**aAAAAgh**

> Mexicans bad!
@Goddess Tyche
Yes.

🌮

Having tons of oil and being close to the U.S. should have if anything gave Venezuela a benefit, as most of our allies who trade with us do well, and even countries we hate but that we trade with end up with good economies like China. The fact they had so much oil should have been a benefit, not a deficit to them, it was not in any way a contributing factor to them falling apart, this is the opposite of reality in every way possible.

There's no reason why having tons of oil money would be bad for Venezuela xD It was the mismanagement of it that was the problem

https://youtu.be/LiZlBspV2-M

Interesting

Thanks **Andrew**

https://youtu.be/8Wq8HgIymZ8

7:57

"... And he was just a schoolboy dipped in chocolate"
I'd almost bet money that's what alerted the YouTube Stasi

Harassment being, of course, a dogwhistle for racism.

Not sure who to @ with this so @Secretary of Akkad

http://michellemalkin.com/2020/03/01/afpac-speech-the-charge-of-the-america-first-brigade/

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

https://youtu.be/ENkedhRsOCU

https://imgur.com/a/SsiALME

https://thenationaltelegraph.com/interviews/derek-sloan-bill-c-16-effectively-redefines-the-meaning-of-gender

https://youtu.be/bGCQ1ferVhc

Get it lolberts? You’re gonna have to form militias, or collectives

https://youtu.be/Nojrpd2WL30 so I was arguing about the movie Starship Troopers with someone and he sent me this video to validate his point, he first sent the wisecrack video first. I'm still watching it, but I thought I'd post it here. It seems everyone looks at the esthetics of the movie ignoring what's behind it. Explains why they like Star Wars. all esthetic 0 substances.

Ah, yes. The solution to oppression is to join an oppressive group and demand to be oppressed by them so they can make you liberate them and therefore yourself by sacrificing yourself according to the wishes of those who you chose to let you oppress you.

@snake I don't know if your listening device doesn't work or not, but every time we talk about the meaning of collectives just a few days later all the information has left your brain again.

Uh yeah it’s called democracy you get to choose your dictators

Ah yes we can only be liberated if we can be oppressed by the majority.

Yeah but I would simply disagree with your framing of the debate.

It's not a framing, it's exactly what you're describing, only with a comedic spin.

Not my fault that your understanding of collectives is so lackluster.

Well, is a militia a collective to you or nah?

As I explained last time, and that time before, and that time before, and that time before, there is a difference between a collective and collectivism.

.... but the way you define collectivism is more so authoritarianism or totalitarianism rather than collectivism. Collectivism. Just because you give the group priority over every single need of every single person doesn’t mean you’re being authoritarian.

Collectivism is simply forming a collective and placing that over the individual parts

It's not "my" definition. That part of the definition of collectivism is the same across the board.

Yes, the definition of collectivism is placing the collective over individuals I get it

Collectivism is **not** "simply forming a collective and placing that over the individual parts".
Collectivism is specifically the survival of the group being of greater value than the survival of the individual, therefore it becomes acceptable to sacrifice the freedom, well-being, and self-interest of each and every individual within a collective to protect the collective.

I have a job. This means that I and others work *collectively* because we each *individually* find the arrangement suitable to our personal goals. Nobody *mandates* that we do so thus this *collective* is the result of free decisions by *individuals*.

Collectivism is like this

“Collectivism is **not** "simply forming a collective and placing that over the individual parts".
Collectivism is specifically the survival of the group being of greater value than the survival of the individual, therefore it becomes acceptable to sacrifice the freedom, well-being, and self-interest of each and every individual within a collective to protect the collective.”

I simply have to disagree, placing the collective over the individual doesn’t automatically lead to the people losing rights. Because you can have individual rights while worrying more about the total sum rather than Johnny

Sometimes that does happen, sure, like in a military. But that’s a necessary evil if you want to have a army.

You, Boomer and I decide to form a group of three, and we agree that the survival of our group is more important than the survival of each one of us individually. This means that it is acceptable and even desirable for the three of us to replace, for example you, if your presence threatens the existence of our group. We can kick you out and replace you with another individual so that our group of three continues, because you are completely disposable and useless unless you serve the group, and only the group.
That's collectivism.