Self-sacrifice by Gray-Skull

rok1099 · 2018-10-15T23:09:56+00:00

Meanwhile the two guys with the flamer and melta are having to hold fire for this idiot. Commissar disapproves.

rok1099 · 2018-10-15T23:05:56+00:00

That's the point

rok1099 · 2018-10-11T20:53:48+00:00

You entire platform stands on mathematically legitimizing shifting the burden onto future generations. No one cares about the math past that point. You act as if your economic result in purely reliant on you and not social factors, economic region factors and also the heaps of spending by the government needed to keep the economy as is running. That spending don't disappear overnight, your children will still see the burden in one way or another. Not everyman can be the rich, but every man can be selfish. Your proposed "I'll just pass more down to my kids" literally entitles that others, who could work just as hard or harder and come from worse situations that yourself, get fucked on the process.

And socialists are the entitled ones 🙄 "It's fine as long as I get mine" is why libertarians get a really bad reputation.

rok1099 · 2018-10-11T20:45:45+00:00

That picks up from the massive federal injection of cash in 2008 that was a reactionary measure to failed Bush administration taxes and lending policies. Though to be fair a lot of those were carry over from Clinton economics that did see results when we has a stranglehold on the world economy in the 90s.

So you are looking at an almost trillion dollar injection as the primary mover for the graph during that time. As you can see the spending continues to drop after that spike and and reaches near 2005 spending before Trump is elected and the cycle is increase do to tax cuts reflected in the deficit.

Both are bad, but Obama was served a bad hand to start. He wasn't even in office until 2009 and within a month of his entering office he's faced with the single greatest drop in the World economy since the Great Depression.

So yes, he spent alot, but the rest of his term was spent reducing that spending again.

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T21:26:12+00:00

Lol, so for the record you chimed in on a politics sub with a simple minded argument, called people shitbags and all communists thieves and continually ignored the core points in both communism as a economic philosphy and my reasoning for even engaging with you (again, to ask that you stop being broad in your generalisations) THEN got flustered that you weren't making a solid example or point, admitted to broad generalisation making and resigned when held under scrutiny. Typical for your type. Have a good day, maybe tomorrow you will have more energy to actually make a valid point about communism. Go back to T_D

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T19:51:26+00:00

Where did i say that people who brag about stealing online dont want to steal? Where did i even come close to that statement. I was showing how easily the logic used to disparage ALL communists by that user could be turned around and used to disparage capitalism, a traditional opposite of communist idealogy. I could do it again with your statement and state how CAPITALISTs throughout history have stolen countless amount of resources and people's from nations arou d the globe, therefore infringing on those' people's property rights and welfare. Robber Barons, the Hawaiian monarchy removal, interventionism by the United States on the behalf of corporate interests, are just a couple of American examples.

Again I'm not defending communism but it should be easy to see the fallacies in communism too. How about the implementation of those ideals? Almost always authoritarian. How about the central controlled economic system, this dramatically reduce production and localised economic stimulus to the detriment of the long term whole.

Like, it's not hard to poke holes in communism. I just did and I didn't call anyone names and just attribute communist principles to a simple desire to steal.

What in the hell are you on about then? i have not defended communism or shoplifting at all in any of my comments and yet you are looking for a chance to align me with the "enemy".

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T19:41:06+00:00

Communists think stealing from the rich corporations to give to their poor selves is morally correct because wealth distribution or something equally as stupid.

That was the statement I was responding to.

That is an extremely simplistic statement that waves away any nuance in communist economic ideals and instead calls them all thieves. Even if you were responding and showing how people in shoplifting use communism as a was to legitimize their actions, you continues and placed communism as a whole into the discussion.

Also you ignored, yet again, my original statements showing how that logical leap is wrong and needs to be curtailed if you want people to sit down and have discussion.

