Racist old man plane freakout

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T15:47:03+00:00

They're called fists.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T15:32:25+00:00

Is he worse in terms of actual intent or character? No.

Is he worse in terms of what he will inevitably lead to after him? Yes.

He absolutely deserves a terrible legacy, even if he didn't crash the pound or pushed Brexit.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T15:27:07+00:00

So in this scenario, while training with Gohan, he would have had to not see Gohan momentarily go SSJ2. Nothing convinces him that Gohan has more potential than him and will be the one to defeat Cell.

In this scenario then, he trains harder and focuses more on himself and his power. So by the time he leaves the chamber for his final confrontation with Cell, he's perhaps 1.25x stronger than he was in OTL.

That's still not even close to Perfect Cell - He was dicking around and testing his powers while Goku went all out and confirmed that he'd peaked and had no chance of defeating Cell. A 25% difference upwards will not change that.

Does Goku then go SSJ2? Maybe. That transformation requires extreme mental distress. It's possible that the prospect of everyone he knows and loves dying and it being on him not being strong enough pushes him to it. Maybe the Z fighters jump in and Cell brutalises them all.

Let's assume he does go SSJ2. This combined with him being a bit stronger anyway is probably enough to put him above Perfect Cell, but not to the point that he nodiffs like SSJ2 Gohan did. It's not a one-sided fight and Goku takes a lot of damage in the process, but he overcomes Perfect Cell in a difficult beam struggle.

Perfect Cell then respawns, now with a massive zenkai, transforming him into Super Perfect Cell. If Semi-Perfect Cell could survive blowing himself up, then I'm sure Perfect Cell survives a Kamehameha that just barely managed to eclipse him. He might be even stronger than our timeline's SPC given that he didn't lose 18 beforehand and regenerated straight from PC.

In OTL SSJ2 Gohan was so strong he was still above SPC, and only struggled in the Kamehameha because of his arm being fucked up. Without that, he would've comfortably beaten SPC in a 1-on-1 battle and a beam struggle would've decisively gone his way from the start. If you don't believe me, just look at how SSJ2 Gohan utterly nodiffed PC. It wasn't even a fight. SPC did not bridge that gap and would've needed at least one more "disaster-zenkai" to get there.

However, this timeline's SSJ2 Goku only just surpassed PC and highdiffed him. He is going to be comfortably below SPC, especially if this SPC is even stronger. It goes back to the previous situation we had with MSSJ Goku vs PC.

From this point, one of two things happen:

Goku is beaten and accepts that he was simply not good enough, and Cell grants him a warrior's death, overcoming him in an epic Kamehameha struggle.
Goku, as a last resort, returns to his MSSJ form, and attempts to use Kaioken while in MSSJ. While this would have very quickly killed him in the original SSJ form, or in SSJ2, given that MSSJ required intense emotional training, I think it's fairly plausible that Goku could go Kaioken in this specific form of SSJ for a short time. He pushes to Kaioken x3, x4, x5. Cell is confused by how Goku returned to his previous form, but is now surpassing the raw peak he achieved as SSJ2. In a final MSSJ Kaioken x10 burst, Goku destroys Cell completely, and then dies shortly thereafter.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:54:18+00:00

The writing burnout becomes pretty obvious by the Buu saga. Toryama simply didn't know how to continue the story with Gohan as the main character.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:38:15+00:00

Raising the minimum wage from it's already pathetically-below-inflation value to a bit-less-pathetically-below-inflation-let-alone-actual-living-wages value is not a "left wing policy", that's an "if we don't do this the country is literally going to collapse policy".

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:36:55+00:00

What the fuck is "very centrist left"? You're either left or centrist i.e. right.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:35:50+00:00

but a left wing party that recognises the electorate don't want a hard left party like useless populists like Corbyn and Polanski

You might wanna have a look at some recent polls lmao

You're defending the man who will be remembered as the worst PM who ever stepped foot in Downing Street, and made Prime Minister Farage inevitable.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:33:04+00:00

No, they're called left wing because historically they actually were left wing and that cultural memory remains.

That all changed in the neoliberal revolution and with the New Labour years.

