Can confirm what AntiLibertyDude says. Harder to masturbate when you remind yourself that every time you watch porn, you might support human trafficking.

Autarchy in our economy? Wew.

You don't even have all raw materials in every country. Even if you combine expansionism, that would mean Germany would have to conquer as far as Eastern Europe for a few measly silicone deposits.

Countries like China, Russia or the USA could get away with it, maybe. Even then, the question is if it's worth it. Autarchy in military and medical goods and foodstuffs (to a degree) is pretty much common sense and does not warrant an ideology, in everything else, it's simply a waste of resources. Look at the map above. Why are not all silicone deposits tapped? Because sometimes, buying that stuff is cheaper than building a factory from scratch and keeping it running. Also, comparative advantage something something.

Anyway, to the poll today: Nations aren't states. They were never taken to be states until around the French Revolution. National pride existed since forever, but I didn't see the nation get treated as the first principle of the state in any of my readings antique or medieval texts. The state was pretty much the king and his subjects, i.e. everyone residing in his domain or bound to him by contract, custom or conquest. That king could well be a foreigner, it may have pissed people off when that happened, but they didn't deem it an affront to nature.

Heresies were so often put in the service of a national cause precisely because you couldn't build a state on a nation. So instead, you demanded independence for your nation because you were the only Muslims, Cathars or Taborites around and thus obviously destined to rule yourselves. (Bit of a historical simplification but the principle holds)

With the Partition of Poland, the nation came to fulfill that role. The Poles were not that happy that their old and respectable nation was cut up, which it was because it did not fit into the times, having an elected monarch. A ruler by inheritance cannot do diplomacy with such a state, not the least because intermarriage is unfeasible.

But nationalism really gained ground with the French Revolution. The Revolution was based on universalist values, but once it took over the state, that begged the question of why exactly this particular territory should be ruled by these particular french guys. Nationalism offered the answer. Without it, any "global" revolution would have to remain "global", and could not settle in the state it is in. The same thing happened in China and Russia, they started out as internationalist (the USSR didn't even have Russia in its name), but when the revolution succeeded, they had to gain the particular loyalty of the people they ruled, which they did by switching to more nationalist propaganda.

Long story short, this is how we have come to see state and nation as synonymous.

The difference is that your sex parties would be mandatory, if the history of the Gulags is to show anything

Yes yes, you said that. Three times.

Wewest of my wew

Do you have any facts to back that up?

K

Just do what you want

I'm not mad

That is why my gf-posting was lost on you

"K"
"Just do what you want"
"I'm not mad"

Just reading these things gives me PTSD

A hackerman would never understand, just as you don't understand the functionality of my four toolbars.

Realizing the agenda behind it is one thing. It wouldn't have worked for me. An agenda does not make it harmful, but bad effects get worse if you can see an agenda behind it.

There is practically no way to ensure that the actresses in porn have not been coerced or cheated at some point. Both actions put it close to rape. They often have these nice interviews where the actors say how much fun they had, but if it's an interview before the scene, the script can be changed or they could withdraw consent later on. If it's after the scene, their paycheck hinges on them saying it was all fun and consensual. Perhaps they even convince themselves of that, to regain some of their dignity.

As for amateur porn, this can still be produced the same way, but even if it's fully consensual, you don't know if it was supposed to be uploaded and to whom. It can always be revenge porn. For a while, I exclusively watched amateur porn because I considered it at least more ethical than professional stuff, but at best, that's a matter of degree.

Then there are all the wasted hours browsing porn in the hopes that you find something that satisfies you, which you probably won't if you train your brain to demand constant novelty in sexual things. The escalation is real. One thing I also did, before I cut porn completely, was to watch stuff that was more erotic and less hardcore. It isn't good, but it's better. Cutting it is best.

All this bullshit about suppressed sexuality? First of all, all our animal drives are supposed to be suppressed at some level. You don't eat like a pig just because you are a little hungry, you don't beat a man to death whenever you're mad, and you don't masturbate every time you get horny. And second, if a healthy appetite means appreciating a good meal and not eating chocolate cake every day for breakfast, then a healthy sexual appetite means being able to appreciate bikini babes and not eating bdsm-gangbang-furry-porn for breakfast.

Speaking of which, averting your eyes from lingerie models and bikini babes is a decent spiritual exercise. Good habits usually start with small things.

Henlo

Whom did I insult?

Because I said bullshit? To talk of bullshit in the context of porn is part of my religion.

