 2003. Look for the links.
Let me turn the question around:
What is it that you dislike about Trump?
@Dusty Let's be more specific.
What is his attitude towards women? Are you referring to his locker room banter from a decade ago? Around 20 million women voted for him, including a woman I personally know. (Former South African.)
The woman I know, who voted for him, is divorced and highly successful. She lives in Malibu, which is largely Clinton supporters.
What I'm saying is that Trump might not be what the media makes him out to be. The markets love him, and he is following through on his campaign promises like no other president before him. Good or bad, that he is sticking to his guns makes him respectable, in my opinion.
I certainly think Obama would be more pleasant at a braai, than Trump. But I think Trump is a better president than Obama.
I also think that Trump is a result of the left's constant dismissal of anything to do with white males who are straight. The more the media tries to reduce men to nothing, the more pushback we will see, like we are seeing.
"Toxic masculinity" mantra leads to guys flipping the bird.
Plus, Trump was a businessman who had a TV show and then got pissed off at everything. He said I'm going to run for president to fix this mess. Everybody laughed and then he won.
That, to me, is brilliant.
I love Trump because he flips the bird at everybody. He has completely derailed mainstream media and doesn't give a shit.
And his presidency isn't terrible either. The markets are doing fine. The people who hate him are just emotional.
"Trump on balance can't be described as a good person, but because of the bloody nose he gave the left people will defend the indefensible."
Describing him as good or bad is not something we can do, since it is a moral judgement, and we don't know him. We only know what the media portrays. Therefore, good or bad is irrelevant.
I don't buy arguments favouring "balance" anymore. I used to, when I was naive.
Also, Hilary was president for 2 terms during the 90s. Why would she want to be president again?
Hilary also stated she wanted a wall, back in 2009, I think.
The difference is that she said "fence" and not "wall".
"As a senator from New York, Clinton voted to authorize war not just in Afghanistan but in Iraq, too, despite a less-than-compelling case for invading the latter country. She also supported extended occupations that have failed to accomplish anything other the near-complete destabilization of the entire Middle East and Central Asian regions. Incredibly, she still talks about the U.S. intervention in Libya—which she argued for forcefully as Secretary of State—as an example of "smart power." "
"Add to that her near-complete failure while serving as the nation's top diplomat (including a ludicrously botched "reset" with Russia) and her calls for increasing all manner of surveillance in the service of the global war on terror and you're looking at a huge increase in state power with little sense of balance or responsibility."
Clinton on free speech:
""You're going to hear all of the usual complaints—you know, 'freedom of speech,' etc.," she said. "But if we truly are in a war against terrorism and we are truly looking for ways to shut off their funding, shut off the flow of foreign fighters, then we've got to shut off their means of communicating.""
"Clinton however supported the odious Defense of Marriage Act signed by her husband in the late 1990s, which was an attempt to forestall recognition of gay marriage. In fact, she only embraced marriage equality in 2013, in a conversion that is widely seen as political."
She also opposes free trade deals like NAFTA, CAFTA, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
But let's get sad about Trump's guy talk in a locker room.
Obama was willing - and did - increase human suffering.
Obama deported the most immigrants than any president before him.
He was also the first president in US history to serve 2 full terms at war.
If that were true, then the markets would show it. They don't.
I'm not seeing actual data here, other than feelings.
He's the first US president to help broker a deal with N Korea.
He's not nearly as useless as the media portray him.
Thing is, @Tom_Servo , most of your gripes are the same things we hear over and over. They're just feelings.
So we're talking about something that might or might not happen.
I am no Trump fan, but I think he's superior to Clinton and the way he's derailed the media is poetry.
@Tom_Servo Because you come off as the usual anti-Trump type with no data.
Your arguments have been around the way he talks about women, for example.
There's nothing wrong with the way he talks about women.
To say "bad leader" is a moral judgement. Moral judgements are subjective.
This is a fact:
Has federal spending increased or decreased?
I like Trump and think he's doing a great job at annoying the media. That's my opinion.
Arguing over him being a good or bad leader is hilariously stupid.
Because he headed up a party that was in opposition to another party.
If you are part of a party with views that differ from another, OF COURSE you will be divisive.
But Trump is a master troll, and that makes him fantastic.
A better discussion might be whether or not the economy is sinking due to his policies. The current evidence suggests that it isn't sinking at all.
Who cares if Zuma lied a lot. What matters is this.
Zuma's first few years were actually very unstable.
The massive dip shows instability. After that was stable, yes.
Between 2009 and 2011 were unstable for the SA economy.
Therefore, his first few years were not "didnt look so bad either".
If it isn't important, then what number would you like to start at?
Mugabe killed his economy almost, literally, overnight.
If EWC goes ahead and our economy tanks, then are we still going to say "No, but you see, we need to wait until his first term is up before we can make any conclusions."
@Tom_Servo My apologies for my aggressive tone today.
Please feel free to share.
This cartoon comes thanks to my brilliant patrons.
I love it when black Trump fans tell white anti-Trump folks to piss off. 😂
One of the farms on the list has mineral deposits, which the government has been wanting for years. Of course, it's a fake list. The ANC said so.
For journalists and others who don't seem to understand the basics, it's been written out for you in colourful crayons.
@Robzombie The list is possibly incomplete, but it comes from the Dept Of Land Reform. That there is a list is the problem; not what's in the list.
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*
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.
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.
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.
I support rhino horn trade. I support lifting of all prohibitions on drugs. Does that make me left or right? I don't care.
Just ground your worldview on a set of values and principles. Everything falls into place after that. It's far more honest too.
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.
@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.
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"
Where did the huge amount of investments come from? And why did they happen?
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.
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.
Facebook has every right to censor him. It's not his platform.
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.
Okay, so then at what point does Facebook lose its policy right?
@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.
I'm still waiting for my Dec investment to return. 😂
It IS simple. The government has made it complicated.
The moment a company is in bed with the state, you no longer have capitalism / free market.
If people don't like it, then they can go elsewhere.
Like I said, keep things simple.
1. Is the company operating freely?
2. What state restrictions apply to the company?
3. Is competition hindrered?
It is only complicated if you willfully choose to ignore the simplicity.
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.
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.
You're right. It IS unhealthy. I've never said otherwise.
State funded healthcare shouldn't exist. Here is an example of the government making things complicated.
@Roovdwalt That's how the market works, yes. Exactly.
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.
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.
I gave examples to highlight my point. I noted the problem with state healthcare, for example.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
@Tom_Servo FB only has influence over free speech on its own platform.
That's the first problem with the arguments around free speech.
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.
269 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Page 1/2 | Next