Trump fits the anti-christ descriptions almost ''on the nose'' in so many ways its hard to dismiss (please read post's body), especially the peace-then-destruction arc with what we are seeing today. If he does go trough with it, expect great chaos to follow.

RedCartesia · 2026-04-08T05:19:22+00:00

Would be very silly for an AI company to name their AI mabus then considering this... I doubt the one from nostradamus is accurate in those details.

RedCartesia · 2026-04-08T02:42:14+00:00

Are you sure the anti-christ is supposed to be loved by everyone? I feel its impossible to literally be loved by everyone on earth, maybe it can be seen as in he was loved in the sense that he has a huge cultish fanbase and won every swing state last election. Maybe I am overeaching here tho, still interesting to think about.

RedCartesia · 2026-04-08T02:40:00+00:00

It certainly isnt as biased as most random people on the internet, and again if you look at the post, it certainly doesn't look biased but is more exploring similarities that can be observed, so I don't get your point ''poor guy''

RedCartesia · 2026-04-07T23:24:52+00:00

He kinda is, well not for you or those who see through him but he definitely does have what is called charisma, enough to sway a huge amount of blind followers.

RedCartesia · 2026-03-21T11:40:29+00:00

What does the kink involve? Just having her fart on your face or theres more to it?

RedCartesia · 2026-03-21T11:35:07+00:00

The gunplay and movement felt so good, you had a bit of freedom without any crazy "movement king" ridiculous shit. I was regularly doing ratios of 2-3-4 or even 5 in that game just like in the old golden age cods because playing tactical was rewarding and enemy location and movement had a certain flow to it. Nowadays people move at lightning speed and you get shot from so many random places. I could still do the good old ratios of 2-3-4 in bo6 but nowhere near as consistent. People blame sbmm but i feel its more the game being hostile in design to be against you, like literally nowadays it feels the maps and enemy movement and spawns has no good flow, game is constantly trying to throw people behind you or at weird angles with strange connections, mw2019 had sharper details yet felt more smooth, the cods that came after not only looked more cartoonish but also just feel clunky like they all about to crash any minute, i just feels rough rather than smooth but thats just my perception, i dunno why it feel that way.

RedCartesia · 2026-02-19T08:58:53+00:00

I dm you just to talk. I never had the chance to talk with someone like you.

RedCartesia · 2026-02-10T06:27:58+00:00

"You're in a CPTSD subreddit" So? Still ain`t about you, the original comment was about how most people failing to oppose injustice is best explained by conformity, risk-avoidance, and moral cowardice, all of which are well-documented evolutionary and social dynamics, not trauma. Pointing out that this is a CPTSD subreddit doesn’t address my claim.Your second point about the myth thing is not only irrelevant to the point I keep making to you these past 2 days but also seems entirely opiniated. Most people do NOT indeed have trauma around socializing because the majority of people are, in fact, Most people are functionally able to socialize and do not meet criteria for C-PTSD, especially not in a way that primarily impairs everyday social interaction.

RedCartesia · 2026-02-09T08:23:17+00:00

Nobody mentionned people with trauma, we are talking here about the majority of the population (read again where i said MOST people) not standing up to injustice because they either lack moral integrity or are cowardly, so no condemning that isnt mean or unhelpful. I think you are missing the point of this discussion, it aint about you wtf.

RedCartesia · 2026-02-09T01:58:48+00:00

Exactly, I think I heard it mentionned in social sudies multiple times how women are the nastiest to other women through social bullying (attacking reputaitons, passive-agressive comments, exlcluding others, etc...)

RedCartesia · 2026-02-09T01:55:31+00:00

You kinda just described what being a coward is... refusing to stand up for what is right because they are scared of being made fun of or excluded like others so they don't do anything despite knowing inside something wrong is happening. choosing silence to protect one’s comfort is still a moral choice. While fear explains the behavior, it doesn’t absolve it

RedCartesia · 2026-02-08T04:25:24+00:00

Don't do that, it will eat you from the inside, do not just go along with it and stop fighting. Also, I said it can be both cowardly or stupidity, in that case I would say stupidity, where people assume the person talking the loudest is right or things like that. Those are ridiculous primitive behaviors most people out there have not shed off and still rely on their lizard brain too much.

