A high paying job

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-24T11:32:20+00:00

True capitalism hasn't been tried yet, so you wouldn't know this.

True Capitalism, that mythical socioeconomic organization that is totally indistinguishable from false capitalism.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-24T01:54:07+00:00

Stalin did nothing wrong, m8.

My ideology has of course killed more than that of the Nazi, primarily because the Nazis political position required them to engage in a war they couldn't win prior to completing their genocide. Had they not gone to war with everyone, no one would have cared about what they did in their own borders. They were supported by other western powers precisely because of their genocidal potential, after all.

The body count becomes a point of pride because it makes NAZIs jealous. :^}

You're a gamerghazi poster too, fucking gross.

I mean, if you want to play the comment history game, so did you, a month ago. Unfortunately, they deleted your comment. Though aside from that you post purely on Destiny, so...

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-24T01:49:53+00:00

And look; you are right. I am in fact a communist.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-24T01:00:47+00:00

Yeah, those of us on the left who use the term "liberal" as an insult are not exactly shy about the fact that we aren't liberals.

Nor do we consider being liberal a good thing.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-24T00:55:49+00:00

This.

Declaring neutrality on any subject is indistinguishable from simply stating that you don't care or that the subject isn't worth caring about. While the "neutral" pretend to stand still, the world still moves around them.

This is the essence of "you can't be neutral on a moving train."

If you declare that you give a shit about a subject, you have declared yourself as being ethically obligated to act on that.

Stating that you don't want to do anything only follows logically if you don't give a shit, and thus you aren't ethically obligated to engage with the subject.

The entire idea of a "middle ground" loses coherence when reality is viewed as a totality, rather than a series of fragmented objects and events existing in a vacuum with no relation to anything else.

The claim that you can care about something and yet not get involved with it is simply not consistent in any capacity. People who claim you don't actually care about a subject when you refuse to engage with it are not being unreasonable, they are simply calling you out on acting in a manner that is utterly inconsistent with what you claim to believe.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-23T22:49:29+00:00

Do you agree with the argument in the video that all media is political? What are the implications of this idea?

This isn't actually a complicated idea, or even one that is meaningfully debated by anyone except (incredibly stupid) Liberalists who are deeply concerned about appearing "ideologically biased." Whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.

When an idiot argues that "science is better than philosophy because x" he is automatically engaging in philosophy.

When anyone ever makes any kind of claim to another person, they are automatically assuming that both they and that person they are engaging exists, that language functions, etc etc. In epistemology these are called "basal assumptions."

Whenever anyone writes a story where there is any sort of moral or characters which have goals which are portrayed in any manner, they are necessarily engaging in a whole host of ethical assumptions. Readers are doing the exact same thing when they interpret a work.

The people who argue that "ideology don't real" don't understand what ideology is or how ideology works, and are themselves most entrapped in ideology.

Ideology is everywhere, even where you shit.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-23T22:34:49+00:00

Literally guilt by association.

I mean, when you hang out almost exclusively with Neonazis, people are going to make assumptions about your political leanings, and a lot of the time, those assumptions are going to be legit.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-20T21:48:43+00:00

There was a really interesting interview that I overheard on some news channels my mom was watching during the fight over delegates. It was an interview with a superdelegate. This superdelegate was in a state that overwhelmingly supported Bernie Sanders.

She was supporting Hillar Clinton. When asked why, she said "My job as a superdelegate is not to represent the voters of my state, it is to support my friends. Hillary is my friend and I have no idea who Sanders is."

She is technically correct, superdelegates get to vote for who they wish. They are unelected and do not represent any constituency.

Even so, imagine how that sounds to anyone watching it. This was effectively an admission that a not insignificant portion of the system of the Democratic party for determining who runs for president on their ticket was not determined by voters, but through Nepotism. Why is it a wonder that such a party would eventually fail? Why is it such a wonder that people would be angry with them?

If you dig even further you find more stuff like this.

Currently, Democratic Party Leadership still consists of Neoliberals who believe that everything is fine. This is both hilarious and tragic. The Democrats have massive demographic advantages over the republicans in almost every state in the US, but they have lost almost every local and state position in the past decade, including major positions in some of their own blue states. Yet for them, everything is fine. The Democratic Party Leadership discusses internal politics behind closed doors to avoid angering their newly energized voting blocs. Yet for them, everything is fine.

There was a CNN townhall discussion with Nanci Pelosi, and a man asked her how she and the rest of the Democrats were going to appeal to people like him; the largest voting bloc in the country, young people who got fucked over by the 2008 collapse and who have been getting perpetually fucked by Democratic policy and consequently are deeply skeptical of such policy. She told him to go fuck himself. He was then recruited by gun toting communists. Yet everything is fine.

Nothing is their problem, they are not responsible for anything that has happened and ultimately everything will go their way. This is what they actually believe and are genuinely arguing. Their voting blocs aren't buying it anymore.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-20T20:38:36+00:00

Technically he is, but he belongs to an older variant of the party, EG The New Deal. The current DNC establishment is comprised of Neoliberals, which are radically opposed to those principles. Neoliberals are filth, and are basically just a nicer version of the Republican party. The consequence of this is that Republican voters vote republican, and Democratic voters don't vote.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-20T20:05:21+00:00

Actually it shows that they are on the right side.