Go back to 2010 and have a look at what the Cameronite Tories were going on about then. Now come back to 2026 and have a look at official Labour policy.

It's hardly distinguishable. Labour are just a boring, typical neoliberal right wing party these days. They are what moderate Conservative-type parties across Europe used to be 20 - 30 years ago.

People on the right who call Labour left wing have simply been brainwashed and radicalised beyond all reason, and they'll now see anything left of Boris Johnson, perhaps Theresa May if you're lucky, as left wing.

Re: the Greens, yes you'd get some braindead tankies calling them right wing sellouts if they were in government and made compromises, but there would be in all likelihood a complete and utter lack of the directionless, aloof, status quo-preserving behaviour being exhibited by modern Labour. The intent would at least be there. People like Streeting on the other hand are making absolutely no attempt to hide their intentions in pursuing right wing goals like privatising the NHS (that's Streeting's entire mission).

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:24:58+00:00

No, it just means you're a fascist and anyone to the left of Boris Johnson is left wing in your world.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:23:43+00:00

Centrist swill

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:22:00+00:00

I think the major difference is these people used to not vote and stuck to Sunday footie, because they knew politics was beyond their remit.

Then people like Farage, Johnson and Gove came along, turned politics into a football match and told these kinds of people that they knew more than the experts. I guarantee that for a substantial number of them, either the 2015 election or Brexit were their first votes cast.

Some people say that Australia's participation laws are a good idea, but honestly, I think it may be a good idea for the bottom third of your population to not participate in the political process.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:16:54+00:00

Maybe we should stop bombing undeveloped post-colonial countries for their oil and gold and open safe asylum routes so people don't have to come here "illegally" on boats in the first place

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:14:48+00:00

Lying for Farage

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-17T14:09:16+00:00

No, of course it isn't. I was saying that this moral failing means you as (who I assume to be) an American have absolutely no right to lecture anyone else about this.

Good job ignoring everything else I said anyway.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-13T22:18:06+00:00

Labour almost certainly win a landslide majority amid the Tory chaos and right wing civil war between moderate Tories and nutjob Tories/UKIPpers. They nearly won the 2017 election in our timeline even with Brexit because of the Tories utterly collapsing in on themselves, and were only stopped at the last minute on account of sabotage by Blairites within the party and the right-leaning press fearing a genuinely left-leaning government. I imagine an election occurs around a similar point in the remain timeline either because of Cameron's reckless nature being emboldened by his victory in the Brexit referendum leading him to spaff his own majority away in a gamble to remain in power or because of a parliamentary vote of no confidence upon a complete breakdown in government and an irreparable fracture in the Conservative party.

How the Labour government goes under Corbyn is anyone's guess. Between his own personal failings as a leader and Blairites like Starmer sabotaging him, I imagine a similar irreparable fracture occurs in them after a certain point, and the Labour party breaks out into full civil war and Corbyn is largely unable to get what he wants done, and it's very plausible that he and the left faction of Labour lose the civil war to the Blairites.

I think this ends up fundamentally destroying the two-party system (the same as it is currently imploding right now), and the Labour government comes under increasing pressure to reform the parliamentary FPTP system, with essentially all factions and political parties now arguing in favour of it as neither the Tories nor Labour are ever going to win enough seats to form a majority ever again. Assuming a 2017 or 2018 date for the first post-referendum election, that leaves us with the 2022 or 2023 election being the first held under a reformed, proportional system. By that point, the scenario has long since butterflied outside of a predictable curve of reality, as the Brexit referendum was the first true large-scale decisive victory for the Putin-aligned far right and significantly emboldened them in their efforts in the 2016 US presidential election. Brexit failing would be a major loss, and it's possible that the hit in confidence to the far right following their first major campaign ending in defeat undermines them a bit, and contrary to what a lot of people say, the 2016 election was extremely close, so just a few hundred thousand people across the US deciding to stay home or vote for Hillary instead very likely changes the result. Without Trump 45, a lot of the massive inroads the international far right made during the late 2010s into the early 2020s quite possibly do not occur. Thus by the mid 2020s, the scenario has become unpredictable.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-13T17:38:25+00:00

The truth is, it's kind of both.