Because most made concessions to capitalism. You have to do a lot wrong to start a famine in the 20th century, like suffer a blockade, have no capital whatsoever or do whatever it is China did.

Famines don't come out of nowhere. Like I said, you really have to try for them to happen.

And earthquakes are something any modern economy can recover from, too. Germany was bombed into oblivion, and it recovered under Adenauer and became a world-class economy. Japan had Fukushima and they remain a world power.

What's delusional is trying to telling yourself socialism is not against Gods laws

Matthew 07:16, now tell me what the fruits of socialism are

We are not talking about that

No, it recognizes the duty to give. Big difference

You can't have charity when the state redistributes all property

Incidentally, this sounds a lot like Chinas Great Famine

Now stop passing the ball

How is the system that produced Pitesti, several famines, and Cubas horrid abortion rates not obviously against Gods law?

How is socialism not against it?

I know very well that socialism did cause all these things.

The famines are a no-brainer. All the famines of the 20th century, those from Africa aside, were either the result of foreign blockades, or of collectivization

Serious

As I said: Every single blockade of the 20th century, those in Africa aside, occurred in a country at war and blockaded, or in a socialist country

Which is somehow only ever aimed against socialist countries?

Do you have any proof, a single proof, to back that up?

Russia started a collectivization campaign right before the 1933 famine

China started one right before the 1978 famine, including the communal kitchen campaign

You did say the famines were the result of imperialism and interventionism from other nations

Why did the two biggest successes of the CIA-Famine-Taskforce occur right after a collectivization campaign?

I am asking where the coincidence comes from

How did other nations cause the 1933 famine, and the 1978-1982 famine, and why did they choose as the time precisely the moment the collectivizations started?

I already gave my examples

We don't have any data on North Korea

Or nothing very reliable

Those are the two most important famines in the entire narrative

The Holodomor, and the Great Famine

All you are saying is that famines can be caused by foreign intervention

Something like that, yes

Your endgoal isn't, your methods are

Back then, the economy was freer than it is now

That was the top marginal tax rate. It only applied to the dollars earned above 300,000 dollars or something. It wasn't the total tax rate for people in the highest income bracket.

I am no expert in the US economy at the time, I only know from Germany that its market was definitely freer. With us, it was the same however, in 1950 you could raise a family with a working class wage, now you need two parents who are academicians. Here, taxes are to blame for that. You already pay 50% total taxes if your income is above 5k, which is a higher middle class income

They are still essential

We feel the effects of bracket creep now. It's why I can't take programs serious that talk about only taxing the super-rich. That's what all tax codes wanted to do, and yet here we are, with middle class earners paying the top rate

It means that as nominal income rises, people move into the higher tax brackets, even though their real income has stayed the same or even decreased

States are greedy, more greedy than any corporation I ever dealt with. You know how I feel? I feel that my state hates me

And hates my entire family

Everyone talks about taxing the rich as if they were all thieves, and here I am, taxed like I was rich. What can I conclude, except that the state regards me as a thief?

We have politician-states

The state produces them

If you believed that, you wouldn't beg the rich for their money

Or demand it at gunpoint, whatever

Hospitals, schools, do you think you can build those without money?

No problem

Thank you. Likewise! Maybe we will, I cannot guarantee it however

I see politics in terms of tradition these days, and the tradition of faacism was as progressive as it gets

Hegel? Jan Hus? The Futurists? That ain't no conservativism

That's the most retarded take I ever saw @OrthoGoat

No respect for the female saints who are way above you and me in holiness

You spat on their faith. Blasphemous faggot.

>thats why we need to force them
Who even are "we"? You? We're all believers in Discord since like wednesday, all newly converts, so perhaps get off your high horse

I am aware of that

So?

He pretty much denied that Gods grace is always insufficient for women to remain faithful

He came close to denying that female sainthood is even a thing

Hundreds of them

Actually, make that thousands. Tens of thousands maybe.

Kek

We got some four hundred page book on the roads, lel

Some libertarian was more scared than I was

Hate you how?

Persevere, try to take it with patience, and become a better person in front of them. Less angry, more charitable, more forgiving... whatever you can do.

Christ will love you all the more for it, and perhaps you will mellow them out or even convert them, God willing.

I used to powerlift as a hobby. Never got very far, but it's amazing how strong you are compared to mortals even as a mediocre powerlifter.

Substituting -isms for arguments is stupid <:wtf:591182282648190986>

To me, it's a matter of not tempting God