There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

[katamari Damassi]

What the hell is wrong with people? I'm checking out the google news feed and clicked on a story about "zombie raccoons frightening people." I didn't realize it was on the Fox News site. It's a straightforward story about raccoons with distemper or possibly rabies, but the comments are all "herp derp, libtards."

[Old_ones]

Identity politics always lead to mild, self-inflicted retardation,

Maybe. Though that certainly also applies to the identatarian group known as “liberal civic nationalists”. Your card is available for pick up from the table.

I don't have anything to say to most of that, but I just want to point out that nobody identifies as a "liberal civic nationalist" or a "civic nationalist". That's a term of abuse that you got from that stupid nazi cunt Lauren Rose, and I dispute the validity of it as an "identitarian group" (or even a label). First of all, the word "civic" is some misguided attempt to differentiate people who have an affinity for the values and ideals of their nation instead of identifying primarily with their racial collective. The fact that this is about ideas like what my society stands for and was founded upon makes it not my fucking identity group. As in, I wasn't born an "American civic nationalist" anymore than I was born a metalhead or a fan of Nietzsche's writing. Those are ideas that I elected based on my own thought processes once I matured and came to understand them. Second of all, there is no need to use this ugly contrived label when the word "patriot" would suffice. Patriots understand the philosophy, history and values of their country was founded on, and elevate those over other considerations, like petty identitarianism. If I considered myself a white person first and an American second then I wouldn't be a patriot. I don't know much about Australia, though. Maybe your constitution is founded on blood and soil and it makes total sense to view Australian values as being part of some white ethnic identity focus.

[Old_ones]

Its.......Fat Time.......!!

DZ9b_hSVQAACiyx.jpg

Chrononormativity? Really?

Have we hit peak stupid yet?

[katamari Damassi]

Its.......Fat Time.......!!

DZ9b_hSVQAACiyx.jpg

Chrononormativity? Really?

Have we hit peak stupid yet?

We'd probably have to consult with Dogen but I think the closer you get to a significant source of gravity, the slower time passes, so standing next to Lindy West should add years to your life.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Theory of relalipidy.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Its.......Fat Time.......!!

DZ9b_hSVQAACiyx.jpg

Chrononormativity? Really?

Have we hit peak stupid yet?

We'd probably have to consult with Dogen but I think the closer you get to a significant source of gravity, the slower time passes, so standing next to Lindy West should add years to your life.

Careful! Michael Shermer got in trouble for getting too close to Pamela Gay's Schwarzschild radius.

[Keating]

Is Kirb laying pipes for SJWism again?

[Keating]

I wanted to lay pipes yesterday, but my girlfriend wasn’t around.

[Keating]

I like the word ‘patriot’ and think it’s important and useful to describe people have the national interest ahead of their own. I have, however, been seriously told by an SJW type that ‘patriot’ has right wing connotations, and the correct phrase is ‘social democrat’.

This seems dumb to me. A monarchist can be a patriot, for example.

[free thoughtpolice]

The problem is how much we atheists worship a small number of celebrity atheists in spite of their rapist tendencies:
https://freethoughtblogs.com/atrivialkn ... ing-in-it/
If there ever were a chance that the militant asexual/atheist movement produced a terrorist it would probably break Siggy's heart.

[Shatterface]

I don't have anything to say to most of that, but I just want to point out that nobody identifies as a "liberal civic nationalist" or a "civic nationalist". That's a term of abuse that you got from that stupid nazi cunt Lauren Rose, and I dispute the validity of it as an "identitarian group" (or even a label). First of all, the word "civic" is some misguided attempt to differentiate people who have an affinity for the values and ideals of their nation instead of identifying primarily with their racial collective. The fact that this is about ideas like what my society stands for and was founded upon makes it not my fucking identity group. As in, I wasn't born an "American civic nationalist" anymore than I was born a metalhead or a fan of Nietzsche's writing. Those are ideas that I elected based on my own thought processes once I matured and came to understand them. Second of all, there is no need to use this ugly contrived label when the word "patriot" would suffice. Patriots understand the philosophy, history and values of their country was founded on, and elevate those over other considerations, like petty identitarianism. If I considered myself a white person first and an American second then I wouldn't be a patriot. I don't know much about Australia, though. Maybe your constitution is founded on blood and soil and it makes total sense to view Australian values as being part of some white ethnic identity focus.

I'm happy to think of myself as British because I was born here and I generally support our values but if I had to 'identify' according to my bloodline I'd hate the fucking Brits.

