Board 8 > Nationalist politics topic 11: NPC meme is the gift that keeps on giving

(+) Yeah! (+)

Some examples:
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/ancient-history/siege-constantinople-bulgarian-khan-fought-arabs.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tours
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconquista
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna

Among many others.

Meanwhile, this time the polls were correct and Republicans kept and expanded their influence in the senate, but lost the house. How anti-climatic. I suppose we'll see two years of the two sides exchanging blows and nothing important happening... Trump had better complete his takeover of the Republican party by 2020 because it was the GOP establishment candidates that lost the party the house.

The democratic party can claim the overall victory, however, due to the completely idiotic decision by Florida voters to give voting rights to felons. You know which way those will go... Trump can consider Florida lost already. Republican voters who supported that suggestion sealed their own fate.
---

Vlado posted...

There are links at the bottom of the wikipedia article. Click them and read them. Just because no-one has bothered to make clear statistics of right-wing vs. left-wing channels/users censored does not mean we should deny the obvious.

Add citations and evidence to the list of things you don't understand, I guess.
---

Vlado posted...

The democratic party can claim the overall victory, however, due to the completely idiotic decision by Florida voters to give voting rights to felons. You know which way those will go... Trump can consider Florida lost already. Republican voters who supported that suggestion sealed their own fate. People's stupidity and lack of foresight never cease to amaze me.

If you have served your time, why should you not regain the right to vote?
---

Kenri posted...

Add citations and evidence to the list of things you don't understand, I guess.

Actually, why would the burden of proof even be on me? We've had numerous prominent right-wing channels censored and zero such left-wing channels. Therefore, it's you who should prove left-wing channels get censored just as much or worse.

And even if they were, censoring 5 left-wing channels with 10 average followers vs. 5 right-wing ones with 100000 average followers is obviously not equal censorship. As I already pointed out, Alex Jones alone is enough proof tech companies are targetting the right with their censorship.

TheRock1525 posted...

If you have served your time, why should you not regain the right to vote?

Because by committing crimes, you relinquish your right to determine the direction your state/country goes in politically. I'm in fact in favour of harsher voting restrictions than that - only people who can prove having contributed to the country, e.g. by having paid a certain amount of taxes over a certain period, should get to vote at all.
---

I thought you were anti-corporatist? That argument is literally in favor of giving more power to the wealthy, because it allows them to vote politicians into into office that will legislate favorably towards their interests, thus increasing the balance of power between the rich and everyone else.

Do you even think about the things you say, or do you just automatically believe the opposite of whatever liberals want?
---

Vlado posted...

Because by committing crimes, you relinquish your right to determine the direction your state/country goes in politically. I'm in fact in favour of harsher voting restrictions than that - only people who can prove having contributed to the country, e.g. by having paid a certain amount of taxes over a certain period, should get to vote at all.

Any crime? Or just certain crimes?
---

Vlado posted...

decision by Florida voters to give voting rights to felons

Except for murder and sexual assault felons, which makes it even worse for straight while males
---

Espeon posted...

That argument is literally in favor of giving more power to the wealthy

Wait, what? Paying taxes makes you wealthy? lmfao

TheRock1525 posted...

Any crime? Or just certain crimes?

Any significant crime. I suppose something like jaywalking should not qualify. Can't be bothered to make you a list, but it's rather common sense which crimes are harmful to society.

foolm0r0n posted...

Except for murder and sexual assault felons, which makes it even worse for straight while males

Have you ever looked at crime statistics?
---

Vlado posted...

Have you ever looked at crime statistics?

Yes
---

Vlado posted...

Actually, why would the burden of proof even be on me? We've had numerous prominent right-wing channels censored and zero such left-wing channels. Therefore, it's you who should prove left-wing channels get censored just as much or worse.

And even if they were, censoring 5 left-wing channels with 10 average followers vs. 5 right-wing ones with 100000 average followers is obviously not equal censorship. As I already pointed out, Alex Jones alone is enough proof tech companies are targetting the right with their censorship.

So you really don't have a single piece of evidence other than Alex "A Single Person" Jones, huh.

The burden of proof is on you because you're the only one claiming to have actual numbers for this shit, so show them.
---

What would you define a certain amount of tax over a certain period as then? Do you include people paying sales tax on everyday purchases? Do you feel that people too poor to pay a reasonable amount of income tax should therefore have no say in the legislative process to perhaps ease that burden?
---

Vlado posted...

Wait, what? Paying taxes makes you wealthy? lmfao

Uhh generally if you pay more taxes its because youre wealthy yes

Also what if NON CITIZENS reach your tax threshold? Can they vote now?
---

Kenri posted...

Vlado posted...

Actually, why would the burden of proof even be on me? We've had numerous prominent right-wing channels censored and zero such left-wing channels. Therefore, it's you who should prove left-wing channels get censored just as much or worse.