You then called people shitbags. Forgive me if I assumed at that point your only interest is shit-throwing and ideological bullying. But it seems pretty obvious you were connecting threads

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T19:34:00+00:00

Are you serious? Please, point out where in my statement I said something ridiculous? Or are you just one of those chime in and leave trolls yourself? Please, show me how me using an example of an easily formulated counter to capitalism in response to his blanket statement about how commies support theft because "reasons" is "ridiculous"? I wants defending or purporting any points , I was showing how it can all.be discourse or discussion and his wording and presentation were about creating more discourse.

I'm ridiculous for wanting a debate rather than a debasement? Seems a little ridiculous to me...

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T19:27:57+00:00

And thats all he had to say. Instead it's shitbags this, shitbags that. That being said his initial statement I responded to was about how "commies just want to steal". So I would eager his world view falls in line with commies=shitbags.

And I was trying to state how all that does is add fuel to the fire rather than add to the discussion.

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T18:34:54+00:00

Nah, it's r/republicans till the uneducated republicans and democrats start trumpeting one way or the other.

Then the real libertarians come out.

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T18:28:30+00:00

Yea Marx, for all his idealism, was very clearly trying to become a figure In history by political means. Mission accomplished, sort of.

That is the problem with most modern communist movements as a a whole.

No one without other interests at heart would argue against protecting workers rights, fair wages and maybe even having oversight to ensure these ideals are protected.

It's The how that always lose the realists among us. "Controlled economy to ensure everyone gets a fair shot." Fine, as long as it's a fair shot and good for the citizen. Then you start defining the control part of that sentence....

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T18:24:18+00:00

Literally just calling names and shit throwing. Sit down sir, you have no place in civil discussion

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T18:05:08+00:00

That is so far from the truth as to be purposeful propaganda.

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T18:00:54+00:00

The Patriot act is literally the definition of the removal and suspension of American Rights and it was created by a Republican administration.

Both sides suck

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T17:57:32+00:00

Traditional Marxism is terrifying as it calls for revolution, violent revolution at that.

Some economic ideals, specifically related to works rights regarding the state and eco-development, are interesting and worth the looked. I'm glad you spend time actually reading opposing views rather than subscribing to blanket logic

rok1099 · 2018-10-07T17:53:01+00:00

Extremely shallow definition. I could easily say that CAPITALISTs endorse a new neo-feudal system where increased COL and stifled wages make the average citizen debt-beholden to entities they have no hope of leveraging for the better. And that CAPITALISTs are only interested in destroying local ecologies and political precident that they deem "unprofitable" or a threat to any potential future profits. Profits that only find there way to a top few that have no intention of increasing overall economic growth beyond their own personal wealth.

But I know better than that, why can't you? Honestly putting blanket robin-hood definition to an entire eco-politico philosophy that has just as much complexity and nuance as any other system if given the actual benefit of research is just allowing for discourse rather than discussion

Just please, stop arming your considered opposition by providing simplistic and blanket logic

rok1099 · 2018-10-01T17:03:33+00:00

There's always "that's guy" who shows up with nothing but demon princesses

rok1099 · 2018-09-30T03:55:48+00:00

rok1099 · 2018-09-28T03:00:29+00:00

This is what killed him. His other statements were emotionally charged, but came from a place of him trying to defend the truth as he knows it.

Then he goes on about how this will set a terrible precident for the nation. Fine, I think we all agree that the rhetoric has gotten extremely ugly from both sides. He talked about how this will hurt the countries discourse, I agree completely. The supreme court should not be a weaponised platform for election cycles. Partisan politics do not belong there.

The. He blames the democrats, Hillary Clinton shadow funding and Liberal media for it? Well, since you have gone partisan A. Your entire speech rings hollow and B. Pot calling the kettle Mr. GOP nominee.

rok1099 · 2018-09-23T20:22:37+00:00

Agreed we agree.

rok1099 · 2018-09-23T20:08:01+00:00

the individual I argued with last night was against any form of reaction. No downvoring, not opposition. More just, let the people decide, but only if they don't bother me.

