TC but intentionally shittier

no but better place that's not worthy of being in TC. Even TC deserves some higher standard. It's not to replace TC.

I think this is just a place for the various users who are banned from posting in TH . . . You know who you are.

A porto-potty if you will.

I give it two months before it's filled up and the mods empty it.

I'll take that action, I give it a week before no one posts in it anymore and it's forgotten

I suppose it is a good idea except that it doesn't give shit posters the plausible deniability of not being a shit poster.

A voluntary prison…

Well you are voluntarily choosing to be here x-jla . . .

Chad, it sounds more like an inmate confession to me.

Chad, that’s a Koolhaas reference

səbˈvɜː.sɪv/ trying to destroy or damage something, especially an established political system: subversive elements/groups in society. That shoe fits.

Maybe you should reread your reference.

I know who Rem Koolhass is x-jla. You might want to re look at his walled city project as I think you're misinterpreting it's meaning.

2 weeks. I now realize it's too inconvenient to have to pick up an argument and effectively move it AND keep momentum. Also, its not like someone is going to post something and think to themselves, "huh, what I'm saying is hot garbage and will devolve into a meaningless argument".

It may only find success retroactively.

I think you're not giving x-jla, non-asd, and few others enough credit. ;)

Only thyme will tell.

What will the thyme tell us?

Jovan, I'm just in a goofy mood today. Phonetic typo.

“How long before this thread is gone?”

Does just seeing a bunch of posts that are ignored count?

It will officially be one week since the start of the thread by EOD. Anyone want to revise their initial estimate?

this died so fast after x-jla took hiatus... I haven't even seen b3 posting any of his "commie" articles either.

Yeah, once x-jla gets put on a time out the site goes back to be a nice place.

Anyway, at least a little shit talk in the Great Toilet thread.

Touché

Trump - 2
Biden - 0
Buttigieg- 0

What do these numbers mean?

Visits to Ohio that landed with the folks in Ohio.

I’ve been to Ohio once. Does that put me in the rankings?

Impeachments.

Where is bidens for litterally doing the same thing with the documents?

*that they tried to criminally prosecute trump for. That story just evaporated after old man Biden was caught

Not true.

A perfect example of a shit post by you. A lie wrapped in bigotry.

Yes, I’m racist against Joe Biden and co.

That makes tons of sense.

Where is bidens for litterally doing the same thing with the documents? (No, he didn't say he didn't have them, claim they were his or refuse to turn them over.)

old man Biden (Ageism is a form of bigotry.) was caught (No, they were voluntarily turned over.)

Like I said a lie wrapped in bigotry.

Oh shut up. Biden is too mentally old to be president. Ageism my ass. Trump is same age, no cognitive decline. Bernie sanders, no cognitive decline. Do you not see it? The guy looks like a zombie.

Are you denying the documents situations are quantativaly and qualitatively different? Are you denying that you used the pejorative connotation of the word old?

Trump is mentally deficient from beginning as well as psychologically unfit for being President considering this man is also a criminal. He ran a criminal business that is actually a convicted felon, now. He was in charge of that. He's also a insurrectionist traitor who crossed the line for any person to legally be in public office and is itself a willful forfeiture of citizenship which means he's not a U.S. citizen anymore and disqualified himself. Actions and conspiring an attack against the U.S. is itself a declaration and waging war against the country which itself is a declaration by action a willful forfeiture of citizenship. This means he should be placed under custody for illegal presence in this country or deported. Biden has had some brain related impact due to brain aneuryisms in the 1980s. 

Add to it that he's what, 80 years old. Every human that age has cognitive decline. Trump was already declined cognitively since when he was in his 20s but even then, he was never that high or intelligent. x-jla, your issues with Biden being a little slower in processing information and some speech issues, well, that's a disability as far as ADA act is concerned and you are discriminating on basis of disability. While there is some disability, he is not disabled to the point of 25th Amendment applying. 

Trump was unfit for office from the beginning. He was unfit since he was a child. He grew up with values that are outright anti-American. Anti-law. Anti-everything unless it benefits him. He's too fucking self-centered and selfish to be fit for being the President. To be President, you need to give a shit about other people. He doesn't give a shit about anyone but himself. Trump is morally unfit but every aspect of himself and his conduct makes him unfit. He didn't do his Presidential duties. He did not work as a President would. He sat around twitting on Twitter every second of every day except for when he had to sign or do some photo op. Other than that, the White House Chief of Staff did all the work except when Trump had to sign something or when he meddled without regard to the consequences and almost always for the wrong things. 

Trump willfully with willful criminal intent stole government documents and intentionally keep them against the rightful owners (the United States itself), and against subpoenas and court orders. if you and I did that, we would be in jail. If we did what Biden has been doing and willfully return documents, we'd probably might avoid indictment. Trump crossed the lines for reasonable staying of indictments. He forfeited the opportunity for the Attorney General to choose not to indict with reasonable cause. Attorney General is statutorily required to indict Trump and there is no good faith effort by Trump to warrant staying such indictments which there must be in order to stay such indictment. 

Donald Trump's case is a case that can be argued to warrant summary judgment with Donald Trump's own words as evidence of admission of guilt. Biden's case, albeit not good, is not as bad as Trump which is compounded by Trump's own actions. I'd argue we should not elect either of them. Neither of them should seek reelection. Additionally, the Governor of Florida and some others should not be elected as President / Vice-President.

The document situation is worse for Biden. He wasn’t even president.

You have confused the 2 of them and you didn't answer the second question.

No, I’m not. He is too old to be president. Are you denying that humans decline with age. This is biological reality. Can he be a soldier, kickboxer? Too old right. What’s the difference.

Some old dudes like Bernie and trump stay sharp. If they do they do, if they don’t they don’t. I probably won’t myself based on family history

He wasn’t even president. (He is).

old man Biden (are you denying that is a pejorative connotation of the word old?

I am not denying that. Biden is too frail and old to be president. Are you denying that some people are too aged for certain jobs? You are drawing an arbitrary line where one becomes “ageist”. No one would say that it’s ageist to suggest Tom Bradey is getting too old to play. Mental and physical fitness declines with age. This is a fact.

baited you with a single word. it's comically easy.

" The document situation is worse for Biden. He wasn’t even president." 

Get your facts straight x-jla. Trump's case involves hundreds of classified documents and also consisted of 1000s of other documents. He did it on purpose and with willful intent. Trump even deliberately went to every effort to not return any of them and it resulted in the government coming over with a search and seizure warrant. Some of the documents were of the highest level security classification.

Biden's case involves much less documents.

In addition, the Biden's time in Vice-presidency was back before certain charges were raised in severity. Trump's documents were after Trump signed into law the increase in penalty and obviously should have known better considering he made a whole presidential campaign ordeal over Hillary Clinton and the email controversy. So, it's clear Trump did it with criminal intent. He admitted to it.

Both Trump and Biden should not run for re-election. I'll vote for Biden before I'll vote for Trump but I think it's time to move on to new candidates.

Biden is the worst president in history.

“He wasn’t even president. (He is).“. He took those docs when he was vp.

In my opinion, Donald Trump is the worst. His actions and inaction on January 6, 2021 alone makes him the worst. He didn't even do anything really as a President. He didn't even put in an average half-time 20 hours a week, 50 weeks a year work load. He spent too much time twitting on twitter. Even Joe spends more time each day and week doing the job of President. 

Mar a lago is more insecure location than an average home given the high open to the public traffic of guests and who the hell knows how well Mar-a-lago staff is secure or trustworthy. Both Trump and Biden's "documents" controversy is bad. Trump is overall worse not only in volume of content but actual criminal intent that Donald Trump admitted to not only once but multiple times. The very attempt to keep those documents through those legal proceedings to keep the documents from the government itself is evidence of attempting to keep what does not belong to him... which is itself a crime. It's theft and unlawful retention of stolen items. 

In Biden's case, it boils down to: Did he even know classified or other government documents were there? It's possible. Items gets stuffed in boxes and such... all without the VP personally overseeing it. Trump's penchant for micromanaging makes for things worse. Biden like many other politicians don't micromanage this process so it is usually accidental. 

The bright side to these cases does highlight the need to improve how such documents are provided. Maybe instead of in paper form, it is provided electronically to the President and others through terminals connected to SCIF facilities and the PEOC at the white house. So use the PEOC for discussing stuff that are classified. 

Trump's case also highlights a case of a President with criminal intent. He stole them not for some memorabilia. He stole them so he has something to give Putin for asylum if he decided to flee to Russia. Trump only sought being President to avoid criminal charges for hiscrimes that precedes his Presidency and during. Trump is purely self-centered and selfish and there is no altruism. Donald Trump has absolutely no altruism in his personal character. Everything is about benefitting him. False altruism is not altruism at all.

I don't trust Trump at all. Biden is so so but I think he should spend the rest of his years enjoying retirement with his wife and family & friends. Running for another 4 years as President after this term is more likely to be taking up the rest of his time he has to enjoy retirement. Trump should never have been President and never was fit for office. He should not even be a candidate.

I like how x-jla is saying:

Biden is too old, frail, and feeble minded to be the president

Yet he's also says:

Binden is systematically planning to take away your rights

So is Biden feeble minded or a mastermind performing a long con plan?  

you know what the difference is between $1 and 1 bazillion $? About 1 bazillion.

If you don’t understand what we mean when we talk about “globalists” this is it.

they usually mean jews.

Wrong

Wrong

The laziest argument ever is “if you disagree with me you are racist! Because I can’t imagine how anyone could disagree with me unless they are bad because I’m good!” - tdudes

Southpark did a hilarious bit on Megan Markle. She was incredibly annoying and attention seeking and then she cried that “they are mean because I’m an ethnic!” Lol. That game is over. Get some new material for your diversion…

X, just a friendly reminder from your local leftist architect :) "Globalists" is now and has always been a very quiet dogwhistle for a very violent antisemitism, dating back well before the Nazis, and used by fascist hate groups all around the world. If you weren't aware of your implicit support for Naziism before, now you know. Continuing forward, please kill any fascist tendencies you may have inside you.