It's one thing to expect me to support liberal democracy, it's another to expect me to identify with ethnonationalists who, a generation ago, would have been happy kicking the shit out of Paddies.

Maybe it's easier in Australia or South Africa to imagine that history and blood bind white people together but that's not the experience we have had in Europe.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

The problem is how much we atheists worship a small number of celebrity atheists in spite of their rapist tendencies:
https://freethoughtblogs.com/atrivialkn ... ing-in-it/
If there ever were a chance that the militant asexual/atheist movement produced a terrorist it would probably break Siggy's heart.

I think Siggy and Trav should have their own reality show.

[John D]

Welcome to London innit bruv.

Hard to tell on my phone, but did I just witness a crowd of immigrants chase off the police and trash their car? Betcha those officers wouldn't mind a sidearm right then...

Fuck me... haha. A bunch of punk POC throwing rocks can drive off London Bobbies. What the shit?

[Old_ones]

I like the word ‘patriot’ and think it’s important and useful to describe people have the national interest ahead of their own. I have, however, been seriously told by an SJW type that ‘patriot’ has right wing connotations, and the correct phrase is ‘social democrat’.

This seems dumb to me. A monarchist can be a patriot, for example.

"Patriot" might have some centrist to center right connotations. It seems to indicate some level of trust and deference to your government, and some level of reverence for your history. People on the far left rarely have those things. People on the far right often don't either, but they often deceive themselves about that. They are trying to get the real [country name here] back from the Bilderbergs group and the Jewish lizard people conspiracy, or whatever. Left wingers just shriek about injustice and colonialism and throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Social democrat is clearly a marker for an adherent of a particular ideology. It would be on the same level as calling yourself a libertarian or (as you mentioned) monarchist, or whatever else. Having an ideology doesn't necessarily preclude you from being a patriot, but the two conditions are synonymous.

[Old_ones]

*aren't synonymous.

[Brive1987]

http://i.imgur.com/cIzHI14.jpg

[Brive1987]

Identity politics always lead to mild, self-inflicted retardation,

Maybe. Though that certainly also applies to the identatarian group known as “liberal civic nationalists”. Your card is available for pick up from the table.

I don't have anything to say to most of that, but I just want to point out that nobody identifies as a "liberal civic nationalist" or a "civic nationalist". That's a term of abuse that you got from that stupid nazi cunt Lauren Rose, and I dispute the validity of it as an "identitarian group" (or even a label). First of all, the word "civic" is some misguided attempt to differentiate people who have an affinity for the values and ideals of their nation instead of identifying primarily with their racial collective. The fact that this is about ideas like what my society stands for and was founded upon makes it not my fucking identity group. As in, I wasn't born an "American civic nationalist" anymore than I was born a metalhead or a fan of Nietzsche's writing. Those are ideas that I elected based on my own thought processes once I matured and came to understand them. Second of all, there is no need to use this ugly contrived label when the word "patriot" would suffice. Patriots understand the philosophy, history and values of their country was founded on, and elevate those over other considerations, like petty identitarianism. If I considered myself a white person first and an American second then I wouldn't be a patriot. I don't know much about Australia, though. Maybe your constitution is founded on blood and soil and it makes total sense to view Australian values as being part of some white ethnic identity focus.

I didn’t actually say anybody sets out to identify with that label. My point was that no one gets away from a club membership based on some form of commonly valued set of traits or beliefs. And pretty much anyone outside the club gets to be a problem. That’s why it’s amusing to see Kirb frothing at the mouth at his ideological enemies - for being so damned ideological. His screeds do deserve an occasional response.

But I appreciate your rant. Especially the sophisticated line that the choices are liberal valueist (how’s that for a new label which is more specific than “patriot”) or a Jew crushing, Muslim munching, Black bashing ‘blut and boden’ racist. :mrgreen:

And poor cunt Lauren Rose. She didn’t even get a footnote in the Wikipedia article.

Civic nationalism lies within the traditions of rationalism and liberalism, but as a form of nationalism it is contrasted with ethnic nationalism. Membership of the civic nation is considered voluntary, as in Ernest Renan's classical definition in "Qu'est-ce qu'une nation?" of the nation as a "daily referendum" characterized by the "will to live together".[citation needed] Civic-national ideals influenced the development of representative democracy in countries such as the United States and France (see the United States Declaration of Independence of 1776, and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789).

The Scottish National Party[6][7][8] and Plaid Cymru,[8] which advocate independence of their respective nations from the United Kingdom, proclaim themselves to be civic nationalist parties, in which they advocate the independence and popular sovereignty of the people living in their nations society, not individual ethnic groups.