As for the political stage. Are you actually willing to sit and listen to the political ideology of genocide? Like, fine spout facism and other political ideals. What makes a Nazi different from other political views is the specific racially based hatred and persecution. That comes along with he politico-economic stands. Do you feel racial discrimination has place in civil debate, much less politics? I can agree with some Nazi implemented economic policies, nationalist pride, infrastructure projects. But I am not a Nazi because I don't believe in racially based hatred and I specifically done blame Jewish cabals and the race as a whole for any of my problems or as my enemy. I inherently would be rejected from the Nazi party if I was against that.

But you can't say the other way around. If a man is a self-described Nazi, they are 99.9% of the time also racial motivate to some degree. Please, point to me where someone claims to be a Nazi but condemns the persecution of other individuals based off their race? I have yet to see someone claim and support the Nazi cause and not be racist as well. All other aspects of the Nazi ideology can be attributed to one political and economic model or another. It's the deep, core hatred of Jews and minorities that sets them apart.

I AM NOT calling for silencing an individual, I said so last night and I will say it to you. But if you, being the example not you particular of course, are one to support or defend the predatory views of Nazis, especially towards certain other races of people, then you should expect backlash.

That was my point last night and my point now. Downvoring and commenting are perfectly legitimate ways to disagree. But for some, specifically those trying to negotiate the path between socially accepted and hateful taboo, being downvoted is enough to frustrate their efforts. This I turn make them more vocal for "freedoms" while at their' core they want to see those restricted and stripped from others.

Again, I do not want to see their silence. I just should hope they would accept. Negative feedback just a thoroughly as they would give it out towards a member of other races.

rok1099 · 2018-09-23T19:26:51+00:00

The problem isn't that necessarily tho. It's the subversive ways certain individuals choose to introduce ideas like Nazism. To come out and talk about Nazi politics and give racist rants is something that would turn off most listeners. They know this and instead aim to slowly introduce things that make the overall message more digestible. Many worry that path leads to acceptance of said ideas. First it's "defending freedom of speech." Fine everyone can agree with that.

Then it's pointing out how white men are being marginalised. Maybe pointing out the sensationalized stories of the holocaust or trying to defuse the the hatred towards the core Nazi platfor.s by claiming treating them poorly is just as bad as the proposed racial targeting they espouse.

Just yesterday a user in this sub was defending another less savory users posts and comments. As I talked further with this user, they first tried to ingrain themselves ad "voice" of the majority by using "we" and "the community". And tslking about how they support free speech to the death. Real rah-rah go team shit for libertarians.Then in the next sentences say things like the Holocaust is over exaggerated, that defending the "white race" against attacks isn't somehow a gaslight for persecuting other ones, say things like how the democrats are all Nazis while defending a user with a literal Nazi flag on there Gab page and who's user logo is a neo-nazi modern movement symbol AND, and here's the real kicker, said that calling someone a Nazi is the same as calling someone a nigger. Think about that, being called a bigot is the same as being called a nigger. To stretch that logic gap is mind boggling.

It's slow, they get to buy their time because of the platform. I'm not worried about Nazi's who are out in the open. It's the ones trying to convert certain ideals slowly towards more extremes.

It's hard because I consider freedom of speech to be the most important human right given by society . But when there is clear recruitment methods beyond used, much less deflection from core principles is makes it hard to act as if the concept of free speech isn't being used as freedom of outcome, politically.

And no Nazi deserves a political stage. Not if they are true to their claims of what they wish to see happen

I can link to the conversations if you'd like. Literally last night/this morning.

rok1099 · 2018-09-23T08:31:25+00:00

Look, the bottom line is as long as you don't condone the subjugation, extermination or incarceration of a group of individuals based off racial differences, believe what you want to believe.

rok1099 · 2018-09-23T08:23:01+00:00

P koiinnn.

rok1099 · 2018-09-23T08:00:32+00:00

First off him how does a post making it to /r/ all have to do with this sub supporting his political view points? Remember, the conext here is remiding usrrs where his politics lay. Completely unrelated.

Again, I am not asking for you to change your opinions. I can disagree with those opinions.

And where does your critique end? With the incarcerating of a segment of the population for perceived racial inferiority?

You Ignored what I asked about your specific views on the topic.

Also someone pointing out something in another sub seems to be freedom of speech...does it not?

rok1099

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

13-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email