How do you thumb down a definition. Are you arguing that’s not the definition?

It's not the social definition of the word, no. Remember how the f-slur literally means(/meant at the time) "a bundle of sticks"? The social definition of "globalist" is a dogwhistle for antisemitism. If you're continuing to support an argument for the use of that term, I can safely assume I'm arguing with an actual fascist.

I don’t care about the acceptable language of the wokie cult. I’m not in the cult. That’s a word that plenty of Jewish people use. What do you prefer globalization-ers

Don't take my word for it.

"That’s a word that plenty of Jewish people use" and yet https://www.ajc.org/translatehate/globalist

“Frequently appropriate globalist” I was using the actual definition though, so what’s the problem? Do you have a better word to mean - proponents of globalization and global governance? Globalizationers I suggested, but not proper English.

“Capitalists” was also appropriated to refer to the Jews. You are all Nazis I guess.

No. "Jewish capitalist" has been used as a pejorative since the days of Marx (including, sadly, by him). However "Capitalism" is a real-world economic system that can be critiqued, and its enablers can rightly be labeled (and will often call themselves) as "capitalists". The narrative of "globalism" has always been linked to antisemitism, and is equal to the "shadowy cabal" sentiment spewed by fascist organizations for over a century. You're not only wrong, but you're being willfully obtuse in order to spread fascist ideology on this forum. You disgust me.

Do you agree that there are proponents of globalization and global governance? What do we call them?

Also, I’m a libertarian, the opposite of a fascist. Jovan thinks that fascism is anything that he doesn’t like or anyone who calls out stupid behaviors: “whaaaawaaaa I wore underpants on my head and those fascists are laughing at me:(“

So you seem to suggest that globalization is not real?

Globalization, purely in the sense of the inevitability of capitalism at a scale larger than one's own country, obviously exists. "Globalism" in the sense of some cabal that has all the power and is secretly guiding the world toward some dark agenda to do... whatever it is those "deep state" people believe.... is just an old-fashioned signal that you hate Jewish people. But yeah, go off about how Hitler was "actually a socialist" and yet, simultaneously, about how "Fascism is a merger of state and corporate power." Not only are neither of those things true, but they are also literally incompatible ideas. Of course, you'd have to have any basic knowledge of all of those terms to understand why they're incompatible.

You don’t think that some people believe in globalism? What do you think the EU is? What do you think the world economic forum is?

Socialists wanted to destroy liberalism. Marx himself was very antisemitic and racist.

You only have a surface understanding of what these things are. You think socialism is equity and inclusion! You are what they call a useful idiot.

"I’m a libertarian, the opposite of a fascist." 

If I had to pick a single word for you I'd go with "naif"

Do you believe that people sometimes conspire?

You know like trump and Russia? Oh wait that was disproven…it was like a theory about a conspiracy that was wrong and y’all believed it.

No, nobody wants to buy the Brooklyn Bridge, vertical land or a house lot in the desert with no city services. But, thanks for asking.

It’s a nyt article (not that nyt matters to me but it probably matters to you).

The author is a racist warmonger which probably does appeal to you.

Of course of course. Everyone is racist

You should check your sources. This individual has quite a history.

I don’t know of him. If he was that bad the nyt wouldn’t employ him. Doesn’t change the fact that covid policy was a complete failure, like predicted, and like censored by the fascists.

Then how do you know he isn't full of shit?

Because the mask mandates didn’t work

This isn’t rocket science. We can compare states

You don't believe in science or common sense. You dissemble when asked for proof and are using words you don't know what they mean. You parse facts to support your ignorant, racist, and fascist beliefs.

Only one who is racist, fascist, and anti science is you.

x-jla, first, it was not claimed that face masks were perfect. A lot of people never got N95 or better rated masks or respirators to wear to address COVID. A lot of people used Chines knockoffs and non-rated masks so their effectiveness is less. People including you conflated "masks helps with reducing transmission of COVID with absolutely preventing COVID from being transmitted. There was also the social distancing guidelines.

Dude, cloth face masks on toddlers provide zero protection. N-95 masks that are properly fit on a clean shaven face work…but “masks” as a general category is pretty much useless feelgoodery

Actually, it provides more than zero protection but of limited value. If you paid attention, face masks weren't THE requirement to protect, it was the combination of masks, social distancing and self-quarantine that was the requirements. Not just one but the whole group. Part of the thing was not to congregate in groups in tight or crowded spaces. The idea was to distance and minimal indoor congregating into crowds. The problem was they didn't close things down and locked down long enough and closed international travel and domestic travel. Lock downs should have been continuous for 90 to 120 days. People should have quarantined for 45-60 days. Domestic travel for 180 days and international travel 1 year or longer but not until 240 days without a single case of COVID. That is what should have happened and that was during Trump's administration to begin with. Trump should have started this December 15th. Trump was made aware of the issues of COVID outbreak in November/December 2019. He screwed up. Biden inherited a mess.

I called out Republicans with the same fervor when they were the dominant fascists during bush. Even voted obama 2x because I hated their reign so much. The coin has flipped though. They both suck, but the left is the dominant tyrannical party

I don't think you know what "left" or "fascist" mean.

I don’t think you know much of anything

The fact is you are out of your depth on this forum.

Believing something really strongly is not the same as understanding it.

Yeah I know. That’s many peoples problem on here. Many on here believe strongly in this ideology but don’t understand where it leads and how it destroys liberal society. I am a 1990’s liberal. I believe in liberal social Justice, like that of MLK. Jovan and B3 are not liberal. They are lefties. The Marxists hated liberalism and wanted to destroy it. Fascism=liberalism. War = peace. Freedom = slavery. There was a book about this that we all read in hs. We know the word games well, and it’s fooling anyone.

So when people like Arch2 advocate for the public to be forced into paying for and taking a vaccine for profit, without question…then claim that objection to that is fascist. It’s fucking hilarious. The mandate was literally a fascist mandate in the economic definition of the term (merger of state and corporate interests)

Accept our good fascism or you is ze bad fascist.

log off dude

Lmao, fascism is not a "merger of state and corporate interests". Fascism is a sociopolitical ideology, spread primarily through racist and colonialist worldviews, meant to define the hierarchical purity of a particular group of people, and which justifies a state-sanctioned violence against anyone below that group of people. I'd say you have no idea what you're talking about, but I'd rather attribute the malice that you know perfectly well how you're attempting to incite hateful violence against the marginalized.

“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” — Benito Mussolini.

Congratulations, Benito Mussolini's fascism incorporated capitalist elements into state power. Francisco Franco's fascism was a "manifestation of the desire to live". I don't trust the words of fascist governments to tell me what it is or isn't. I do not care. The relationship between fascism and capitalism is strong only because they both require and celebrate a ruthless hierarchy of one human being over another. If capitalism was opposed to societal hierarchies, fascism would discard it as useless, just as it did with socialism and anarchism.

You don’t understand the basics.

Fascism has much more in common with central planned economies of communism than laissez faire capitalism. Hitler/Nazis had national socialism. Neo nazi still refer to themselves as national socialists.

And while the social conditions under fascism are about military statism, state enforcement of traditionalism, etc. the economics are definitely defined by state and corporate mergers…like we saw with Pfizer and the US govt, Halliburton and the Government, etc…The US has some fascist economics, aka corporatism…laissez faire capitalism only exists at the small business level…

x-jla: "You don't understand the basics."
x-jla: "Hitler/Nazis had national socialism. Neo nazi still refer to themselves as national socialists".

RIP. Literally the most pre-pubescent take on fascism that exists. Try harder.

To be clear about your contradictions here, Fascism is a sociopolitical ideology engrained in the idea of upholding the superiority of one group of people over another (often drawn along lines of race, ethnic group, class, sexuality, and ableism). It is not only hierarchical, but glorifies hierarchy, to the end that it supports the excising or subjugation of those deemed to be lower on the rung than the preferred group. 

Fascism absolutely is able to seed itself into capitalism, because capitalism as an economic system is built on maintaining a hierarchy, but it is not the same thing as corporatism (or state capitalism), because it's not exclusive to a particular economic system. 

HOWEVER, Fascism is also entirely incompatible with left-wing ideologies such as socialism, because of the inherent requirement to view people in layers of forced hierarchy, which are almost entirely defined by immutable characteristics (such as ethnicity, race, or sexuality). 

Fascism can and does exist even when it's not the predominant group in power, because it's an ideology and not a system of governance. Fascists will often call themselves socialists because fascism is very often a populist ideology, which requires the complicity of a majority to be successful. They are NOT socialists, and in fact, one of the first things that happened during many fascist coups of government in the 20th century was to excise socialists from their nation-states. But calling themselves socialists is useful for two reasons: 

1. It allows them to appeal to the populist nature of socialism, by attempting to unit common people under an idea of oppression and hierarchy; and 

2. It allows them the cover of pretending that fascism isn't the embodiment of ultra-conservative state-enforced hierarchy (all of which are directly opposed to socialist and other left-wing ideologies).

I’m not defending fascism. I’m simply noting that fascism is an statist authoritarian system. When implemented,

*it’s indistinguishable from communism. China is a good example of this.

“Socialism” is a fantasy that always devolved into communism because it’s flawed understanding of human nature. Socialism is the primer of communism. Communism and fascism are slightly different flavors of the same thing.

“The fat right” in America is primer for fascism in a way similar to how to far left is a primer to communism. Both will end with a system of boots on the neck, state controlled economy, suppression of speech…The only force against authoritarianism is libertarianism or classical liberalism. That is being undermined from both directions. The

The state will allow the far left or far right to teeter the scale in their authoritarian favor. Now the game has become outsourced tyranny through companies like Twitter. To them is doesn’t matter.
Once the power is gotten, potato potato…

There is literally not a single claim that you made that I can even begin to debunk here. Every one of them, from you not defending fascism, to the "far left" in America being the equal and opposite baddie to the far right, is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've read or heard in a while, and that's a very low bar to meet considering all of your Neo-nazi friends I've fought with here in Florida.

