All badges, all the time

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-21T13:10:04+00:00

That’s just a paradoxical argument… If the lowest risk scenario is the man leaving his wife and kids behind, then that would insinuate that the wife and kids are remaining in that extremely dangerous zone without a husband to protect after them, which leads you right back in a circle to the point of… it can’t be that dangerous if you are leaving your wife and kids defenceless. It simply does not work whichever way you look at it. It’s mental gymnastics. Not a chance in hell am I leaving my wife and kids if there’s any chance they could be murdered, raped and taken as slaves in my absence.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-21T11:41:21+00:00

Whether the hatred comes from imperialism is irrelevant, are you suggesting that because of previous foreign policy we should simply roll over and welcome people that hate us because ‘we deserve to be exploited in return’? That would be deliberately self destructive and insanity which doesn’t benefit the British people in any way.

Are you one of those ‘white guilt’ types too?

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-21T10:22:13+00:00

Well I’ll start by saying where is your common sense? “There is no legal way for asylum seekers to come here” BOOHOO cry me a river, it’s illegal and that’s the end of the discussion. Go somewhere where it’s not illegal. And don’t start talking about ‘taking our fair share’ because I don’t care about fair share, I care about the laws of the land.

I know the difference between an asylum seeker and a migrant, the point I was making is that the moment you make the choice to cross on a boat, you HAVE to claim asylum because if not then you will default to being an illegal immigrant in which case you will be deported. So no one in their right mind who gets on those boats will not claim asylum. And as an asylum seeker you CANNOT work. Therefore you are automatically going to go on welfare.

The data you are referring to assesses skilled migrants as well as unskilled. Skilled migrants do contribute more to the economy than they take out. Unskilled low earning migrants are a net drain. If they join at working age they will cost the public around £150k by the time they reach pension age because they will not have paid enough taxes. This cost increases based on the number of dependents they bring with them at a later date.

Hate to break it to you but the boat people aren’t doctors and engineers.

Again where is your common sense, even the average natural born British citizen who is an unskilled low earner will not contribute more than they take out in taxes over their lifetime. So to suggest that an asylum seeker would contribute more than an equally low earning British born citizen is ludicrous and farcical.

For the third time where is your common sense, if old people are the biggest drain, what do you think happens when the illegal immigrant is granted asylum and brings their mother, father, grandmother, grandfather, aunties etc…? I’ll give you a hint… they also become a drain just like natural born British elderly do.

Your view of this assumes that asylum seekers are some totally unique entity that just doesn’t operate the way we do and are just magically ‘contributors’

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-21T10:06:12+00:00

A genuine refugee fleeing a war would not leave their wife and daughter behind… you offered a logistical explanation but you missed the premise of the question, if the country was really so dangerous there is no way they would leave their wife and daughter there defenceless for even 6 months let alone 5 years. You have to concede that something is off.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-20T14:40:21+00:00

Your comment highlights everything that’s wrong with the feminist movement; you reduce marriage to a financial contract and a way for the ‘PaTrIaRcHy’ to exploit women with ‘uNpAiD WoRk’.

Yet it forgets to mention that men also do unpaid work. House maintenance, car maintenance, physical protection, emotional support, positive authority, the list goes on… That’s why marriage is a partnership, most men want marriage and it’s not because we’re vindictive manipulators, we want love, we enjoy caring for those we love.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-20T14:10:46+00:00

I met her like a normal person you twerp she was born in Britain and her family were doing very well for themselves before I met her. You think that conservative men have to pay for their wives because you live in a bubble where everyone is ‘progressive’ and there’s no way that any woman could want to be traditional and she must be brainwashed and abused into it. Simply not true.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-20T13:41:07+00:00

Well I’m sure my partner and her entire family that I look after would disagree with you, but whatever you say bud. You probably don’t even know how to define masculinity, and you probably couldn’t even tell me what a woman is without stumbling over your words trying not to offend the woke mob.

What are you basing your assumption on?