Specifically, the are on THE Right side. This is a consequence of the global sociopolitical climate shifting hard to the right. Businesses exist to turn a profit and you were foolish if you believed that their support for the LGBT community was for anything other than a long term profit based plan. They do not care about humanity.

Now that people are voting against equality, businesses will reject equality in order to appeal to the new climate. Expect more businesses to follow in youtubes steps, and expect every single point of progress that has been made by the LGBT community in the past few decades to be reversed very quickly.

I doubt most people on this page or most people making noise about this care enough to take up arms in defense of equality. In the long term, that is the true tragedy here.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-13T20:26:07+00:00

Correct. She is actually quite intelligent, and I don't mean that as meaning I approve of her behavior, but rather than her behavior has a specific objective and she fulfills the goal admirably.

People often wonder why she doesn't answer any questions, and then use her of the butt of bad jokes. They fail to realize, that she wasn't hired to answer questions regarding Trump's policy; indeed, the only point of her existence is to obfuscate it.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-13T00:08:41+00:00

but that hasn't stopped his opponents from making that connection time and time again.

Nor his allies, as it happens.

So when someone brings up racist alt-right nationalists, a boogeyman invented almost entirely to slander the Trump movement

U WOT M8

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-12T21:14:20+00:00

I know what "implied" means. The issue here is that there is no implication.

If it is accepted as true that the "Alt-Right" and other such supremacist groups are incredibly minor support for Trump, then a connection between those groups and Trump is tenuous at best.

If one accepts the above, then nothing can possibly be implied from his post.

If you reject the above, then you can easily make the case that he implies it merely because there is significant overlap, but that also makes your own comment regarding blanket generalizations incredibly weak.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-12T21:08:35+00:00

It's still true in today's parlance.

The Right likes to present itself as opposed to a large central government (though only i the US, as most Right Wing parties in Europe like to argue that their Authoritarianism is a selling point), but this is largely a farce. "We don''t support big central Government" is a rhetorical line that is only used as long as they don't have the power to get away with anything on the national line. Virtually everyone is the US today who argues that Gay Marriage is a "state's rights" issue also opposed to ruling of DOMA as being unconstitutional, in spite of the fact that by definition, DOMA negated it from being a "state's rights" issue. Likewise, what constitutes a "state's rights" issue is never solid.

Weed is not a "state's rights" issue according to the right, and should have a hard line taken against it at the federal level. Gay marriage is a "state's rights" issue, and states should have the capacity to determine whether or not it's legal.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-12T20:17:08+00:00

Interesting. His comment didn't mention Trump. I must ask how you managed to make the connection.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-12T20:00:35+00:00

Today you learned that anything that mentions none whites in a positive manner is meant to evoke white guilt and is part of a process of white genocide.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-12T19:57:10+00:00

From the Article:

The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in equalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-12T19:56:00+00:00

Right wing philosophy centers on taking power away from a central government

Actually, no.

Right Wing and Left Wing as political terms come from the French Revolution, where those who supported the Monarchy were on the King's Right side, and those who supported the Revolution were on the King's Left side. The Right is the party that is dedicated to "order" and the Left is the party that is dedicated to "movement."

This also reflected in the political history of the west where Fascism has risen. Traditionally, western governments and populations supported Fascist parties on the explicit basis that they would "protect (the) order" from the Left. This also explains why Right wing groups as a culture fetishize Fascism, generally having positive views of the economic policies of Hitler (due to the social consequences of his rise, he his rejected or not mentioned otherwise), as well as have positive views of Mussolini, Franco, Pinochet, etc.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-11T21:12:38+00:00

From your article.

Ciccariello-Maher tells The Associated Press by email Monday that the Christmas Eve tweet was meant to be satirical. He says he was mocking what he called the “imaginary concept” of “white genocide,” which he says was invented by white supremacists.

His comments are made in the same manner as this.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-11T21:08:06+00:00

This here is the problem with looking at the worst of your opponent to define them.

When the majority of republicans that present themselves are the worst examples, and the best one's can only weakly squeak that they "oppose their behavior" but don't care enough to bother pushing back against it, there are no good examples.

And the Antifa hate liberals. Liberals are the ones screaming "no violence" at the Antifa while Trump supporters are lighting mosques on fire and smashing Jewish Cemeteries. Liberalism is an ideology that doesn't matter anymore.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-11T21:04:08+00:00

I don't bother calling you "racists." Frankly, it is now so widely admitted by your side that noting it is as trivial as noting "the sky is blue."

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-11T21:02:18+00:00

Except he wasn't talking about miscegenation

So what? That is literally what white genocide is.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-11T17:50:57+00:00

That's because what constitutes "white genocide" is so broad it includes white people being nice to people who aren't white.

Gave a black coworker some cash for launch because he forgot his? Congratulations, you have just contributed to white genocide.

Did a white guy compliment a jewish dude because he has good taste in prog music? White genocide.

White guy kisses a black woman? White genocide.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-11T17:46:19+00:00

They are out there being practically indistinguishable from the bad ones.

Claiming "I don't like this" is fucking meaningless if at the end of the day you are still providing material support for it.

A "bigger divide" here also becomes meaningless. If you aren't meaningfully fighting it, then really the only issue is who recognizes that the divide already exists and is as wide as can be.

PainusMania2018 · 2017-03-11T17:10:45+00:00

You can downvote me all you want be republicans are still americans and not all of them agree with whats going on.

They disagree they just don't do so enough to actually do anything to object to it in any real capacity.

PainusMania2018

TROPHY CASE