I'm not saying he isn't up to the job. However, I think he should not seek reelection especially if there are good candidates to follow up his administration. Right now, I still intend to vote for Biden, especially against Trump and I am not voting for that Florida governor as President if he so chooses to run for election. I'd support Biden if no one comes forward. However, we'd be needing to seek a strong post-Biden candidate for 2028 elections.

Worst president in history. Complete fool. Only one more foolish is cackling Kamala. Now they put the us into a potentially catastrophic ww3 senario with Russia and you applaud and have the nerve to call a journalist a war monger while ignoring the warmongering of Biden and co.

If he did nothing you would say he is spineless. If he cured cancer you would say he is ruining the economy by destroying the healthcare system as we know it.

I don’t understand how you can say Biden is doing a great job with a straight face. I really can’t understand this. I haven’t met anyone who shares your opinion. Ukraine alone should scare the shit out of you. Military industries love it. Short of that we are playing a very dangerous game. Rather than brokering a peace deal we are balls in on a proxy war with a nuclear power…and now China is too. Yes Russia and China are bad, but in the nuclear age we had learned to keep things from escalating into hot wars…until now.

"I haven’t met anyone who shares your opinion." The vast majority of people you're interacting with on this website share his opinion, or are we using convenient definitions of "met"?

Also one need not be a cheerleader for Biden to realize that "worst president in history" is a disqualifyingly absurd statement.

And you're surprised by the results? Did you expect a reasonable discussion from a clueless wanker who thinks arming teachers is a more reasonable decision than addressing gun-control?

Point made. I am off this cluster fuck. Hope this thread is deleted.

Arch2 <3

How do you address gun control?

By severely limiting purchase options, ammo capacity, limiting guns per household, add mandatory training/education to new & existing licenses and conceal carry "permits". Stopping the advertisement of weapons and the glorification of the fucking backwards 2A would not hurt. Literally anything would also help instead of re-directing "the blame" like you certainly will do in 3 minutes from now.

The 2A is important.

But you wouldn’t understand the value of our constitutional republic…but you are a beneficiary of it…because we keep you and most of the western world secure and set the precedent for liberalism.

It is not and has no use other than to mock those who still hold onto past ideals. It should be severely amended and the rest of the developed world has moved on and matured. You gun cunts have not so grow up and let go of your silly murder toy obsession and future generations will have at least one thing to thank you for.

You are Canadian. Don’t worry about your big bro America. You guys voted for JT, the most creepy creep of all, so nothing you Canadians say has any weight. The 2A is the amendment that guarantees a last ditch resort against authoritarianism, ensures self defense, and allows for self reliance. Its what stops the state from zero covid like policy like seen in China. We have a system of Supreme Court to preserve the constitution. Trailer parkboys and Rush are the only awesome
things from Canada.

Your 2A guarantees absolutely nothing of value. You have blood on your hands. You, specifically, because you support this nonsense. We're better than you, that's for certain, as are most, if not all, of the rest of developed world. Keep hanging on to bullshit ideals and you'll stay at the bottom. I've never watcher trailer park boys.

N.S. is right. The 2nd Amendment (2A) doesn't guarantee anything. 

First, guns don't protect anything. They are just objects. It is the people that guarantee any destiny. 

However, regardless, just because you have a gun doesn't mean you can effectively defend your rights. Back in the early days of the U.S., yeah, x-jla's argument has validity. As a tool for self-defense in the wilderness and break-ins and the like, sure and may have validity. 

Fighting the U.S., no chance in heaven, earth, or hell. to start, the U.S. can just give the ultimate F.U. message and kill all life on the planet within 4 hours of the orders to deploy all nukes, biological, and chemical weapons at once for a scorch/sterilize earth. You might prolong your death beyond 4 hours if you have a good enough bunker with filtration but you're just prolonging your ultimate demise. Without even doing that, the U.S. can deploy the use of certain orbital weapons and drones to kill people outside the reach of your mediocre antiquated guns and vision. You can be vaporized by a particle beam. 

The only thing stopping the U.S. from doing that is the will to uphold the Geneva convention among other important values. The U.S.'s will to kill citizens with drones is not something our military is bloodthirsty enough to do such barbarism. However, this is still a possibility. 

You would be up against a country that with only maybe 50 loyalists in key control points can literally kill billions on this planet and you couldn't even hope to do shit about it. They just have to be at the right locations and in control. It's easy enough to gather a few hundred or even a few thousand loyalist to secure those locations. However, if the will to kill citizens changes, citizens with guns are about as good as you holding your piss pistol... not going to help. 

It is people who have kept us from going down that but the weapon that defends us from that isn't necessarily a gun. It can be mere psychology and talking a disturbed man from his or her worse impulses.

Too many fronts on here to add another…all I’ll say is no you can’t have my 2a

Then suffer the ever increasing ridicule. I'm sure some said the same thing about ownership of slaves once too. That was removed, your 2A will also go the same way.

I suspect, there might be a repeal and replace situation. Where the 2nd amendment is repealed and a replacement to the 2nd amendment would remain that grants in a clearer language limited right to own and possess guns but also limited government regulation on the types of weapons allowed to be owned by civilians as part of the governments right to safeguard the national and individual state's defense and public safety. Limited rights to own guns subject to revocation of those rights under certain causes through due process. I think that was the original intent but it was poorly written and archaic terms like Militia complicates things.

At least this thread gave me a good cache of screenshot evidence for jla supporting and spreading (or attempting to...) fascist propaganda and talking points.

Remember when Russia invaded Ukraine and they used guns to defend their territory. Lesson is guns work. 2a may one day be needed to fend off communist Canadians

X, you don’t have anything worth conquering. You can keep all your problems, no need to fear other will taken them.

To wrestle the issue of gun ownership rights that have been long standing since the days of Daniel Boone et al, and dealing with issues with guns, the original drafters of the 2nd Amendment intended there to be responsible gun regulation of sorts while reserving some limited individual right to own guns. It was to be a balanced between the two competing theory. 

It needs to be replaced with better worded replacement that allows responsible gun regulation and responsible rights to bear arms and necessary revocation or other disciplinary actions for irresponsible use of guns which mass killing or mass shooting squarely falls into this category. There will be people who love it, hate it, like it, dislike it and are neutral/unsure. We need to respect responsible gun ownership but also need regulation and not be hamstrung. So, even replacing the 2A with a better and more clearer expression that is not archaic to point of meaninglessness. 

Where the 2nd amendment is repealed and a replacement to the 2nd amendment would be adopted that grants in a clearer language of limited right to own and possess guns but also limited government regulation on the types of weapons allowed to be owned by civilians as part of the governments right to safeguard the national and individual state's defense and public safety and authority to adopt necessary regulation. Limited rights to own guns would be subject to revocation of those rights under certain causes through due process.

Energy dept. says covid came from lab. Who is the conspiracy theory?

"Some officials briefed on the intelligence said that it was relatively weak and that the Energy Department’s conclusion was made with “low confidence,” suggesting its level of certainty was not high. While the department shared the information with other agencies, none of them changed their conclusions, officials said."

The Energy Department. Of course, they have nothing to gain here. More war, more profits for the war machine. More body bags. More misery. The only thing we know with "high confidence" is the above and laxative is a dipshit.

New intelligence has prompted the Energy
Department to conclude that an accidental laboratory leak in China most likely caused the coronavirus pandemic, though U.S. spy agencies remain divided over the origins of the virus, American officials said on Sunday.“

Some officials that spent years trying to cover it up are still not admitting it. Surprise

“Fringe conspiracy theory”. “Debunked lab leak theory”. All over the headlines of the fake corporate news. It was a lab leak,

Do you admit being wrong about lab leak?

.

“The Science “

x-jla - Have any proof about a 'lab leak'?

Read the news Chad.

I have. It's not hard . . . why can't you provide data?

https://www.usatoday.com/story...

https://www.axios.com/2023/02/...

https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

https://foreignaffairs.house.g...

x-jla - you originally said COVID was a bio weapon from China purposefully released. Then you changed to it was an accidental bio weapons lab leak from China. Now you're trying to say that you were right all along because it was an accidental lab leak from a vaccine research lab in China.

You were never correct about this.  

Also Sneaky never denied that COVID could of been from a Chinese lab. In fact he said it could of been but until there was proof it's only speculation.  

I said that it was a lab leak, and that it was potentially intentional. It was certainly a cover up, and it was certainly allowed to spread by the CCP beyond its borders. They allowed travel during Chinese New Years and well aware of covid at the time. That was too proven. The CCP used covid imo to harm the west. Whether the initial release was accidental or intentional that idk. Are you going to gas light?

Media and “deep state” covered this up. Fauci and co did everything they could to stop the lab leak theory. FB even banned anything discussing it. I remember articles posted on here being removed too.

Nice try. You're sprinkling in lies and opinion with a few facts trying to pass everything off as facts. Your posting is so very predictable. No one is trying to gaslight you. You're just such a dishonest person that I'm sure it's hard for you to keep everything you say straight.

Lol. You are the most dishonest person of all. This new information is not new. They are just now admitting it. Anyone with a functional brain and deeper interest in truth over tribalism would have speculated that the Wuhan institute of virology that studies bar coronavirus may be the source of the new bat coronavirus in Wuhan….I’m grateful for my own bs immunity more and more every day. Furthermore, if you read what top scientists were saying about strange cleavage sites on the virus, odd behaviors, etc…rather than vox smear campaigns, it was a pretty strong case from early on.

But you were fooled into accepting an anti scientific term like “the science” despite your third grade scientific method learnings.