And even if they were, censoring 5 left-wing channels with 10 average followers vs. 5 right-wing ones with 100000 average followers is obviously not equal censorship. As I already pointed out, Alex Jones alone is enough proof tech companies are targetting the right with their censorship.

So you really don't have a single piece of evidence other than Alex "A Single Person" Jones, huh.

The burden of proof is on you because you're the only one claiming to have actual numbers for this shit, so show them.

Other channels were actually mentioned in that wikipedia quote. You've basically admitted defeat here by trying to shift the burden of proof on me. Thus, it is established that globalist tech companies DO censor anti-globalists, what a shock. Next.

foolm0r0n posted...

Yes

Oh really?



https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime

Adjusting this to the population percentages, the picture is clear. Also keep in mind Hispanics are included in the "white" category.

Jakyl25 posted...

Uhh generally if you pay more taxes its because youre wealthy yes

Except merely paying taxes does not make you wealthy, which is what your side tried to claim.

Jakyl25 posted...

Also what if NON CITIZENS reach your tax threshold? Can they vote now?

Of course not. They are not citizens.
---

Vlado posted...

Adjusting this to the population percentages, the picture is clear

Do you think you're disagreeing with me?

I'm saying straight white men go to prison more for murder or sexual assault than they do for other crimes, like drugs. So by giving voting back to non-violent felons, they are disproportionately keeping straight white men from voting.
---

Vlado posted...

Other channels were actually mentioned in that wikipedia quote. You've basically admitted defeat here by trying to shift the burden of proof on me. Thus, it is established that globalist tech companies DO censor anti-globalists, what a shock. Next.

"Countless thousands" of other channels were not mentioned in the (unsourced) Wikipedia quote.

Just admit you were talking out of your ass, dude. No amount of misunderstanding how burden of proof works is gonna change that lmao
---

I just realized that under Vlados Taxes = Vote plan, Trump himself might not be allowed to vote. He brags about how he manipulates his taxes so that he doesnt have to pay!
---

foolm0r0n posted...

Vlado posted...

Adjusting this to the population percentages, the picture is clear

Do you think you're disagreeing with me?

I'm saying straight white men go to prison more for murder or sexual assault than they do for other crimes, like drugs. So by giving voting back to non-violent felons, they are disproportionately keeping straight white men from voting.

If you're not disagreeing with me, don't act that way. :) Also, don't pretend you can't do basic Math.

Kenri posted...

"Countless thousands" of other channels were not mentioned in the (unsourced) Wikipedia quote.

Just admit you were talking out of your ass, dude. No amount of misunderstanding how burden of proof works is gonna change that lmao

No need to get so upset just because I pointed out an obvious fact. No idea why you'd even think that globalist tech companies would censor globalists instead of anti-globalists.
---

Espeon posted...

What would you define a certain amount of tax over a certain period as then? Do you include people paying sales tax on everyday purchases? Do you feel that people too poor to pay a reasonable amount of income tax should therefore have no say in the legislative process to perhaps ease that burden?

---

I have not thought it out in much detail, but the spirit of the rule is as follows: Only those who tangibly contribute to the country get the right to have a say in the direction the country takes.
---

Vlado posted...

If you're not disagreeing with me, don't act that way

I am gonna treat an idiot like an idiot no matter what. Go ask Trump to censor me if you don't like it.
---

Don't be so harsh on yourself. Life is a path of constant improvement.
---

Vlado posted...

No idea why you'd even think that globalist tech companies would censor globalists instead of anti-globalists.

The difference is in who you have been told are the globalists vs who actually are
---

lmfao, imagine actually believing google, facebook, twitter, amazon, etc. are not globalists. However long the aforementioned path may be, some things are very difficult.
---

Vlado posted...

I have not thought it out in much detail, but the spirit of the rule is as follows: Only those who tangibly contribute to the country get the right to have a say in the direction the country takes.

Isnt it POSSIBLE that someone, through no fault of their own, is unable to tangibly contribute to their country? Lets say someone loses their job because its no longer profitable to employ a human employee...should that person suddenly have no say in policies that might help them to improve their living situation (and subsequently allow them to contribute again)? Your proposal is inherently unbalanced towards the very people you claim to rail against.
---

If you lose your job, you can find another job.
---

So people who are unemployed are just lazy
---

Vlado posted...

If you lose your job, you can find another job.

But again, what if the rich and powerful use their votes to elect politicians that make finding a job more difficult?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

So people who are unemployed are just lazy

If you say so.

Meanwhile, Sessions resigns. I remember what high hopes I had for this man. And then he did absolutely nothing of any value. How foolish I was.
---

Vlado posted...

lmfao, imagine actually believing google, facebook, twitter, amazon, etc. are not globalists

That's not what I said

Think it through and you'll figure it out
---

Vlado posted...

