My mother, who has been here for over four decades, saw that I was conservative and immediately and without any forethought meant that it was synonymous with Republican—she couldn't even conceptualize the idea of being conservative and NOT being Republican.

So whatever slight lean you might have instantly gets you swept up in the inferno of what the party that leans that direction believes.

*Oh, you lean left?* (pulls out card with talking points) *So you believe in abortion, feminism, gay rights, pro-union, you hate Christians and you want to open the borders, like the Democrat party, right?*

Yeah, and nobody even sees the flatness of the political "spectrum" in the mainstream US. It's more like a political string, where you are either dialed to on extreme -X or another +X. There is no Y axis at all, just normie "conservative" points and normie progressive ones.

Political compass used to do that but the new one sucks and is broken.

I do those for my server but I make them by hand

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/513386760739487746/538522890652483644/DrainBoysVol01.png

With some work you can make pretty good looking charts.

Colored dots refer to the role colors

It's a flawed and heavily biased test

If you're trying to get some arbitrary dot on a square and you're answering untruthfully to do it then there's no point in doing one at all.

Anyone else peruse r/whereareallthegoodmen?

^graph

@Deleted User

It depends on what your goals are as a society. If you're wanting a larger structure to help enforce laws and keep general peace without much else, a smaller government works faster and more efficiently. If you want to imperialize and/or deal with bureaucratic issues then a larger government will have more resources and power.

One isn't necessarily "better" than the other.

I prefer living in areas with a smaller government. I consider myself a confederalist really. I think that (for the kind of society and state that I want to be a part of) smaller government is always better because it is much easier to petition it to change and for it to understand the needs and desires of the people.

Consider how difficult it is, as a private citizen, to petition for change in the US government. It's nearly impossible because you're basically screaming at a mountain to move.

Yeah, and they can't get their word out either

@jojojojojojojojo What point are you trying to make?

Hmm

It is only contradictory when the socialism is not brought about voluntarily, and in (checks history) 100% of cases it is never fully voluntary.

Socialism without voluntarism is tyranny every time.

So, it can't be libertarian.

I think that socialist societies can only really work (and not be morally gray) in very small groups where everyone can be in contact with each other and the consent of the proletariat can be achieved 100%.

Tyrannical socialists steal your capital.
Tyrannical capitalists steal your labor.

Neat

You mean onanism?

😏

I've never heard of it and Google isn't pulling up much of anything useful @Deleted User

I only know of "Onanism", i.e. masturbation

OK, what is it?

🍿

How do you go about choosing a divine ruler?

So you're going to use democracy to create absolutism?

<:GWseremePeepoThink:402867838580293643>

sorry

*Christian Identity intensifies*

@Deleted User I use the term "old white dudes" disparagingly IRL to detract my libtard friends from knowing my true edge

Well the problem is all of the intelligent people around me are lefties and all the right wingers around me are sub-90 IQ tards

That's what you get for living in the American midwest

I prefer intelligent and dissident company to stupid circlejerking

@jojojojojojojojo Yeah but IQ is correlated with religiosity, too, so square that circle.

Openness isn't about your propensity to change stances, it's about your willingness to entertain ideas.

I would say people who doggedly refuse to listen to any argument that doesn't correlate with their views shows lower intelligence, on average

It makes sense that openness is positively correlated with intelligence

What about anarchofascism

Just the same, highly open people (who also have weak convictions) are quick to be convinced of bad ideas and things that are bad for them and society.

@Phil With Frankincense Delete Discord, hit the gym, lawyer up

It's an old internet joke, before your time young man

Same. I'm moving in a couple weeks and I'm going full /gymbro/ once I do

I'll make this mutt body shine

You don't have a job?

NEET faggot

true

>dead jew worshipers arguing with fedora tippers

I can tell I'm gonna like this server already

@Deleted User not necessarily

I would say if this retardation was impeding on other conversations it should get moved

Why don't you guys argue over things that have more physical evidence and validity, like Odin or Vishnu?

Yes yes

I'm not a pagan I'm a gaytheist

I wrote a lengthy essay once about why God is evil but nobody read it

Yeah because animals never develop traits which don't benefit evolution mkay

The fact that humans have been able to form and prosper as we have means that our traits are progenic

"Humans are the most prosperous species in the world, it must be because of our traits which are supposedly negative to evolution"

"All other animals"

Flamingos, wolves, whales

That's just off the top of my head

Also you attributing self-sacrifice to pride sounds like Christian post-facto apologia

Wait you're trying to claim that Greek mythos isn't real when you don't read ancient Greek? @⍟luminance

Most Americans I know use NKJV, NAS or one of the International versions.

Back when I was a Christian I used an old copy of the NAS

NAS is supposedly a more "literal" translation

Obviously without the ability to consult the original text I can't validate that claim

The cringey Atheism 2.0 shit is what initially got me into doubting my Christian values but the thing that ultimately led me to becoming an atheist was borne of my own internal reflections on faith and morality.

I would say that a good 90% of (young) atheists are more of the FACTS AND LOGIC type

Who are you asking, @Notso?

Well I'm American, I guess I can only speak for myself and any atheists I have had direct conversations with, of which the vast majority are also American.

Sure

@⍟luminance So If something exists it necessitates that specifically the Abrahamic God created it?

The universe, specifically.

That's a massive assumption on your part, in my opinion

@Notso I would say it's a lot of that and a lot of Boomer religion: "I go to church every Sunday dressed in overalls and a shitty Wal-Mart tee-shirt and I think Jesus is fuckin' cool"

The Bible belt is very white but it also paradoxically is rather low in average IQ.

I've lived in it my whole life

I would say the average intelligence here is somewhere around 95

>endless void
citation?

We have no idea what came before the Big Bang.

That's you creating a gap where it needn't be then shoehorning your god into it.

Is it really?

What does "nothing" mean?

There is no consensus on the subject.

Some believe that it was formed from the echoes of a larger Big Crunch from a previous iteration of the universe. Some believe that it was formed from the collision of other multiverses.

Night Phil

The problem with this retarded argument is literally anything could feasibly fit the role of this "universal creator"

And again, this plays on the assumption of the universe being causally created by a single event

We have *no true idea* what created the universe, what caused the bang, what came before it.