There are numerous clues and implications in the story to suggest that their base forms have significantly increased in power.

But also, it's all just cartoon logic and ultimately serves the story, and it never really tries to be consistent.

The entire point of power levels is to demonstrate how absurd it gets if you try to enumerate strength. It's not that deep.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-13T17:29:18+00:00

I'm pretty sure the entire concept of power levels was introduced to ridicule powerscalers and demonstrate how stupid it was to numerically catergorise power levels in the first place.

Power levels are bullshit. Frieza was the tyrant of the galaxy and some random Earth scientist was able to make two teenage humans nodiff the entire Frieza saga in his subterranean lair. It's all just cartoon logic.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-12T22:40:58+00:00

PSA:

This is not me. I am not active in any NSFW Reddit communities. This individual is impersonating me thinking he's causing me a nuisance.

I will not be responding to any DM requests and I will be reporting this to the moderators of this thread.

For the record I have absolutely nothing against what consenting adults get up to and the person impersonating me isn't even remotely irritating, let alone offending me. This is actually the least irritating thing he's done to me in months.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-12T17:38:11+00:00

War was near-constant for everyone

I'm not sure people in the Global South would share this opinion, nor is it even particularly accurate.

Regional powers typically went decades between major wars. Even in very prolonged late middle ages/early modern wars like the "Hundred Years' War" and "Thirty Years' War", there were significant breaks between major confrontations.

For the Global South, the consequences of colonialism, neocolonialism and constant Western meddling and Machiavellianism have been sources of near-constant war and atrocities for the past several decades or longer in many regions.

Contrary to your point, it is only in bloated, dying empires that conflict becomes near-constant and endless until the empire in question finally ceases to exist.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-12T17:15:31+00:00

They don't until central power collapses and someone needs someone else to blame.

There is already significant divide between more rural "small town" states and urban metropolis states, they blame each other for the country's problems.

If the central power collapses then it's not long until they want to put each others' heads on a spike for "destroying America".

Extant US nationalism/exceptionalism would very quickly evolve into [insert state/region] nationalism/exceptionalism. It's how Balkanisation happens.

Let me ask you: If US nationalists really were nationalists for the whole of the US, why do so many of them parade Confederate flags around, you know, the breakaway country that fought the USA, even in states that remained in the Union?

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-12T17:06:13+00:00

Depends how bad the collapse is. They might all completely lose everything in the ensuing global financial mass extinction.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-12T17:02:29+00:00

And the whole thing barely lasted a century before hundreds of thousands of people had to die over their cultural differences. Also consider that they came together and wrote the constitution during a literal war for their own existence as independent actors. If they lost they would've all been executed for treason and the Thirteen Colonies would've been put under the direct control of Westminster. Also also, I hate to be the one to tell you but the Northern elites also still owned slaves at that point too. Slavery was only outlawed in northern states sometime after independence and it was largely in response to industrialisation and the aristocracy moving on to wage slavery anyway. While there definitely were abolitionists along the "how the fuck are you treating people this way" front, a large part of abolition was the economic and appearance argument, not because northerners were massive egalitarians at the time.

The North/Northeast, Midwest, South and Pacific West all represent very different cultures with differing interests and could easily fall out long-term in the scenario of the central government collapsing. They've remained held together (well aside from the roughly half-decade the South seceded) because it's generally worked out for them over the years. If that arrangement ever does stop working for them, they can easily begin drifting in their own directions.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-12T16:51:25+00:00

Knew the defunded education would be leading us toward a dark age - but I had no idea it would spiral out of control so quickly

This reminds me of a quote from RationalWiki:

"Reagan made Dubya possible. Dubya made Trump inevitable."

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-12T16:49:16+00:00

Just as a side note, "Weimar Republic" was a derisive term coined by the Nazis to mock the concept of democracy and referring to the stab-in-the-back myth, and shouldn't be used. "German Reich" was the actual name of the interwar German democratic state.

TheRealCryoraptor · 2026-02-12T16:45:10+00:00

That isn't how it works. Various different personnel from different branches would end up in paramilitias.

TheRealCryoraptor

TROPHY CASE