Don’t worry, as the Internet is forever, you’ve already criticised dear leader. We just have to hope they don’t get into power.

I mean, you might as well call it the Walmart expansion model

And they say you guys are humourless!

I wasn’t being too serious tbh. However, as we’re here, I feel like fairytales might have been around a little bit longer than nazis.

You should read about how the Franks “christianised” German saxons and then cross reference that with the time period those kinds of fairytales come from, as we’re swapping reading ideas. It’s just a guess on my part of course.

Apologies for interrupting your work.

Burned alive for using the wrong sewing technique / burned alive for worshiping the wrong god or maybe the “right” God but, in the wrong way, who knows?

Either way, somehow, someway, the idea of being burned alive for not following rules seems to be almost literally burned deep into the Germanic saxon psyche.

They’re not a humourless people. They’re just terrified someone might catch them not working or following the rules and laughing isn’t working.

Yup, I took a large venti in your bathroom

Youd be hard pushed to find many who weren’t

They know how much control they can assert of the population through controlling social media. They’re not about to allow anyone else to use that, if they can help it. Also, it’ll dilute their messaging, even if it wasn’t as problematic as something like tiktok.

It makes sense the second you stop presuming any good faith.

deleted by creator

Its estimated that this will stop underage people accessing porn for at least 30 seconds while they download tor browser

If you consider the price of equipment, food, training, transport etc. it sounds like a bargain to me.

I mean, the price of an American soldier.

Article 5 was triggered by 9/11 and is the reason everyone followed America into Afghanistan

“Wait a minute, are you trying to tell me that the person who’s been going robbin people while wearing a hood is also called Robin Hood and that a real name of a real person and not just British people taking piss?”

*Click clack

You’ve been very naughty this year haven’t you, Brian?

Never before, in human history, has such ruthlessness been so wholesome.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Thats understandable and I think I arrive at the same point. All be it from a slightly different way. I have no faith in us doing anything to change it because no one likes the answer.

What do you feed an insatiable monster who can absorb any weapon you throw at it and poops out planet killing gas?

As little as possible.

What does capitalism actually feed on?

Human labour.

Specifically human labour, above and beyond what we need to live and have a comfortable life. The problem is, you can’t have super rich without vast amounts of excess, toxic, forced labour.

The answer has always been the strategic refusal of work. The problem is, you might as well tell people that the way to salvation is punching babies in the face because work is now as much a god as anything else we’ve had in human culture.

Want to sit around and do nothing to save the planet?

Well, now you can.

Its not whataboutism. Its trying to help you see something youre clearly missing. Its applying the same logic somewhere else, to see if it still works. Its literally how you explain fallacies.

Its not an all lives matter response either. Instead its you attempting to reject intersectionality, in the name of feminism, without a hint of irony or self awareness. Luckily for you, no one else seems to have read theory post the 1980s either.

“Men are trash” being acceptable for all women implies that every man ever has always suffered less power imbalances than every woman ever. For example, it would mean that black male slaves in the 1800s would have to of suffered less at the hand of power imbalances than Queens of the United Kingdom, for your “power imbalance makes sexism ok” argument to hold any weight. Its just a safespace for sexism, provided it’s only directed one way.

Lol no, intersectionality isn’t a false equivalence, as you’re attempting to paint. It’s the rejection of upper class white women, for whom all the men in their lives were all powerful, declaring that all men are always in a higher position of power than all women because that’s the only thing they ever saw (bougouise feminism).

Turns out, for all their talk of equality, people like yourself just want to be at the top of a new hierarchy, exacting revenge.

You literally tried to refute intersectionality with “thats like saying all lives matter.”

But I didn’t manufacture that and neither did you. It also, intentionally, ignores every single other intersection a white person could have.

Don’t worry, the sentiment invalidates itself. That kind of backwards bougouise feminism died in the 80s and should’ve stayed that way.

Again, you don’t understand what a false equivalence fallacy is. So, you should really stop attempting to use it because doing so is make you look like a fool.

Whatabouting and false equivalences aren’t the same thing. I feel like I’m witnessing the death of irony here.

No, something wrong is still wrong, even if you feel bad about historical injustices. The power imbalance does not change this and also ignores every other intersection a white person could have.

You even drew a false equivalence the BLM which is the only actual false equivalence on this chain.

See the wiki pages of the fallacies you clearly don’t understand.

God damn bougouise feminists.