The information is new - it was just shown to be reasonably correct. You won't admit this but many people here (myself included) said it could be from China and would wait until more info was available. 

We disagreed with you when you stated:

 It was bio weapon purposefully released by China

It was accidentally released bio weapon by China

We disagreed with you because you had no facts or sources providing corroborating evidence.  You still don't.  The evidence shows that it was an accidental lab leak 

Not true Chad. This is the problem with deleting posts. Enables the Gas lighting

.

"Within two years after seizing state power, Mussolini had shut down all opposition newspapers and crushed the Socialist, Liberal, Catholic, Democratic, and Republican parties, which together had commanded some 80 percent of the vote. Labor leaders, peasant leaders, parliamentary delegates, and others critical of the new regime were beaten, exiled, or murdered by fascist terror squadristi. The Italian Communist Party endured the severest repression of all, yet managed to maintain a courageous underground resistance that eventually evolved into armed struggle against the Blackshirts and the German occupation force.

In Germany, a similar pattern of complicity between fascists and capitalists emerged. German workers and farm laborers had won the right to unionize, the eight-hour day, and unemployment insurance. But to revive profit levels, heavy industry and big finance wanted wage cuts for their workers and massive state subsidies and tax cuts for themselves." Michael Parenti 

Sound familiar?

Yes, it sounds a lot like communism. Centralized power and planning over economic and social systems.
My point was that.

And if you are implying that US corporatism is similar I agree with you on that.

Wrong.

Cuba: Improvements in housing, schools, literacy, sanitation, health clinics, jobs, human services, life expectancy

Speaking of Cuba, Michael Parenti writes:

For all its mistakes and abuses, the Cuban Revolution brought sanitation, schools, health clinics, jobs, housing and human services to a level not found throughout most of the Third World and in many parts of the first world.

Life expectancy rose from 55 to 75. Smallpox, malaria, tuberculosis, typhoid, polio and numerous other diseases have been wiped out by improved living standards. Cuba has enjoyed a level of literacy higher than the US. The Cuban revolution has sent teachers, doctors, and workers to dozens of Third World countries without charging a penny. It is the country with the most teachers and doctors per capita of all counties. Most third world capitalist regimes are far more oppressive.

IN DEFENSE OF LENINIST COMMUNISM

I am not a Leninist but since capitalists insist that Leninism is the only kind of socialism, Leninism is worth defending. To do this I will be guided by Michael Parenti’s book Blackshirts and Reds. One of the things Parenti points out is that capitalists make unfalsifiable claims, putting state socialist countries in a position of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t.” For example:

“If Soviets refuse to negotiate a point, they were intransient and belligerent.
If they appeared willing to make concessions, this was a skillful ploy to put us off our guard.

By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative.

If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people rejected the regime’s atheistic ideology.

If the workers went on strike, this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom

A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population.” (pgs. 41-42)

So, in other words, capitalists fail to state the conditions in which they could be proven wrong.

100 million dead from communism. Communism has killed more than fascism. That’s a fact.

But I know what you will say “that’s not communism”. Wrong. Communism is a process that always ends in authoritarianism. I have a bunch of Cubans I’d like you to talk to about Cuba.

So fascism is better because it has a lower death toll than communism? Hate to break it to you but capitalism has killed more than 100 million people.

None of that was communism or fascism or any of those things. None of the governments that did those things were that kind of governments. They had all became dictatorships by the time those acts of killing took place. It was giving up things up to the control of individuals placing too much power into a singular individual that resulted in such. As long as there are checks and balances in any of those things, the will to do such atrocities remains very low.

Here’s Chad with the Kathy Newman response. I didn’t say that.

Capitalism has undoubtedly raised the living standard of more people than any system ever before. This is absolute fact

It’s the only reason why China even exists. It’s almost entirely eradicated extreme poverty. On the other hand, socialism has turned once thriving societies into complete dystopian slums like Venezuela.

True communism is governed by a council with no one person in control. A chairman that can either be a non-voting member of such a council or just one equal vote but has the responsibility to organize the meetings and procedures of conducting meetings but otherwise is no more powerful than the others on the council. True communism rejects the idea of individuals being more powerful. True communism would be egalitarian in values. We not I. Us not I or me. The will is the will of the people. In fact, its a type of democracy that is also what true socialism is.

Propaganda distorted people's understanding of what is communism. It became a label for a flavor of dictatorships.

Do you think that resources are only needed in capitalism? Do you not understand that any society has a resource demand? Communism and Fascism are both authoritarian systems that feel pretty similar for the majority of their citizens. Communism is more successful as an authoritarian dictatorship because it appeals to the masses early on and uses them to establish its power.

What I was saying is that the far left in the West, and the far right in the west, both are perfectly welcomed and exploited by the state to expand state power. The western world governments have learned that left-right differences are not what’s important. They will centralize power in the name of left or right. Until we realize that, we will continue to have the wrong arguments.

CAPITALISM'S TALLY OF THE DEAD 

At present: 

5,100,000 are behind bars or on probation or parole; 2,700,000 of these are either locked up in county, state or federal prisons or under legal supervision. Each week 1,600 more people go to jail than leave. The prison population has skyrocketed over 200 percent since 1980. Over 40 percent of inmates are jailed on nonviolent drug related crimes. African Americans constitute 13 percent of drug users but 35 percent of drug arrests, 55 percent of drug convictions and 74 percent of prison sentences. For nondrug offenses, African Americans get prison terms that average about 10 percent longer than Caucasians for similar crimes.
15,000+ have tuberculosis, with the numbers growing rapidly; 10,000,000 or more carry the tuberculosis bacilli, with large numbers among the economically deprived or addicted.
10,000,000 people have serious drinking problems; alcoholism is on the rise.
16,000,000 have diabetes, up from 11,000,000 in 1983 as Americans get more sedentary and sugar addicted. Left untreated, diabetes can lead to blindness, kidney failure and nerve damage.
160,000 will die from diabetes this year.
280,000 are institutionalized for mental illness or mental retardation. Many of these are forced into taking heavy doses of mind control drugs.
255,000 mentally ill or retarded have been summarily released in recent years. Many of the “deinstitutionalized” are now in flophouses or wandering the streets.
3,000,000 or more suffer cerebral and physical handicaps including paralysis, deafness, blindness, and lesser disabilities. A disproportionate number of them are poor. Many of these disabilities could have been corrected with early treatment or prevented with better living conditions.
2,400,000 million suffer from some variety of seriously incapacitating chronic fatigue syndrome.
10,000,000+ suffer from symptomatic asthma, an increase of 145 percent from 1990 to 1995, largely due to the increasingly polluted quality of the air we breathe.
40,000,000 or more are without health insurance or protection from catastrophic illness.
1,800,000 elderly who live with their families are subjected to serious abuse such as forced confinement, underfeeding, and beatings. The mistreatment of elderly people by their children and other close relatives grows dramatically as economic conditions worsen.
1,126,000 of the elderly live in nursing homes. A large but undetermined number endure conditions of extreme neglect, filth, and abuse in homes that are run with an eye to extracting the highest possible profit.
1,000,000 or more children are kept in orphanages, reformatories, and adult prisons. Most have been arrested for minor transgressions or have committed no crime at all and are jailed without due process. Most are from impoverished backgrounds. Many are subjected to beatings, sexual assault, prolonged solitary confinement, mind control drugs, and in some cases psychosurgery.
1,000,000 are estimated to have AIDS as of 1996; over 250,000 have died of that disease.
950,000 school children are treated with powerful mind control drugs for “hyperactivity” every year–with side effects like weight loss, growth retardation and acute psychosis.
4,000,000 children are growing up with unattended learning disabilities.
4,500,000+ children, or more than half of the 9,000,000 children on welfare, suffer from malnutrition. Many of these suffer brain damage caused by prenatal and infant malnourishment.
40,000,000 persons, or one of every four women and more than one of every ten men, are estimated to have been sexually molested as children, most often between the ages of 9 and 12, usually by close relatives or family acquaintances. Such abuse almost always extends into their early teens and is a part of their continual memory and not a product of memory retrieval in therapy.
7,000,000 to 12,000,000 are unemployed; numbers vary with the business cycle. Increasing numbers of the chronically unemployed show signs of stress and emotional depression.
6,000,000 are in “contingent” jobs, or jobs structured to last only temporarily. About 60 percent of these would prefer permanent employment.
15,000,000 or more are part-time or reduced-time “contract” workers who need full-time jobs and who work without benefits.
3,000,000 additional workers are unemployed but uncounted because their unemployment benefits have run out, or they never qualified for benefits, or they have given up looking for work, or they joined the armed forces because they were unable to find work.
80,000,000 live on incomes estimated by the U.S. Department of Labor as below a “comfortable adequacy”; 35,000,000 of these live below the poverty level.
12,000,000 of those at poverty’s rock bottom suffer from chronic hunger and malnutrition. The majority of the people living at or below the poverty level experience hunger during some portion of the year.
2,000,000 or more are homeless, forced to live on the streets or in makeshift shelters.
160,000,000+ are members of households that are in debt, a sharp increase from the 100 million of less than a decade ago. A majority indicate they have borrowed money not for luxuries but for necessities. Mounting debts threaten a financial crack-up in more and more families

Your wrong. There was no such thing as a true communist country. It's fictional. There has never been a true communist country or it only existed briefly before it was turned into such authoritarian. All government systems has or possesses attributes of authoritarian because it is not a GOVERNment (the root word... GOVERN) if there is no authority. A government must be an authority to be a government at all. The atrocities you had been talking about did not come from a communist government. A true communist government would not have had things like the gulags. They would have prisons but they would not be gulags. These occured only in countries that devolved into dictatorships where singular individuals had unilateral control and power to do nearly if not everything he or she wants. True communism existed briefly maybe a few months or so in Russia but when too much power was handed over to some eccentric charismatic person, it turned into dictatorships.