No idea why you'd even think that globalist tech companies would censor globalists instead of anti-globalists.

We started this talking about democrats and democrat supporters getting censored (well "censored"). I dunno where you got started on globalists here but I'm not interested in feeding into your paranoid delusions about how the Jews want to censor your Alex Jones retweets. Either stick to US politics or stop responding to me.
---

Vlado posted...

How foolish I was.

Smartest thing youve ever said, Virgin-o

https://imgur.com/2SJnjpU
13 million more votes.
Lose two seats.

Great "democracy" you've got there America lol.
---

foolm0r0n posted...

That's not what I said

Think it through and you'll figure it out

Ah, so it's my fault you can't formulate your thoughts well? If you've got something to say, say it.

Kenri posted...

We started this talking about democrats and democrat supporters getting censored (well "censored"). I dunno where you got started on globalists here but I'm not interested in feeding into your paranoid delusions about how the Jews want to censor your Alex Jones retweets. Either stick to US politics or stop responding to me.

I'll respond to whoever and whatever I want. Democratic party is run by globalists. There are some winds of change on that front, but they are still far from taking control. Trump is much closer to taking a hold on the Republican party, especially since it's the globalist candidates that lost his party the house.

ShelvingStacks posted...

https://imgur.com/2SJnjpU
13 million more votes.
Lose two seats.

Great "democracy" you've got there America lol.

Yeah, voters in New York City should totally get to decide who gets to represent Montana... lmfao, how detached from reality globalist puppets are.

Meanwhile, you can beat up proto-feminists in RDR2 and that's a big problem... lmfao
https://archive.fo/81Y3b
---

Vlado posted...

Yeah, voters in New York City should totally get to decide who gets to represent Montana...

Do you realize Montana just re-elected a globalist i.e. Democrat, right?

Also why do you think a state of 1 million should have equal say as a state with almost 20 million in something like, say, a judicial appointment?
---

I don't know who they elected, I named the first other state I thought of. And yes to your second question.
---

So you dont think a large state should have a say over a smaller states representation, but you think that the small state should have equal say in the larger states representation.

Also, I just realized you answered yes to a non-yes or no question.
---

Oh, missed the "why." That's the way the US system is set up. The states have certain rights. If you want to abolish states altogether, that's a different story.
---

Vlado posted...

I don't know who they elected, I named the first other state I thought of. And yes to your second question.

Can you explain why? Duterte gets your support because he supposedly represents the will of the majority. Why shouldn't the US be the same?
---

TheRock1525 posted...

Vlado posted...

I don't know who they elected, I named the first other state I thought of. And yes to your second question.

Can you explain why? Duterte gets your support because he supposedly represents the will of the majority. Why shouldn't the US be the same?

You dont have to understand! You jsut have to know that it's American so it's the best. If you say otherwise you're an internationalist!!!!
---

Im not asking your analysis of our current political system. Im asking for your opinion: do you, as someone who is strongly against minority groups coming into countries and upsetting the national culture, believe it is right and fair for a minority of the U.S. population to impose their minority views on the majority culture?
---

Do not confuse "minority" as in "fewer people" with "minority" as in "foreigners who don't belong here."

TheRock1525 posted...

Can you explain why? Duterte gets your support because he supposedly represents the will of the majority. Why shouldn't the US be the same?

Because the states get certain autonomy. If you abolish the state system and make it one big mess, it's a different story. It also wouldn't last very long.
---

Vlado posted...

Do not confuse "minority" as in "fewer people" with "minority" as in "foreigners who don't belong here."

Uh, what?
---

I mean white people literally shouldn't be in the US by that logic. We were foreign invaders.
---

Given that post about minorities, I already know the answer to this question, but Ill ask anyway.

Do you think its fair and just for 3 million people in Puerto Rico (who are American citizens, mind you) to have zero say in electing politicians to represent their interests?
---

On principle, they shouldn't have a say, and nor should Hawaii. Why they're even given citizenship is beyond me.

On principle, they should be their own countries.
---

Vlado posted...

On principle, they shouldn't have a say, and nor should Hawaii. Why they're even given citizenship is beyond me.

On principle, they should be their own countries.

And Alaska? Or are they okay because they vote Republican?
---

It depends on the population. Alaska is fine not because of who they vote, but because the majority of the population are Americans (who most likely migrated there from the mainland US).
---

Vlado posted...

It depends on the population. Alaska is fine not because of who they vote, but because the majority of the population are Americans.

Uh, the majority of the populations of all those places are American.
---

Wrong. If I get a Japanese passport somehow, I do not magically become Japanese. Same applies to every other country.
---

Vlado posted...

Wrong. If I get a Japanese passport somehow, I do not magically become Japanese. Same applies to every other country.

Do you think a majority of people who live in Hawaii, Alaska, and Puerto Rico are people visiting from foreign countries?
---