1665
Commies (media.patriots.win) 🛑  Corrupt Commies  🛑
posted ago by dirtysanchez69 ago by dirtysanchez69 +1666 / -1
Comments (48)
sorted by:
19
Gerbaski 19 points ago +19 / -0

It really is that simple...

11
onemoretimeagain22 11 points ago +11 / -0

Yes it is

9
ExileOnRedditStreet 9 points ago +9 / -0

Ockham's Razor simple

5
Snipthetipandsip 5 points ago +5 / -0

"mEh WhAtAbOuTiSm!!!!1!!1!" - liberals

1
Starxteel 1 point ago +1 / -0

Same with catholicism

14
hansgruber7 14 points ago +14 / -0

Communism is an idea so foolish and so disproven, that only an intellectual could believe it.

6
45fan 6 points ago +6 / -0

Everyone I know who is a leftist is a Utopian. They believe that everyone can exist in perfect balance with each other.

Of course, this is impossible as everyone is unique and therefore such idealism cannot work in reality.

They want diversity and conformity to exist simultaneously without contradiction. They are morons.

3
hansgruber7 3 points ago +3 / -0

God has placed a desire for Heaven in our hearts. Reject God and that desire remains and so they transfer it to this world (Utopia) where it doesn't fit and any attempt to force it brings about Hell on Earth.

9
deleted 9 points ago +9 / -0
7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
4
Lady_MaGa 4 points ago +4 / -0

And what will be the outcome for babies born of vaccinated parents? Scary.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
SpaceForceMilitia 4 points ago +4 / -0

..but i'll be selling my sperm for 10,000 per drop real soon. 6'5 to boot. I better go rub out some money now.

2
MrAnderson1776 2 points ago +2 / -0

6'5" is too tall and requires too many calories per diem to survive the post-Apocalytic world I'm afraid.

Everything gets revalued.

3
Goldlight 3 points ago +3 / -0

he can be used to breed shock troopers

2
SpaceForceMilitia 2 points ago +2 / -0

There isn't only low hanging fruit in the Apoc :)

6
bidensmissingbrain 6 points ago +6 / -0

But muh capitalizm killed all teh minoritehs.

5
thelastlast 5 points ago +5 / -0

it is an IQ test and a mental stability test too.

anyone who believes in communism needs to be removed from society, they are a very real danger to us all. are we waiting for more proof? have you enjoyed the demonstrations they have already given us? want more of that?

4
CivilBindle 4 points ago +4 / -0

Is Molyneaux talking politics again? I know he got burned on yt but God I miss his takes.

4
Herpawinski 4 points ago +4 / -0

At this point, it's obvious that it's the genocide that attracts them in the first place.

3
Patriot_Lettuce 3 points ago +3 / -0

Such a good quote from Stefan Molyneux.

Timeless.

2
FrogsLoveBass 2 points ago +2 / -0

YEAH BUT..... COMMIES....

I think this one gets a pass. 🤣

1
8thGenPatriot 1 point ago +1 / -0

No, it's more of a bare bones intelligence test. I'm pretty sure most of us would exhibit "some sociopathic tendencies," yet still don't support communism.

1
rossnix 1 point ago +1 / -0

In all fairness our democracy has legalized and funded the murder of millions of unborn children.

1
LionofRojava 1 point ago +1 / -0

This belongs on a t-shirt

1
Semisolid 1 point ago +2 / -1

Sociopaths are the least likely to support communism, actually.

Dumbasses that think everyone deserves participation trophies for being born support communism. Sociopaths are the exact opposite of that.

You might be thinking of psychopaths, but even that’s not right.

4
Kholland65 4 points ago +4 / -0

It’s sociopathic in that these people don’t care about the level of genocide or suffering that will be caused, only that they seek to gain something.

1
Semisolid 1 point ago +2 / -1

That’s not sociopathy, that’s psychopathy. Also it’s not remotely related to communism (or at least not why the basement dwelling liberals support it).

1
Kholland65 1 point ago +1 / -0

It’s both, and we’re largely debating semantics. In both cases the idea is that the person doesn’t care about others and places themselves over others. The mere difference is that a sociopath at least has some semblance of empathy and guilt related to what they are doing despite knowing it’s wrong.