For instance, the apparatus for censorship is what matters, whether in the name of covid misinformation or the patriot act. Whether under duress from government officials or the result of ideological subversion….That apparatus is the gain.

Capitalists reduced the indigenous population in North America (not including Mexico) by over 90 percent — from 14 million human beings, when Europeans first landed on the continent, to fewer than 300,000 by the end of the 19th century. In the Caribbean and South America, the devastation wrought by capitalism was probably six to eight times greater.

Capitalists killed and enslaved tens of millions of Africans and plundered the continent. The capitalist wars of the 20th century killed tens of millions of people around the globe. The death toll from World War II alone was around 50 million, the largest numbers of which were working people defending the Soviet Union.

Fatalities caused by U.S. armed forces or U.S.-backed surrogate forces in the second half of the 20th century amount to approximately 3 million in Vietnam, 1 million in Cambodia, 1 million in Mozambique, 500,000 to 1 million in Indonesia, 600,000 in Angola, 300,000 in Laos, 250,000 in East Timor, 200,000 in Iraq (the first time around), 200,000 in Afghanistan (the first time around), 150,000 in Guatemala, 100,000 in Nicaragua, 90,000 in El Salvador and tens of thousands in Chile, Argentina, Zaire, Iran, Colombia, Bolivia, Brazil, Panama, Somalia, South Yemen, Western Sahara and so on. (These are the figures Michael Parenti produces in his wonderful little book, “Dirty Truths.”)

What will the toll be after the U.S. and British armies leave Iraq? Including the consequences of economic sanctions following the first Gulf War, the number of deaths in Iraq caused by the capitalist West over the last decade is easily over 2 million. How many will die after the westerners leave because of the conditions the capitalists established while there? How many more will die in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Palestine? If the past is any indication, the numbers will be horrific. The conflicts being cultivated around the world are the work of global capitalism.

You can either have a flavor of an authoritarian system (which all government systems is type of authoritarian system... it's in the definition of the root word. To govern is to have authority. A system with authority is authoritarian. It must have laws).......... or...... you have an anarchist system (governmentless system) which means no government... no country.... no nation.... just a world of individuals doing whatever they want... lawless.

Yes, there can be governments that has some qualities of anarchy but they are still a government and an authoritarian system that is more lax.

B3, the poorest American is still doing better than the average Cuban. You note a bunch of stats that may or may not be linked to capitalism. Certainly they are indirectly linked at most. You ignore what life would look like under the alternative, or what the alternative even is, or how you implement it. You are looking at socialism with rose glasses, and capitalism with a microscope. You are willing to sacrifice the food for a hypothetical perfect that never existed despite numerous experiments. Modern socialists are insane by Einsteins own definition of insanity

*good not food

True socialism and true communism based governments had never been implemented properly. True examples would be hardly distinguishable from a egalitarian-oriented capitalistic democracy or republic. That is what a real communist or socialist government would look like.

USSR and most other communist governments was not communism at all. It was just a dictatorship.

"The poorest Americans are doing better than the average Cuban."

Care to back up that supposition with something more than your out of your ass opinion? Oh, and please let's not forget to factor in the capitalist/imperialist embargo.

"In pursuit of counterrevolution and in the name of freedom, U.S. forces or U.S.-supported surrogate forces slaughtered 2,000,000 North Koreans in a three-year war; 3,000,000 Vietnamese; over 500,000 in aerial wars over Laos and Cambodia; over 1,500,000 mil- lion in Angola; over 1,000,000 in Mozambique; over 500,000 in Afghanistan; 500,000 to 1,000,000 in Indonesia; 200,000 in East Timor; 100,000 in Nicaragua (combining the Somoza and Reagan eras); over 100,000 in Guatemala (plus an additional 40,000 disap- peared); over 700,000 in Iraq;3 over 60,000 in El Salvador; 30,000 in the "dirty war" of Argentina (though the government admits to only 9,000); 35,000 in Taiwan, when the Kuomintang military arrived from China; 20,000 in Chile; and many thousands in Haiti, Panama, Grenada, Brazil, South Africa, Western Sahara, Zaire, Turkey, and dozens of other countries, in what amounts to a free-market world holocaust.
Official sources either deny these U.S.-sponsored mass murders or justify them as necessary measures that had to be taken against an implacable communist foe. Anticommunist propaganda saturated our airwaves, schools, and political discourse. Despite repeated and often factitious references to the tyranny of the Red Menace, the anticommunist opinion makers never spelled out what communists actually did in the way of socio-economic policy. This might explain why, despite decades of Red-bashing propaganda, most Americans, including many who number themselves among the political cognoscenti, still cannot offer an informed statement about the social policies of communist societies."

this is all way over his head, xlax doesn't read deep history, theory, or do any real research. it's all sound bites and conservative talking points that are picked up with the attention span of a squirrel. any single one is easy to refute, but he runs to the next nut before even reading any rebuttals. for example:

B3, the poorest American is still doing better than the average Cuban.

america: see jackson, mississippi

cuba: see facts: "Water supply and sanitation in Cuba is characterized by a high level of access. A state-owned enterprise is in charge of providing services throughout the country within the country's socialist, centrally planned Cuban economic system." (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...)

A commie sympathizer is morally equivalent to a Nazi sympathizer imo. Pol pot? Stalin? Etc. You are make a false comparison between domestic murder/starvation/oppression, and war. The 100mil deaths of communism were mostly domestic deaths. The larger communist empires also had imperialistic ambitions. US war policies have been challenged mostly by libertarians like Ron Paul. The war machine that you point out is not funded by small government, it’s funded by big government and taxation and the ambitions of economic globalization by..”globalizers?”. So, you
are just reinforcing my point.

x-jla, 

Stalin, Pol Pot.... really? Those weren't communist governments. Those were dictatorships not communism or an actual communist government because a real communist government don't have a singular leader. They operate and make decisions by a board or council. There's no such thing as an individual with more authority and powers in the leadership than another on the council. The council of a true communist and socialist governments are egalitarian in that each it takes a decision by committee for everything that requires that level of decision making. Surely, at lower level tiers of the government may make limited unilateral decisions but major decisions like oversight decisions over military, decisions about going into war or entering peace, or other decisions at that level are make by the body not by unilateral actions of an individual. Joseph Stalin and Pol Pot were dictators. They were only Communist by name and propaganda branding not by actual government form.

Rick, you don’t know what you are talking about. Communism always results in dictatorship. It never ends up as “real communism” because it fails to understand the most basic things about human nature.

rick is very right.

you've lost the plot, xlax.

Rick is very wrong square. If Rick is right, than you must apply the same logic to the other side. Then B3’s posts are nullified because ^ that’s not “real capitalism”.

Mao was very clear with his philosophy and you can draw a clean line between that and the oppressive dystopian result

nope. you're uninformed and it's very obvious.

Again, zero facts. Where was Mao's imperialism again? How are Cubans worse off than the poor in America?

he refuses to respond to my point on cuba...

What was your point on Cuba?

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2021/country-chapters/cuba

Cuba is an oppressive regime that brutalizes its people. I know plenty of Cubans. Whatever social welfare programs they have, their living standards are low, and they have very low freedom and liberties. Do you care about freedom and Civil liberty?

I was referring to the Soviet Union being imperialist.

all ideological talking points, not facts. i can't force you to actually read and consider complexity.

What is a talking point?

And, why don’t you see Americans fleeing to Cuba?

You didn’t answer my question though

About civil liberties

All governments results in dictatorships if you allow any one person too much control and power. The U.S. applied a checks and balance but that can exist in communist governments and socialist governments as well. That was never rejected by communism. It was those governments that did attempt to implement communist government structured did not have a checks and balance system to begin with and they didn't employ it. The "checks and balance" system the U.S. employed, the founding fathers looked at human nature of greed and power abuse and addressed it the best they could envisioned. This can be employed in a Communist government and can prevent dictatorships from forming. There may be room for improvement but it was that separation of powers that kept Trump from becoming a unilateral dictatorship. This can be employed in Communist government system. 

The exact manner of how a communist government is structured has never been outlined specifically. Different implementations around certain common principles but checks and balance through separations of power is still possible. In fact, Communist and Socialist governments are democratic/republics or like governments that are grounded on communism principles. That's how a true socialist or communist government is structured. This difference is between capitalism and socialism/communism. The government structure can be a number of similar government types. 

There can be a socialist/communist democracy or republic. Even the U.S. can be socialist or communist without even changing the Constitution. It's the change from being capitalistic to socialistic/communistic economy structure. Communism and Socialism is an economy principle not a government type. 

If U.S. went socialism/communism economy based, it wouldn't necessarily be a dictatorship unless the checks and balance institution was removed. Any government can be corrupted for ill intent. In U.S. case, it just easily be done unilaterally by a single person. In fact, Germany was a country with checks and balance until it was eroded and removed which allowed Hitler to have such unilateral power and become a dictatorship. As said, it is the people that defines and defends not the words on a 200+ year old sheets of paper or inanimate objects. Human brains, human will determines the destiny of human nations. It's the checks and balance through separation of powers that kept the U.S. from becoming a dictatorship. I did not and am not saying it kept the U.S. or keep the U.S. from being corrupt. 

True communist and socialist governments also would have open and free elections like in the U.S. because it is centered on the people much like the very first three words of the U.S. Constitution in the preamble... WE THE PEOPLE.... is very people centric and very much in alignment with socialism and communism principles. There is difference of opinions with regards to the socio-political, philosophical, economic ideology system.... not the type of government. The U.S. isn't socialist, communist or even capitalist. It's some hybrid of those ideologies based on the people. 

When I say socialist or communist government, it's not a government type but that it is a government that has ascribed to specific ideologies as dominant and prescribed and instituted. U.S. is more capitalistic and historically more capitalist because of heritage and the past. We are now more ecclectic of the various ideologies. 

We have a more egalitarian / socialistic younger population due to a distaste and distrust of corporations due to chain of abuses. Since the 1960s we had began to lean more left than before those times on average because that is what the ideology of our contemporary generations leans towards. We just don't outright prescribe the economic system.

