Message from @Pax Americana
Discord ID: 687639189159673899
China is only as powerful as much as the world let's them
When Britannia ruled the waves, the world was relatively peaceful and there was a global order characterized by British morals and ethics. People today hate on the great powers of the past because they dont understand them.
The people in charge of the 'lefty' narrative do understand them.
I used to think they did. But they believe in social constructivism rather than the organic origin of nations.
They dont understand what an empire is
They just want to destroy that
Let alone what a nation really is
Indeed they do
They understand what empire is - they have their own in the form of internationalism/globalism
But you see
Internationalism and globalism are not imperial
In an act of supreme irony
They 'deconstruct' organic forms of government while creating the greatest social constructs they can think up
A global federation of liberal states is not actually possible
So instead they create this contrived façade
A world they would like would be a global version of Brazil
Indeed
Or something like that
Liberalism isn't their end-game
It's a tool they use
That is not to say that a Global State is impossible, just that it could never exist in such a fashion
And absolutely
Liberalism, now morphed into Neo-Liberalism is simply the means to an end
Yes
For most of these clowns, that end is Market Fundamentalism
And neo-conservatism (if there is much difference)
I dont make distinctions between those anymore
most of the left doesn't seem to be liberal in any sense of the word
Well, it is more that they "sanitized" liberalism of its origins. Liberalism historically evolved from municipalism and was influenced by many old ideologies that were tried and true. Neo-Liberalism was (not literally but spiritually) founded in 1947 with the establishment of the United Nations.
The neo-liberals opposed the Soviet Union, less because of its human rights abuses and atrocities which they made liberal arguments against, and more because of the loss in capital gains that was occurring due to a lack of trade between the 1st and 2nd world.
They support "rights" for transgender children and unrestricted abortion, not because of liberal arguments put forth about individual liberties, but because both can be made into industries and are potential to make a buck.
Women who abort their children stay at work
Children who transition pay for pharmaceutical drugs and cosmetic surgeries to destroy their reproductive capacity
Had John Locke seen what 'liberalism' meant today, it would be a foreign concept
And a grotesque one
Liberty is important, Locke would say, but natural rights spring from human nature, they ought not be unrestricted.
Well, a total shutdown of the education system just happened, tgus would be interesting...
🤣
His most priced posession