1
Semisolid 1 point ago +1 / -0

It’s not both and actually knowing what you’re dealing with is the only way you’ll ever make progress.

If you treat basement dwelling softies as emotionless assholes you’ll get exactly nowhere.

1
Kholland65 1 point ago +1 / -0

Exactly, psychopaths are emotionless, sociopaths are not.

Liberals are clearly emotional people, the problem is they are misguided and think their emotions are being directed to efforts that help people when in reality it’s about helping themselves, they just to dumb to realize that.

1
Goldlight 1 point ago +1 / -0

not sure

with psychopaths, they'll see a highly centralized state where they can take control

these kinds are good at rising to high levels as well

2
Semisolid 2 points ago +2 / -0

Agreed that the rulers are inevitably psychopaths, but you don’t get communism with only a couple of rulers.

The morons that support it (before all the murdering) aren’t sociopaths or psychopaths. They’re “bleeding heart liberals” that think everyone deserves everything no matter how worthless they are.

1
Goldlight 1 point ago +1 / -0

ya or useful idiots that go along with whatever authorities tell them

if you're feeling daring, look for the video "this woman manipulated 5 strangers like it was nothing" by romanian TVee on youtube (bad site I know use an ad blocker)

it shows how psycopathic people can play people like nothing, everyone in there is smart but they still fell in line, except for the person being singled out

so psychopaths get into positions of power (CEOs, politicians, poilice, etc.) and then bullshit things to get more power

edit: in summary you only need a few people in the right place to cause a lot of damage because most of the time a lot of people will go along with whatever their overlords tell them

1
masticator_nord 1 point ago +1 / -0

"Those failures were necessary to work out the contradictions in society." - actual Marxist belief

-1
March4Macragge -1 points ago +1 / -2

Russia is as Russian today as it has been for a thousand years. How is liberalism working out for America. We would have done a lot better with more austere conditions.

2
thelastlast 2 points ago +2 / -0

elaborate, I dont know what you mean here.

5
MrAnderson1776 5 points ago +5 / -0

He's saying that Russia hasn't lost its inherent identity the way the West has. It's not true. Between WWII and the Commuist regime in Russia, Russian identity was literally wiped out. This assclown has no idea what his country or people was like before 90 million ethnic Russians were killed by their compatriots (60 million) and then Hitler (27 million), whom those same Russians helped to bring to power.

You don't suffer those kinds of unnatural deaths and remain the same people you were before because too much of the pre-existing genetic diversity is lost. No one really knows what pre 1900 Russians were like except owing to the fact that the Soviets systematically killed their very best intellectuals, they were likely both smarter and more creative.

It's interesting in a morbid kind of way to look back on Russia before Lenin and Marx destroyed that society. Here's a list of pre-Soviet writers which is completely unmatched by the few post Soviet writers of worth :

Pushkin Gogol Dostoevsky Turgenev (Fathers and Sons) Tolstoy Chekhov Bulgakov Master and Margarita Isaac Babel

You also had tons of guys like Mikhail Lomonosov who was a poet / polymath who discovered the atmosphere of Venus in his spare time.

The thing is, the Czar of Russia, Nicholas II was reality-denying, insular elite (cough cough) who was incapable of processing the threat Communists posed and wholly incapable of understanding the sheer scale of what would happen if they took over. He was living in the past.

But in that he was very Europeanish, like Louis XVI and King George before him. In fact, pre 1917, Russia was basically Eastern Europe culturally, economically and politically. If they had had a "normal" evolution and not a Marxist revolution, they would have been the biggest and greatest and most productive nation in Europe by far. We shared everything with them and their culture and its values was completely recognizable to Europeans. In fact, after the White (as opposed to Red) Russians lost, they fled to England and other European nations, who took them in one of their own elites. But then 1917 happened and well the rest is history.

2
Amaroq64 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'll take your word for it that Pre-Soviet Russia was filled with geniuses and such.

That's quite interesting actually. One incredible genius did escape then: Ayn Rand.

She came to America, lifted herself up by her bootstraps without even knowing English yet, went on to become a playwright, an author, and a philosopher, and changed the western world for the better by providing us the ideas we needed to take pride in our culture.

I've heard from someone old enough to have known her when she was alive: If it weren't for her, it would never have become socially acceptable to defend capitalism and the profit motive today.