Now, you'll see hybrid socialism/capitalism because the people wanted what they perceived as the "best of both". It remains to be seen how well that works in the long run.

“All governments results in dictatorships if you allow any one person too much control and power. The U.S. applied a checks and balance but that can exist in communist governments and socialist governments as well.“. No it can’t. Communism literally requires a centralized economy and the power and the ability to squash capitalistic endeavors.

It literally requires “too much control” to be maintained. That’s why it doesn’t work.

And RB, that’s a myth. Nordic countries are market economies. They are not socialist. They may have social welfare programs, but they are not philosophically socialist in their doctrines, laws, etc.

Why don't we see Americans fleeing to Cuba? Cuba doesn't have the space nor wants all of us. Most of us would be turned away and sent back to U.S. There economy works with their population level but if you dump 300 million Americans on to that island country, it would not work. There are resource issues to consider. x-jla, I think China is on to something with their shift towards a hybrid socialism / capitalism approach. U.S. is likely to lean towards that, too. with it's own approach on the issue. The issues of comparison becomes more and more nuance. It's easier to compare false dichotomy which era propaganda exaggerated the differences.

No one will go to Cuba RB because it sucks in Cuba

.

"I know plenty of Cubans", you forgot the part where they were lap-dogs for the corrupt Batista.

Move to venuzuela b3. You will thrive there

x-jla hybrid socialism and capitalism doesn't mean they are socialist or capitalist. They are something in between. If you allow a person too much power and control, they can literally control the enterprise. That's what dictators do. They control the military, they control the laws, and they control the corporations by gunpoint. Duh. Too much power and control centralized in a single person and that person is "god on earth". You are right that there needs to be a centralization and power over economy but if you control the government then the economy can and invariably will be under your control by de facto means.... by literal or perceived gunpoint. Checks and balances had been in place for a reason so a single person does not have that power. Now, any government can be abusive and corrupt without it becoming a dictatorship but your examples are dictatorships because the power was placed in one person to have unilateral control of a country. Our country has had limited and intermittant times of abusiveness and corruption because of a number of factors, free and open elections and checks & balance beingtwo powerful tools at that. We aren't perfect but we have a decent history because we kept those things protected, defended, and use them to push back against oppression. Our liberties furthers that but they can exist in socialist governments, too... as well as checks and balance (separation of powers).

A socialistic republic with checks and balances can have three branches with an executive council, a bicameral congress branch and a judicial council (we kind of do that with Supreme Court.)

The differences in the Executive branch would not be controlled by a singular person (President) but led or chaired but it being separate from law-making. When there is multiple parties necessary to make such decisions, it is less prone to the emotions and issues of a singular individual. 

How Many Victims? 

We have heard much about the ruthless Reds, beginning with the reign of terror and repression perpetrated during the dictatorship of Joseph Stalin (1929-1953). Estimates of those who perished under Stalins rule—based principally on speculations by writers who never reveal how they arrive at such figures—vary wildly. Thus, Roy Medvedev puts Stalin's victims at 5 to 7 million; Robert Conquest decided on 7 to 8 million; Olga Shatunovskaia claims 19.8 million just for the 1935-40 period; Stephen Cohen says 9 million by 1939, with 3 million executed or dying from mistreatment during the 1936-39 period; and Arthur Koestler tells us it was 20 to 25 million. More recently, William Rusher, of the Claremont Institute, refers to the " 100 million people wantonly murdered by Communist dictators since the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917" (Oakland Tribune, 1/22/96) and Richard Lourie blames the Stalin era for "the slaughter of mil- lions" (New York Times, 8/4/96).

Where are you getting your figures?

“The government during Mao's rule was also responsible for vast numbers of deaths, with estimates ranging from 40 to 80 million victims through starvation, persecution, prison labour, and mass executions.”

Why defend this shit? I don’t understand what you are looking to prove? That we should give it a good ole try again? What’s the outcome that you value, and why use Marxism as a philosophical basis for it?

Because the goal ought to be to raise the standard of life and expand liberty for the most people possible without collapsing the resource space at any given moment or something akin to that. Capitalism has for the most part done this. The legitimate argument of the left, which I agree with, is that corporatism and corporate tyranny is always present to some degree. Ok, so we address that

But we need a healthy left in this country to do that. Instead we have people in the left demanding that I call women birthing humans or whatever weird bs they come up with. Then I make fun of the lunacy and they call you xyz for noticing

Wikipedia is not a source I believe in.

However, it can be useful to find sources for there can and usually some source referenced that Wikipedia articles often reference so it can be a starting point but I would not say it is the end point for credible sources. Sometimes, it's okay to reference Wikipedia if a truly academic level citing sources isn't necessary. Especially, if it has cited sources that you also checked for credibility.

Now, did x-jla do sufficient background check on the credibility of sources he cites (when he does).?.?

.

Ever wonder why most people at this site think you're a racist, homophobic, bigot despite me not providing 'proof'? It's because of the things you post here. I still find it odd that you don't act like you do here in person. It's almost as if you're trying to hide something . . .

Keep stalking me though.  I'm flattered.  

I don’t wonder why. It’s an obvious tactic that the left has done to nearly anyone that questions their narrative. Can you specifically tell me what is racist or bigoted?

It's hard to cite all the times you've stepped over the line since those posts were deleted, but the frequency with which posts + threads of yours get deleted should serve as proof enough that your bullshit is no longer welcome here.

If you just posted your food photos and chilled out about all this we'd all be a lot happier, including you.

.

Tduds, no one forced you to enter the thread. It’s clearly labeled

Are you denying that you used the pejorative connotation of the word old?Ageism is bigotry.

I disagree that it’s ageist. Would you get on a plane with a 90 yo pilot that looks and sounds like Biden?

And ageist isn’t a thing that I really care too much about, to be honest. I use it as a pejorative often to be honest.

We are all going to get old, so it’s like whatever

I understand what you are saying.

Bigots are not bigots

Bigotry is not bigotry. Bigotry is honesty. Honesty is truth and truth is the core principal of democracy.

Being truthful doesn't fit in with the woke narrative of lefties.This is why bigotry gets a bad rap.

People who are bigots are standing tall for the truth. The truth for all people. Bigotry=Truth=Democracy=Freedom...

Would you get on a plane flown by a 90yo man that looks and sounds like Biden?

Are you afraid to answer?

But your point about truth is somewhat accurate. Truth is the primary objective always. When we stop seeking truth in the name of feelings or religious dogmas we stop being a free society

Bigotry is not truth. Bigotry is bigotry. Your attempt to conflate the 2 is Orwellian

Funny how "free thinkers" always seem to coalesce around the same phrasings and topics and buzzwords and how these things are conveniently aligned with prominent and well-funded right wing talking points.

Do you value civil liberties?

#freedomofspeech #merica

"Not only does Human Rights Watch focus solely on civil and political rights, but it does so by approaching human rights from the perspective that all things globally are equal. In other words, it does not account for the grossly unequal power dynamics that exist in a global society dominated by wealthy imperialist nations in the global North. Among the alleged civil and political rights violations in Venezuela addressed in the Human Rights Watch report are issues related to the persecution of political opponents, press freedom, judicial independence and human rights scrutiny."

Do you value civil liberties?

Do you value economic, social and cultural rights?

.

Which ones, and answer my question first

Well, we already know the answer to most of the questions you refuse to answer, because while I believe in Civil Liberties, I also believe everything I cited are equally important, you don't believe in any of those, nor do you believe in civil liberties.

You don't believe in anything on that list.

Beta, I'm sure X believes in capital punishment.

Lol. Your evidence for that is what. Your lies are tiring. I believe in most things on the list. You certainly don’t if you support communism and applaud Cuba.

I applaud cuban cigars.

No you don't. You have been on the fascist side of trans issues, of which you completely and wholly own, so that in and of itself means you don't believe in the rights of the individual. Your self own is replete with double speak and bullshit. You're a hypocrite, a coward, a snowflake and a fraud. You're a Libertarian until that means people living their truest and fullest self, and then you want the boot on their neck.

The Nazis were against gays, lesbians, and trans, the Communists were ahead of capitalists by 80 years.

You made that all up. Where did I say anything against trans or gays or lesbians?

While I can't argue any supporting evidence for "The Nazis were against gays, lesbians, and trans, the Communists were ahead of capitalists by 80 years." Don't know where b3ta got that. It looks suspicious but then x-jla don't support his arguments, either.

As for the first paragraph, there's evidence (unless deleted) that can be argued by some to be hypocritical, cowardous, bullshit, double speak, and so forth.

People living their truest self doesn’t mean that I can’t critique the ridiculous concept of 72 gender identities, or question ridiculous and dangerous medical procedures on kids (can’t get tattoos until 18 still), or be against bs equity quotas that put identity over merit. I was for gay marriage before Obama, and if you show me a right that gays don’t have I’ll certainly be for the gays to have that right…but Nope ever intersection doesn’t get special treatment either. The individual is the unit, not the identity group.

And how historically ignorant are you. Mao persecuted gays. Stalin did too. What communist regime didn’t?

Also incredibly racist

Wow.... just wow.

What is wow RB?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism_and_LGBT_rights

It’s a complicated history, but do you know who was always for gay rights? Libertarians! Also against imperialism, war, police state, slavery, ahead of our time and still ahead of the times

lol

"What is wow RB?" You demonstrating supporting poof others are saying about you.

x-jla, can't you actually cite sources other than Wiki. Why don't you go to the original sources Wikipedia referenced.

“You demonstrating supporting poof others are saying about you.“. Wtf are you talking about

Wikepedia is good enough. I’m not writing a dissertation

RickyB amazed at X dunking on himself on a 610mm high hoop.

Where is the dunk?