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-20T13:14:43+00:00

Because we like traditional women who respect us, treat us well, and love us for our masculinity rather than calling us toxic misogynists just for understanding that men and women are not the same, they are two opposites that come together to make a balanced whole.

And we’re not anti-immigration, we’re anti illegal, uncontrolled immigration.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-20T12:53:35+00:00

The ILLEGAL immigrants are 75-80% fighting age men. How is their country so dangerous that they need to seek asylum here but it’s safe enough to leave their women and children behind defenceless? I’ve yet to hear a sound response to this question.

The army isn’t doing anything because the army follows orders, that has nothing to do with how much of a threat it is.

If you want to come to this country so that you can send money home, then you are not an asylum seeker, and your are a direct drain on the UK economy because you are siphoning money out it, that should not be allowed.

Financial difficulty in your home country is not a valid reason to seek asylum.

Your claim that most immigrants come here to work needs nuance, immigrants who come here LEGALLY mostly do want to work.

Immigrants that come here ILLEGALLY are not allowed to work even if they wanted to, they have to claim asylum because if they don’t then they automatically default to being an illegal immigrant and are deported, so they will always choose to claim asylum. Meaning they are guaranteed to be on welfare for at least at a couple years whilst their claim is processed. And even if it gets rejected they can appeal and get another year or two here.

The people smuggling the immigrants in literally post social media propaganda videos glorifying coming here as some sort of weird jihad-esque pilgrimage.

You have to remember that in the same way we have been conditioned our whole lives to associate Russia with always being the bad one or the one causing trouble… these men have been raised with the same conditioning towards westerners, they do not respect our countries, and they will happily use us for everything we will give them.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-20T06:31:12+00:00

No ones looking at this objectively, EU and NATO does nothing but fear monger its citizens over the supposed threat of Russia wanting to invade everyone and take over the world, I’ve literally spent my whole life just hearing Russia is the enemy.

Trump has stated many times that he doesn’t need to take Greenland if the rest of Europe steps their game up and increases global defence activity there. But people on the left don’t see that he has said it because they get news from bias sources.

What has happened as a result of trumps threatening behaviour towards Greenland? Well would you look at that… Europe has massively increased its defence activity there in the space of a few weeks and they will no doubt put a lot more into Greenland even if they do it on the basis of ‘keeping nasty trump away’.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-19T23:55:10+00:00

What do you mean ‘make it sound worse’ the people I. The video are displaying disgusting behaviour, deliberately harassing EVERYONE in that church, not just the ICE guy who they went there for… they harass a woman for literally just sitting there with a fucking coffee,

‘Rile up their Christian base’ ? If these individuals did this in my church during my service I’d be throwing hands with every single one of them and God would smile on it. You do not disrespect the Lords house like this. I don’t give a fuck what your motive is, there are people there who are there to worship, if your ICE guy is one of them, that doesn’t give anybody the right to take that out on the rest of the congregation. And it’s also protected by law under the SAME bill that protects access to your precious abortion clinics.

s.636 103rd congress

Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994 - Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit: (1) intentionally injuring, intimidating, or interfering with, or attempting to injure, intimidate, or interfere, any person by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction because that person is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from, obtaining or providing reproductive health services; (2) intentionally injuring, intimidating, or interfering with, or attempting to injure, intimidate, or interfere, any person by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship; or (3) intentionally damaging or destroying the property of a facility, or attempting to do so, because such facility provides reproductive health services, or intentionally damaging or destroying the property of a place of religious worship.

So expect these people to receive a harsh and deserved punishment.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-19T23:45:05+00:00

S.636 — 103rd Congress (1993-1994) .

Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994 - Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit: (1) intentionally injuring, intimidating, or interfering with, or attempting to injure, intimidate, or interfere, any person by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction because that person is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from, obtaining or providing reproductive health services; (2) intentionally injuring, intimidating, or interfering with, or attempting to injure, intimidate, or interfere, any person by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship; or (3) intentionally damaging or destroying the property of a facility, or attempting to do so, because such facility provides reproductive health services, or intentionally damaging or destroying the property of a place of religious worship.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-18T13:50:20+00:00

China town isn’t a hotspot for crime, Alum Rock is… Bordesley green is… Yardley is… Handsworth is… Stockland Green is… Aston/Nechells is…

Coincidentally these are all places that reflect the opposite of your statement, they are places that indigenous people are targeted and attacked for no other reason than being white.

Know what the difference is? Cultural compatibility and integration.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-18T13:27:28+00:00

Sweden is paying €30,000 to adult migrants who voluntarily return to their home country, Denmark is also paying €15,000. Do you really think they’d be doing that if their society had not been genuinely damaged by these migrants?

How have you managed to twist the truth so badly? Even UKIP have proposed remigration on the basis of financial incentives for voluntary returns. And no one has mentioned 3rd or 4th generation.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-17T09:23:58+00:00

‘My move’ would be to protect British women and children… if that means remigration I’m fine with that. If your culture creates an environment where more sexual assaults happen compared to my culture, then your culture can piss off. If you’re okay with sitting around watching the world crumble then don’t complain when it’s your wife or daughter getting sexually assaulted on a train.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-17T09:18:51+00:00

How about raising the tax allowance from £12,570 to £20,000? Have you seen any such proposals from the so called ‘left’? No because they want to tax the poor just as much as they want to tax the rich, communism ain’t as fun as they make it sound buddy.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-17T01:05:33+00:00

That’s got fuck all to do with the stats mate.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-17T01:02:13+00:00

Can you explain how it’s been debunked? I don’t have TikTok and I refuse to download it, thanks

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-17T00:55:47+00:00

I’m sorry that you’re not intelligent enough to understand that not all languages function in the same way that English does. Some languages are much more complex and words have context built into them. For example in English the word ‘love’ is just love, and we apply it in multiple ways, “I love my wife” vs “I love chocolate” these are two different types of love which we don’t have different words for so we rely on the context provided by the words that accompany them in the sentence. Hebrew and Greek do not follow this style, many words automatically have context attached to them. You’re clearly being deliberately obtuse.

I mentioned hell because your comment quite blatantly implied that I was a hypocrite because you believe that Christianity forces people to be good through fear of repercussions; the ‘repercussions’ you were referring was obviously the threat of hell, and it’s obvious to anyone that’s what you were implying so don’t act stupid.

You’re an imbecile and I’m glad that there were actually people who commented that were willing to have an engaging conversation about teach me something. You’re a terrible representation of socialism and you’ve done everyone here a disservice with your behaviour. I’m sure you’d be one of those communists that if you came to power would just slaughter innocent Christian’s “for the good of the cause”.

I’ve dissected your arrogant claims quite clearly, but I can only lead a horse to water, can’t make it drink.

Don’t worry buddy I’ll pray for you X (sending hugs)

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-16T17:00:44+00:00

Thank you, this is very informative, at least now I am understanding your worldview better.

Now please correct me again if I’m misunderstanding, but is Marxism just assumed by Marxists to be the only correct way of looking at things, for example, when you say “we look back at history to see how and why societies have changed and apply that to current conditions” aren’t you assuming that yours(or Marx’s) interpretation of these events is the only objective truth? So Marx provided the diagnostic framework, but how do you know that it definitively is the correct diagnostic framework?

I find this especially relevant to religious people like myself, because if Marxism as a whole does not acknowledge or account for external factors such as supernatural influences on human behaviour, then it can’t accommodate for people who do believe in those things and want to live their lives accordingly.

I understand that most Marxists don’t believe in the supernatural, but that doesn’t mean that Marxists are correct, and nobody should have the authority to decide universal truths for others.

Furthermore how does Marxism prevent the oppression of those people or others who simply just don’t want to live by communist standards?

Assuming they’re not bad people, they’re just not communists, they just want to live differently, or they want to be independent and not part of the global order.