She tried to warn us about the long march through the institutions, but we didn't listen.

2
MrAnderson1776 2 points ago +2 / -0

To your point, Ayn Rand and that other defector Yuri Bezmenov:

https://unconstrainedanalytics.org/kgb-defector-yuri-bezmenov-warns-america-of-marxist-subversion/

really did try to warn the West as to what form the attack would come. It was just as they said. Ditto Solzhenitsyn whom the Left, in an early display of their total despicability, turned on in the 70s because he spoke too much truth

1
MrAnderson1776 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not a Rand fan for the reason she took a good perspective on life and people and captialism and ruined it by acting like a fruitcake. (BTW the same thing happened in the last election where a LOT of Republicans were NOT going to vote to confirm the election but then the temporal lobe cases (God bless and protect them all) all rushed the Capitol and no Senator wanted anything to do with it anymore- true story. )

Just three things with Rand (but there's more).

  1. She infected the entire pro-capitalism movement with a kind of grinding humorlessness, fanaticism and uncompromising iconclasty that ONLY TURNS PEOPLE OFF and gives your enemies all they need to get people to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Her fiction is a case in point along with her interviews and public utterances.

  2. She tutored Allen Greenspan who was a literal devotee at her apartment. Greenspan followed her off the cliff by overseeing the outsourcing of America's industrial base and blindness to the abuses and gaming of money and investment which was the run up to the 2008 disaster. He later said he had "found a flaw" in his "theories" as if anyone was interested in him or his fucking "theories" anymore. (Interesting aside: Andrea Mitchell the MSM mouthpiece and serial liar is Mrs. Allen Greenspan).

  3. She was repulsive in her personal conduct. She actually tried to leverage her theory to coerce one of her pupils Nathaniel Branden, into sleeping with her arguing that if he truly believed in Objectivism, he'd be her lover. Branden later said (about) "Look I believe everything Ayn believes and I believe in the principles of Objectivism completely but I dont' see how that means I have to take an old lady to bed".

2
Amaroq64 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't think there was anything Rand could have done better about Greenspan, or that Greenspan could have done better himself.

He seemed like a good objectivist when he was part of her circle. Then he became chairman of the Federal Reserve, an inherently destructive agency.

When there was no way to run that agency correctly, he treated it as evidence that Rand's philosophy had failed and it fractured his belief in objectivism or whatever.

2
MrAnderson1776 2 points ago +2 / -0

It seems to me that these people lack all common sense. Not a fin. guy but from what I've seen it shoudl be completely obvious that the way the system is run it's wide open to every kind of fraud imaginable.

Basically one of two things had to be true about the the people in regulatory positions in the run up to 2008. They did not know anything more about how mortgage back securities worked than I did, even though it's their job, in which case they're derlict.

Or, they knew how they worked but failed to notice how that house of cards could and would be easily toppled.

That's just not possible since, to use an analogy, if I am a house of cards expert and I see one five stories high resting on a base of four cards I know that thing is going to come down.

The way they tried to distribute junk loans throughout the system and the fact that the junk loans got through the approval process at all is a Big Red Flag. The fact that the loan givers were not the equity holders is a Big Red Flag. That fact that the 3rd parties buying this junk were guaranteed to be ignorant of how the securities they were buying were structured is a Big Red Flag. Finally the sheer scale of the activity is a Big Red Flag.

The same thing is going on now with lightening trading schemes and of course the King Daddy Of All Financial Scams:Modern Monetary Theory.

They know what's going on, but too many people are making too much money from it and in the case of MMT, it's polticial crack cocaine being driven at 200 MPH by Democrats so they can justify spending without any limit at all.

1
March4Macragge 1 point ago +1 / -0

Russia can kill 50, even 80% of their population with horrible ideas. However if foreigners don’t come in, then the nation survives. In contrast, the historical American Nation no longer controls the country it created.

2
thelastlast 2 points ago +2 / -0

it seems to me, going back over history, we never got America off the ground before it was poisoned.

it's an exciting prospect to me that I might be alive to see the shedding of the American parasites and the birth of the true country.

1
Geekatlrg 1 point ago +1 / -0

March not sure if you forgot the /s if not you should study Russian history it's fascinating