In November 1917, after the October Revolution, the Tsarist criminal code was abrogated by the Bolsheviks, thus legalizing same-sex sexual intercourse between consenting adults in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and the later Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR). The Bolsheviks took an official position at this time that homosexuality was not of harm and was more a scientific concern than a legal concern.[6]

Nice
Cherry picking

“Personal Relationships Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.”

“Rights and Discrimination
We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should not deny or abridge any individual’s rights based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs.”

Xlax, what is your position on the above?

Cherry picking? Is that a fancy way of admitting defeat? How was the future position of Stalinist Soviet Union any different than American Freedom?

I Agree with the quote.

You're a liar, not a Libertarian.

“As of 2023, Cuba is the only country ruled by a Marxist-Leninist government that legalized same-sex marriage, civil unions and same-sex adoption.

Cuba
Edit
Main article: LGBT rights in Cuba
Before the Cuban Revolution, Cuba had laws that criminalized homosexual men.[67][68][69] Even so, male homosexuality was an important part of the prostitution industry for tourists and the US military, but associated with gambling and criminal activity.[70][69][71]”

“Relative Soviet tolerance for homosexuality and homosexual rights ended in the late 1920s – as Soviet society came increasingly under Stalinist control. In the 1930s, along with increased repression of political dissidents and non-Russian nationalities under Stalin, LGBT themes faced official government censorship, and a uniformly harsher policy across the entire Soviet Union. Homosexuality was officially labelled a disease.[101] The official stance could be summarized in the article of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia of 1930 written by medical expert Sereisky:”

Where's the factual evidence of the persecution you cited above?

"RickyB amazed at X dunking on himself on a 610mm high hoop" well... with a pinch of sarcasm.

B3, are you suggesting that the numbers are made up as some grand conspiracy to undermine communism…? This was not 2000 BC. It’s relatively recent history and there are living survivors of these regimes.

And we have remnants of these regimes still active today under the CCP and Putin

You stated on several occasions that msm is not to be believed, then cite msm to bolster your hypothesis. The same msm that has assisted multiple times throughout history US imperialist agenda. You stated several times that trans children are getting surgeries. You've stated several times mythological opinions regarding covid. Everything you state is not backed up by evidence, just your opinions, and whatever msm you can find to back up your opinions. You're like a very dumb Steven Crowder. You have no evidence of the 100 million killed from communism, I've shown you how that number has been all over the place to suit whatever narrative in the moment. I've also demonstrated how Capitalism/Imperialism is responsible for hundreds of millions dead. As Parenti points out in his book, gulags were overstated, evidence proves that. The "millions dead" meme neglects capitalisms part in that. You're naive, slow, and a mouthpiece for capitalist imperialist system.

You sound like a holocaust denier. The fact that the US wanted to stop the spread of communism, and even the fact that the US engaged in propaganda campaigns to stop communism doesn’t negate the fact that communism collapsed under its own weight. “Capitalism” is just the decentralization of production. That’s all it is. With it or without it resource and labor demands are still present. Based on the numbers, capitalistic societies are far more efficient and effective at providing access to resources to more people than communist ones. This is a fact backed by data. Steven Pinker among others clearly illustrate this.

It’s also a logical fact that communism requires the suppression of capitalism which requires a centralized enforcement mechanism and extreme state power.

Plenty of independent scholars have confirmed enormous numbers of deaths under mao’s Great Leap Forward, and Stalin. Do we have an exact number? Of course that’s not possible when dealing with such totalitarian states. We don’t even have accurate numbers of covid cases in China present day.

Citations! Or they are ramblings of a naive scraper. Communism did not collapse under its own weight, and I've provided, and can continue to provide cogent analysis to state without exception that American Imperialism, surrounding capitalist states, embargos, sanctions, etc caused the collapse. If America were surrounded by a similar effort, we'd collapse in 3 years, not 70.

Where were these accounts when the Soviet Union collapsed? They do not exist. Not even from former Soviet satellites. Fiction. An elaborate construct brought to you by the CIA.

Steven Pinker? That's your go to? He's the Jordan Peterson of Jordan Petersons. And a defender of Jeffrey Epstein. So....yeah.

So only obscure communist sources are acceptable sources. Sounds like your opinions are biased.

I immediately didn't take the page seriously, largely due to the comic book character (Dr. Doom?) at the top of page. b3 explain/summarize?

Quality content right here. ^

.

I'd argue a key point, politically we were fighting the "Communist" propaganda but really we were not fighting communism. We were fighting dictatorships. Those countries were not ready or compatible culturally, philosophically, etc. for actually implementing a communist government properly. It was just convenient for propaganda and label but in reality, they weren't creating a real communist government. The founders of the so-called "communist" regimes were not interested in making a real communist-based government system because it would deny them the glory, the power, and the control that they wanted. The closest thing to real communism is a hippy commune that was frequently much more egalitarian but a few cases that were more cultish. Communism principle rejects "I" for "we".

Not true. Capitalist/Imperialist regimes cannot accept the idea of people owning the means of production. A successful state, centered on Marxist principles completely upends the hegemonic mindset. Exploitation, private capital, all of it, depends on the subjugation of real people, not propaganda.

Perhaps. Not entirely true but the funny thing is, that argument was and is stupid. Not a judgment on you. Just the argument itself, which I think you'll agree with. The fact was communist government pretty much did not exist. Capitalists fought communism theories and principles. U.S. was never fighting an actual communist country. While there was propaganda by U.S. against communism. Comical farce with some bad that went along with the territory. We were more communist than USSR et al were. That's the irony of it all. I agree, there's the element you are referring to. For brevity sake, I didn't go into that.

It also never existed because it’s a toxic philosophy. How many bodies are we going to throw into trying the experiment again?

Where do you get your numbers propagandist?

Wikipedia

Funny that 20 people can’t debate 1 person. lol

Tell yourself whatever makes you happy.

NS I feel personally attacked by the accuracy of this photo of my state.

Florida is beautiful. Hopefully all those NY refugees won’t ruin it.

X, you don't know the meaning of the word debate either.

"Florida is beautiful. Hopefully all those NY refugees won’t ruin it."

 About 80 years too late for that statement.

The Bush family has ties to this

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

if ford had factories in germany making german tanks and factories in america making american tanks, then wouldn't that german factory provide america a way of gaining intel? if germans had some clever new tank design, we would know as soon as they set up the assembly line.

curt, you mean that government and capital were complicitous in keeping the war going, and a profit motive to further the Reich to assist in the destruction of the Communist Soviets?? You don't say.

honestly i don't know. i'm not familiar with the history of what multi-national corporations were doing during world war 2. it was an incredible time for science though, with crazy discoveries in particle physics that brought the smartest people in the world together before the war broke out. some of those smartest people in the world were german. there is a story of a clandestine meeting between niels bohr and werner heisenberg that may have changed the world. the value and cost of the knowledge these folks had was incredible. if multi-national corporations were a tool in maintaining an international dialogue they could have helped make sure germany didn't get the bomb first.

like that mr rogers quote, "look for the helpers. you will always find people who are helping." the multi-national corporations may have had a unique position to help in some respects.

Fuck the proud boys

That's not what you were saying six months ago. I believe you were pissed that we called them a racist hate group and you went on a multi post tirade defending them and saying how they weren't a racist hate group.

What a disgustingly dishonest person you are.

That's exactly what he wrote. That they were Western Chauvinists, not racists.

I said that they are a bunch of assholes, but it’s not obvious that they are a white supremacy group being that their leader is a black guy. Pretty atypical. I asked you to provide evidence. Don’t remember the outcome of that, but since I’ve acknowledged that the certainly have connections to white nationalist groups. That’s not “defending”. I’m don’t engaging with Chad. He is dishonest and refuses to acknowledge when he is wrong. Last week he wrote that one of my lies was “covid was made in China”. Does Chad now take that back? I bet not.

Last week I said that you stated COVID was made in China in bio weapon lab and released on purpose. You also stated that COVID was a bio weapon released on accident. Neither of those statements are true.

As for the Proud Boys - you said they weren't a racist group because they had a Mexican leader.  After evidence was shown they are a racist group you said you said that you only thought they weren't racist because MSNBC said they were racist.  Now you're back to saying the Proud Boys aren't racist because they have a black leader.  

Links showing the proud boys are a white supreist group. From the leader of the group in 2020:

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/f...

From the US government:

https://www.govinfo.gov/conten...

From the Southern Poverty Law Center:

https://www.splcenter.org/figh...

From Wikipedia (a source x-jla uses):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Covid was created in a Chinese lab, and that lab is connected to Chinese bio weapons programs. Sorry that you are bad at nuance, and have terrible reading comprehension skills. The virus was lab created. That’s almost certain. I never said that it’s a fact that it was intentionally released. I said that it’s a possibility. I said it’s also a possibility that it was accidentally released, but then purposefully left to spread worldwide. Those are all still possible unless you have evidence to the contrary. It’s well known that the CCP knew of this virus months before we did, and did nothing to stop it, and allowed travelers to travel internationally. The CCP controls just about every aspect of Chinese life. It’s also highly coincidental that the Hong Kong protest were getting out of hand until China shut down the city in the name of covid and then annexed it.

You fell for the obvious lies of the msm, and so your judgment is questionable. As for the proud boys, I litterally stated that was something that I was likely wrong on. I’m not claiming a perfect batting average. Just much much higher than yours.

You didn't say it was a possibility. 

 You said that COVID was created and released on purpose from a Chinese bio weapons lab.  You then said that it was accidentally released from a Chinese bio weapons lab.  

We all asked for proof and you went on a rambling explanation like you did above with no proof. 

 Many of us - myself included said it could be from a lab but more proof is needed. Many of us - myself included said it could have been accidentally released from a a Chinese lab but proof was needed.

Facts don't care about your opinions. Nothing you post is fact, it's the screeching of a lunatic. Plus, you cite msm, one that has been complicit in imperialist agenda.

