Anarcho-capitalism is dumb in its roots: Lets remove the governments and their rules, so companies can become states instead, with potentially even more tyranicall rules. Fucking clap
I'm getting a boner and I haven't finished reading the message yet
Fucking based, I'm printing this
Wow, you don't even worship Pinochet? Get the fuck out of here
Hey, stop insulting soiboy faggots!
COUNTER-TERRORISTS WIN
As we all are, hail free speech, bithes!
Hey hey, no need to say the first half
Good. Let the retards who still vote democrat get absolutely fucked, while people with a brain finally get the chance to clean their state from Antifa
I've never been this jealous about not being an American
Oh my fucking GEOTUS, shit's'bout to hit the airplane turbine
Oh my god, what a bunch of fucking degenerates. Even 20th century commies had more braincells that these fucking cucks
Oh yeah, good ol' Orwell, that's where the familiarity was coming from
Oh my god, that sounds dystopian as fuck for some reason
This is the beggining of a new space race. Let's show them commies for the 2nd time!
Very well said
Exactly. But to be honest, it's a partisan issue only. Every POTUS always records a speech that is played for when new people get US citizenship. If you google Obama's and then compare it to Trump's, you can see the clear difference between Republican and Democrat view on it. I don't remember the exact text, but Obama's speech basically says the newcomers to keep their culture, and Trump's expresses hope that they will assimilate into the American culture. Not all is lost, we simply have to support the Republican party to prevent America's downfall
I agree with you, but you won't convince anybody in this way. If you really want to advance a cause, do it with arguments. I mean, I was a brain-dead socialist tankie until the age of 17, when I first saw organized and respectful right-wing chanells, instead of raw political banter that was on TV.
What? Rome was never an Ethnostate, it's success and rapid expansion in comparison to ancient empires WAS assimilation. All the other empires before Rome simply conquered and subjugated people, while Rome made conquered people into Romans.They didn't just force their way of life, but also integrated bits of cultures from conquered peoples, like Greeks. Acts of genocide against the most fierce enemies such as northern Germanics were still very present, but anyone willing to integrate into the system was integrated. America was build on the very same premice and continues to execute the principle of assimilation. Currently USA has dozens of ethnicities, like Germans, Anglo-Saxon enthinicites, Irish, Chinese, Russian, Latin, all living like a unified society, because of assimilation. Don't confuse letting people in with assimilating them
Partially, yes. But I'm not talking about that. When Rome weakened itself, the Germanics became stronger, yet that didn't mean they were better for humanity, nor their victories. Hell, that 'victory' was even worse for the Germanic people than being subjugated by Romans. Subjugation would mean short-term losses, like slavery, but long-term gains, like actual civilized life and progress, instead of centuries of garbage feudal organization, where they had to have so many soldiers that the peasants could barely feed themselves. TLDR: Victory of the strongest in brute force doesn't mean it's good for anybody, not even the victor itself
Strong/weak is a pretty fucking lame way of deciding who leads humanity forward. When the Germanic tribes destroyed Western Rome they were undoubtetly the strongest, yet they pushed humanity a few centuries back. Strength only gives a society a short-term benefit and unfortunately people like you confuse 'strength' with good leadership. Trump is a strong leader not because he sent all of his political oppositon into gulags like 'strong' leader Stalin, Trump is a strong leader because he doesn't crave for positive opinions, he simply does what is the right thing, and doesn't give two flying fucks about what actually weak , spineless people have to say about it. Your description of strong/weak is just another type of Identity Politics
It's not so much about male/female dominance or stuff. The problem is, that when the society as a whole begins to promote 'solidarity' instead of priority to your own people, women are simply more prone to it than men. But if a culture emphasyses on the interest of the country and its people, women don't lag behind at all. I come from Russia, and I can tell you that we don't have a male dominant culture. Most women from our country are very self-sophisticated, yet remain femenine, and won't let their husband abuse them. Yet despite that, there is no fake solidarity present in out society. Russia and the interest of its people is always first there, and everyone, with no difference in gender is very opposed to uncontrolled inmigration, and prefers strong border control.
GEOTUS, TAKE MY ENERGY
Oh yeah, just didn't cross my mind that it is KAG
Sike, you thought!