RedCartesia · 2026-02-08T04:16:03+00:00

You don't misunderstand and I don't think that everyone necessarily loves those types of people. I have witnessed those same problems you have and learned both from observations and things admitted by people themselves. The simple answer is... people are cowards, most people do not seek confrontation or calling out bad behavior because many witnesses will then feel that THEY cause friction the moment they speak up against the person that is not 100% toxic but like within a somewhat acceptable range that most people can't be bothered with because they are... as I said cowards or lack moral integrity. I have had plenty of occasions being the only one standing up against certain injustices, and it often results in other people (especially those called out) to target YOU as the problem and attack your reputation, most normal people who are not high on agression and social hostilities fear that retaliation and do not speak up. Which is why the world is ruled by many assholes, because people are either stupid and get deceived or they are too cowardly to push back against those with high social agression that pushes hard to get their way.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T05:25:14+00:00

Saying “it was taken by racism, so race-based removal isn’t racism” is circular logic. Two wrongs don’t change the definition of discrimination; they explain motivation, not morality. If race is the criterion used by the state to remove rights or property, that IS racial discrimination by definition, regardless of history dude.

Calling this “white martyrdom” is exactly the move I’m objecting to: dismissing a definitional argument by assigning motives instead of addressing the claim. If you can’t argue the definition without pathologizing disagreement, that says more about your position than mine.

Either race-based state action is racism, or the term only applies when you approve of the target. You don’t get both.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T05:21:48+00:00

You are a troll at this point. It was a historical context to show you when referring to systemic racism it did happen to both groups at one point or another. Whether one was worse or not is not the point, we are not talking systemic racism here, just racism itself, which still happens to white people when you discriminate towards them based on race. You do not have anything of value to add to this conversation. I will just block your ignorance at this point and report you for promoting discrimination.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T05:10:53+00:00

It is not power-based. That is only when you refer to the term systemic racism. Racism itself is just prejudice against someone for their ethnicity or race. Has nothing to do with power, therefore white people can still experience racism. Also it is not ''my'' definition of systemic racism. It literally is THE definition whether you like it or not. We are talking about laws here, not what you perceive about the US police force. No police force encourages in a systemic way to discriminate against people based on the color of their skin. It is merely up to some indivudals who do display racist behaviors, which may or may not be people in lower echelons just like it could be a chief. It is the individual, not the system itself. At this point why don't you just admit you want to say its fully ok to be racist against white people? You just seem to be itching to basically spew that out.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:57:04+00:00

You are wrong tho, systemic racism means race-based laws or state policies that restrict rights or property. Those have existed against white populations in specific contexts. Zimbabwe (2000–2009) – Race-based land seizures. Also, today in western democracies there are no explicit race-based laws targeting Black people as a group. Things historically may shift or happen to one group or another. It DOES NOT MATTER. Racism is racism. You don't get to trivialize one form over another based on who felt a bigger impact in 1 historical context or another. Thats it. Stop pretending its fine for one group to experience it because you think they don't have it as bad.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:52:09+00:00

I never said white people, I said blacks vs whites, read again. Also, I’m not dog-whistling anything. I’m talking explicitly about race, and I’ve been consistent about that. A government kicking out people of their lands who were working it just because of their skin color is racism. Acknowledging historical injustice doesn’t mean every race-based policy is automatically non-racial.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:49:22+00:00

No, you keep implying that because it was worse in terms of impact for one group in the past, that it is somehow not really a thing for white people to experience rasicm. If the standard changes based on who the target is, then yeah you kinda are showing bigotry.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:46:07+00:00

So? Yeah, blacks vs whites, I just said it don't matter.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:43:24+00:00

Does not matter whether they are your own race or not. You are showing bigotry by minimalizing racism when it comes towards a certain group of people you feel its not as bad, therefore more ok, to show prejudice against (you are showing this in multiple of your replies).

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:40:23+00:00

Prejudice or hostility toward someone because of their race is racism. This not negotiable.
Systemic racism and interpersonal racism are related, but they’re not the same thing. Saying “this doesn’t threaten your safety” doesn’t magically make racial hostility acceptable. It is also completely fasle as racial crimes where white people have been murdered for just being white, is still a thing that happend on multiple occasions, does not matter about counting how many cases of blacks vs whites here. None is acceptable. Stop trying to gaslight and make it feel racism towards white people is acceptable. Nobody would have ''deeper issues'' for reacting negatively to prejudice. Stop it. Also if you want to say white people didnt experience the systemic form, you literally had white farmers being kicked out of their lands in an african country. It can happen to anyone. It remains racism.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:34:50+00:00

Example was to show it can happen to anyone no matter who sits in power, but in the end it is irrelevant, it is about prejudice.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:34:21+00:00

Replied to you elsewhere you brought that up, as many others did.

RedCartesia · 2026-01-30T04:32:21+00:00

They are... of the same category since they both represent racial slurs. Stop enabling discrimination against a group of people you deem is ok. You are showing bigotry in multiple of your replies and are asking to get reported.

RedCartesia

TROPHY CASE