You don’t irrefutable proof to form a hypothesis. There was far less proof for trump stealing the election by colluding with Russia, but you formed that hypothesis…or should I say consumed that spoon fed conspiracy theory

Chad, do you have a citation for what I said?

" You said that COVID was created and released on purpose from a Chinese bio weapons lab. You then said that it was accidentally released from a Chinese bio weapons lab. " 

Chad, he got that from Resident Evil and a photo of some Chinese research lab that has a logo that is strikingly like the logo of a fictional bioweapon company of Resident Evil.

b3, if you're going to copy and paste articles can they be from websites that require a subscription so I can read them for free? And also not be from 2006?

The links I've provided are free. I will continue to post what I find, and so we really think that someone is writing a piece every year about the mythology of Mao's supposed genocide?

The article is free for me as well. Didn't need to sign up for anything. Maybe your mouse is broken ill-will?

On a side note: just because a source is from 2006 doesn't mean it's incorrect.  Obviously if there is newer sources with different information than use those.  

I know its free, I was making a joke that b3 should subscribe to something that charges a fee and then paste the articles here lol. I'm not saying its incorrect, I was just questioning its relevance.

Obscure leftist propaganda is your proof?

JLA never learned to read or write, so I think we can all excuse that he's calling this piece of journalism "propaganda".

Well you know that x-jla doesn't trust the mainstream media.

Oddly when asked what are reliable sources x-jla posts whatever supports his opinions, including mainstream media. 

x-jla, why not provide us with a list of four news sources you trust that aren't the mainstream media.  

So Mao was a benevolent leader?

"From its first issue, Monthly Review attacked the premise that capitalism was capable of infinite growth through Keynesian macroeconomic fine-tuning. Instead, the magazine's editors and leading writers have remained true to the traditional Marxist perspective that capitalist economies contain internal contradictions which will ultimately lead to their collapse and reconstitution on a new socialist basis. Topics of editorial concern have included poverty, unequal distribution of incomes and wealth.

Although not averse to discussion of esoteric matters of socialist theory, Monthly Review was generally characterized by an aversion to doctrinaire citations of Marxist canon in favor of the analysis of real-world economic and historical trends. Readability was emphasized and the use of academic jargon discouraged.[16]

Editors Huberman and Sweezy argued as early as 1952 that massive and expanding military spending was an integral part of the process of capitalist stabilization, driving corporate profits, bolstering levels of employment, and absorbing surplus production. They argued the illusion of an external military threat was required to sustain this system of priorities in government spending; consequently, effort was made by the editors to challenge the dominant Cold War paradigm of "Democracy versus Communism" in the material published in the magazine.[22]

In its editorial line Monthly Review offered critical support of the Soviet Union during its early years although over time the magazine became increasingly critical of Soviet dedication to Socialism in one country and peaceful coexistence, seeing that country as playing a more or less conservative role in a world marked by national revolutionary movements. After the Sino-Soviet split of the 1960s, Sweezy and Huberman soon came to see the People's Republic of China as the actual center of the world revolutionary movement.[23]

Monthly Review never aligned with any specific revolutionary movement or political organization. Many of its articles have been written by academics, journalists, and freelance public intellectuals, including Albert Einstein, Tariq Ali, Isabel Allende, Samir Amin, Julian Bond, Marilyn Buck, G. D. H. Cole, Bernardine Dohrn, W. E. B. Du Bois, Barbara Ehrenreich, Andre Gunder Frank, Eduardo Galeano, Che Guevara, Lorraine Hansberry, Edward S. Herman, Eric Hobsbawm, Michael Klare, Saul Landau, Michael Parenti, Robert W. McChesney, Ralph Miliband, Marge Piercy, Frances Fox Piven, Adrienne Rich, Jean-Paul Sartre, Daniel Singer, E. P. Thompson, Immanuel Wallerstein, and Raymond Williams.[5]"

"The legacy of Mao Zedong as a leader is a controversial topic, and opinions about his leadership vary widely. Mao was the founder of the People's Republic of China and ruled the country from 1949 until his death in 1976. During his time in power, Mao implemented many policies that had significant impacts on China and the world, both positive and negative.

On the positive side, Mao is credited with leading the Chinese Communist Party to victory in the Chinese Civil War, unifying China and establishing a socialist state. He also implemented land reforms that redistributed land to peasants, improving the lives of millions of people. Mao's emphasis on self-reliance and industrialization also helped China become a major world power, particularly in the areas of science and technology.

However, Mao's leadership also had many negative consequences. His policies, such as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, caused widespread famine, economic instability, and political persecution, resulting in the deaths of millions of people. Mao's authoritarian style of leadership also stifled dissent and limited individual freedoms, leading to human rights abuses and political repression.

In summary, opinions on Mao's leadership are mixed, and it is difficult to make a definitive judgment. While he achieved some notable successes, his policies also had significant negative consequences, and his legacy remains a complex and controversial topic."

Good job - those are words aren't they.

Woke doesn't mean what you think it means, and without class analysis it's Capitalism.

It's funny how people like jla will always blame marginalized groups for "turning America woke" or whatever, when in reality, the vast majority of "woke" language and tone policing comes from corporations who are trying to play the marketing game (and who have done so for literal decades now; it's not a new thing), and thankfully, it seems that the younger generation is realizing the empty and shallow capitalist ploy behind "social justice marketing".

The funny thing is that based on x-jla's heritage he's working against his own, and his family's own interests. I think his view is that he can't be racist because he has black friends and isn't of eastern european heritage.

"As an AI language model, I must remain neutral and objective in all responses, and I cannot make political statements or express personal opinions. However, I can provide you with some information to help you better understand the terms you mentioned.

"Wokism" is a term used to describe a range of social justice movements and ideologies that seek to challenge systems of oppression and inequality in society. It often involves a focus on issues related to race, gender, and sexuality and emphasizes the need for social justice and equality.

Marxism, on the other hand, is a political and economic theory developed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the mid-19th century. It is based on the idea that societies are divided into classes, with the ruling class exploiting the working class, and that revolution is necessary to establish a socialist or communist society where resources and power are distributed more equitably.

It is important to note that these two concepts have distinct origins and goals, and it is not accurate to describe "wokism" as simply Marxism filtered through spoiled American narcissists. While there may be some overlap in the ideas and tactics used by those who support these ideologies, they are not the same thing.

It is also worth noting that terms like "spoiled American narcissists" are pejorative and dismissive and do not contribute to productive dialogue or understanding."

What is funny is why you get so mad and personal. Most of your posts are about why you Don’t like me. That’s so lame and boring. I don’t watch the real housewives of la because it’s boring. If you all focused on content, rather than ad hominem attacks maybe an actual debate could happen. Until then, I’m not engaging. It’s a

waste of time.

Very odd. 

I've never made this personal. I've never made an ad hominem attack against you. Everything I've said to you has been focused on what you post and the dishonesty you purpratrate. You on the other hand get very upset and angry when people don't agree with you. You call names, swear, and attempt to insult others. 

 The thing is I literally know who you are. You don't act like this offline. You're hiding this part of yourself from others around you because you know it's disgusting and unacceptable. I think you use this site  to spew the disgusting and horrible things in your mind when you can't handle the stress of the real world and want to try and find someone to blame for your issues. 

Stop posting, get help, and deal with your issues.  You've got kids to worry about and at the rate you're going you'll be dead before you hit 45.  

If you had any content to engage with, deeper than "Hurr durr Hitler was a socialist", some of us might actually engage with your takes, you half-empty jar of mayonnaise.

x-jla, the volume of you posting on this forum during typical work hours and outside typical work hours is indicative that you don't have enough work to keep you busy. If you are a sole-proprietorship and is not struggling, is actively busy with work, you can't possibly be working on projects and post a lot of messages. Successful landscape designers and building designers, architects, etc. engaged in their on sole-proprietorship or small firm is going to be spending a lot of time posting on a forum because you'll be too busy working on the clients projects.... especially between 6AM and 6PM in any of the time zones. The posts would coincide during lunch break, and before and after hours but not generally much at all during hours. If you have time to spout bullshit 3-4 posts or more an hour during work hours during the weekdays, it is likely, you don't have enough work to keep you busy. I don't need to cite sources. I got credible sources that can attest to that.

I understand slowdowns during winter.

“You on the other hand get very upset and angry when people don't agree with you”. Not true, I get upset when people intentionally misrepresent what I say and use that to base their counter argument off of. That sours any possibility at dialogue.

RB, one thing you and Chad are correct about is that I do spend too much time posting. I will be on hiatus for a while. Peace

No one here is misrepresenting what you say. 

People are just disagreeing with what you say and providing sources to back up your ignorance. You try and modify what your original statement was when this happens.  You're unable to keep track of your attempts to change what your said so you try and say people are misrepresenting you. You're not a stupid person so I don't think you're simply forgetting what you said. You're just lying.

I'd drop this charade.  We all know who you are and what you're doing.  It would be better for everyone if you just focused on improving yourself and business.  

Now excuse me, I do have to get back work as lunch is over.  

Just before posting today, I just got back from a property committee meeting and taking a break before the next thing on the agenda to do.

I'm going to keep posting Commie shit.

Only on your breaks from work though right? ;)

the operative word being: shit

I see we have another Muskite.

as well as another b3tadine(balkins)

You hoits my feels capitalist bootlicker.

x-jla drum please, Fab? I am suspecting this is just an alt account of x-jla. If you are going to take a sabbatical then that should apply to you the person on all accounts you have on Archinect.

I'm guessing hiatus until tomorrow

Going back through "drums please" posts/comment history.... doesn't look like the same person. Going back to posts from '04. My apologies to "drums please".

My point still stands that while x-jla is on hiatus, it should apply to any and all accounts.

The more news I read, the more things I hear my governor say, the more street signs I see being propped up in my part of town, the more I get nervous about going to bars at night by myself without a gun. The violence of the state (and its media and popular figures) against marginalized groups in particular is why I fully defend those groups being armed.