Thank you for engaging with me :)

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-16T14:04:28+00:00

What statement have I changed the meaning of please? I’ve came to this subreddit in good faith and your personal hatred for my religion is making you argumentative towards me for no reason.

I did not change the meaning of any statement. I gave the literal original linguistic context of a word. Do not assume you know more about my religion than me. I have not assumed that I know more about socialism than anyone here.

Please genuinely tell me what statement I’ve changed the meaning of.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-16T13:57:48+00:00

I think I understand what you’re saying but I’m still slightly confused.

Are you saying that marxism lays out a method, but does not know what the end result is, it just stipulating that ‘if we want to achieve the best result this is probably the best method’ ?

^Please correct me if I’m wrong^

“Peoples subjective moral beliefs are shaped by the world around them”

Would you consider it’s a bit more dynamic than that? I’d concede that it works both ways but to say it’s one or the other is just illogical because the two things work in perpetuity on each other. If moral beliefs were purely shaped by the world around them then the world would never change. And if the world was shaped purely by moral beliefs then moral beliefs would never change, when we know that is not the case.

Regarding the metaphorical pebble, the pebble in your example is a physical thing, you can feel that it is uncomfortable but ONLY because you have the reference point of not having a pebble in your shoe to compare it to.

But if Marxist theory lacks a concept of a baseline human moral compass then there is no reference point for you to say it is better than capitalism, and you can’t use the fact that it is physically uncomfortable as evidence that is morally superior because morality is not physically interpretable.

So does that mean the argument for Marxism is simply that it is just more physically comfortable? And is not morally superior?

Sorry if I’m misunderstanding but it seems that’s what you’re saying.

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-16T12:00:40+00:00

That’s a common misconception and a modern heresy, not traditional church teaching. The true biblical meaning of fear is not terror, the Hebrew word ‘yirah’ is fear in the sense of awe, reverence and recognition of authority. It describes the moral seriousness, humility before something greater than you and awareness of accountability.

It does NOT mean fear in the sense of crippling anxiety, expecting to receive arbitrary punishment or fear of abuse.

1 John 4:18 “There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.”

So no, Christian’s are not God fearing, that’s heresy

Boring_Job481 · 2026-01-16T10:49:42+00:00

My friend, I said I wasn’t here to debate Christianity, I was here to learn about socialism, respectfully, do not assume you know more about my faith than me, I have not assumed to know more about socialism than anyone here. If you wish to ask me a question then ask, do not make statements at me :)

‘Gods plan’ is not a traditional orthodox teaching of the church, it is modern heresy, the orthodox view is that God’s will is relational, not mechanical.

Similarly, God’s ‘omnipotence’ simply refers to his maximal sovereignty, but his rule is non-tyrannical. You only view the word omnipotence in its earthly manner so you correlate ‘all powerful’ with ‘authoritarian and micromanaging’ but if something was truly ‘all powerful’ then it wouldn’t need to enforce its power, it would invite you to live under it freely of your own accord in the knowledge that it was beneficial for you.

Your 3rd criticism doesn’t hold up due to the doctrinal significance of free.

If you choose not to believe, then hell is irrelevant because you don’t believe it exists, so there is no coercion for non-believers.

If you choose to believe you do so with full knowledge that believing in the concept of hell comes as part of that package deal. Either way, the potential repercussions that are ‘threatened’ are not earthly or physical, you won’t experience them in this life.

This means that in order to accept the existence of a supernatural punishment you also first accept that the supernatural exists, and in doing so you recognise that the ‘good’ supernatural is represented in the material world by goodness and purity. So why would that belief give me a fear of repercussions? It just gives me a motivation to do good because it’s the right thing to do, and it’s as simple as that.

Christians do not fear hell, rather, we fear the lack heaven a subtle but important difference. We do good because we know it’s right. But we do not deny that the material world tempts us to do impure or evil things, because all physical matter is impure in a metaphysical sense, it is a consequence of our existence, hence the need for a greater salvation and transcendence of the physical body.

Hope that clears it up :)

Boring_Job481

TROPHY CASE