Outside Europe, it has also been used to describe the Civil War-era Republican Party in the United States.[9]

Civic nationalism contrasts with more heritage-based forms, such as ethnic nationalism.

The Centre Party of Norway is an example of a civic nationalist party.[10]

[MarcusAu]

Is Kirb laying pipes for SJWism again?

Speaking of which...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFN8Wj37WYI

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

What the hell is wrong with people? I'm checking out the google news feed and clicked on a story about "zombie raccoons frightening people." I didn't realize it was on the Fox News site. It's a straightforward story about raccoons with distemper or possibly rabies, but the comments are all "herp derp, libtards."

Russian bots and DaveDooDoo007.

[Brive1987]

[
Which values? Which goals? It's easy to talk about those things in vague terms and then accuse others to straw-man. I'm basing my analysis of the TradLife from its practitioners, the vast majority of which are Christian conservatives or nostalgic for a patriarchal age, with all the assorted reactionary ideas, which are the same reactionary ideas which we rightly criticize about islam.

If children are so important what motivates people to have them are affordable child care services, better and cheaper education, tax breaks and work-related incentives, FAR more than "traditional job descriptions".

Australians want more children than they actually have, according to newly released data collected as part of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey.

Analysing data over 15 years, the study reports that by age 40, Australian men and women desire 1.5 more children than they actually have. Women are also having children at later ages than previous cohorts: only 30% of Australian men and women report having their desired number of children by age 35.

Australian women WANT more children. The problem isn't with a lack of "traditional values", but with a demanding job market and limited welfare for families and child care.

Australia also has a very limited welfare state to support working families, while workplace norms emphasise long work hours. Mothers in Australia are most likely to reduce to part-time work when children are preschool-aged: Australian women report some of the highest part-time employment rates in the world.

The Australian workplace has also failed to meet the demands of modern families. Few offer reduced work time and flexible work arrangements to working parents. Australian workers report some of the longest weekly work hours in the world, imposing time demands that are often incompatible with raising children.

But of course this approach, let's call it the Nugent way, is far too low-key for various clickbait mongers, identitarian shit-stirrers, outrage "journalists" and other assorted media clickwhores.

You seem very emotionally charged for someone not defending a group construct or identity. Does this not raise a red flag for you?

Here. To soothe your roiled “blut”. Today’s Panzerleid is a Kirb-centric relaxing piano zen version...

Being emotionally charged isn't incompatible with a defense of principles. Yes, I dislike shit-stirrers and clickbait "journalism". I don't suffer fools gladly.

Only fools suffer fools gladly. And anyone who foolishly disagrees with your purposeful-thought must be a fool by definition. And therefore cannot be suffered. Eh? ;)

The principles I outlined are implemented in various fashions. Feel free to zero in on whichever practitioner best suits your narrative of a high-and-tight “Kinder, Küche, Kirche”.

Awkward that “Wife with a Purpose” broke with ‘what’s his name’ for being a shit to his wife. I thought your slippery slope led to acceptable Islamic style battery as a trad-lifer’s core KPI? Nuance is always the smear of vegemite in the margarine tub.

I am offended you didn’t react respond to my Islamic dog-park analogy.

I will, however, assume an implicit “thanks” for the zen music. You are most welcome.

[HoneyWagon]

Look who is a speaker at NECSS in July...
https://necss.org/amanda-marcotte/

What the hell is she doing at a conference related to "skepticism"?

[Brive1987]

I don't have anything to say to most of that, but I just want to point out that nobody identifies as a "liberal civic nationalist" or a "civic nationalist". That's a term of abuse that you got from that stupid nazi cunt Lauren Rose, and I dispute the validity of it as an "identitarian group" (or even a label). First of all, the word "civic" is some misguided attempt to differentiate people who have an affinity for the values and ideals of their nation instead of identifying primarily with their racial collective. The fact that this is about ideas like what my society stands for and was founded upon makes it not my fucking identity group. As in, I wasn't born an "American civic nationalist" anymore than I was born a metalhead or a fan of Nietzsche's writing. Those are ideas that I elected based on my own thought processes once I matured and came to understand them. Second of all, there is no need to use this ugly contrived label when the word "patriot" would suffice. Patriots understand the philosophy, history and values of their country was founded on, and elevate those over other considerations, like petty identitarianism. If I considered myself a white person first and an American second then I wouldn't be a patriot. I don't know much about Australia, though. Maybe your constitution is founded on blood and soil and it makes total sense to view Australian values as being part of some white ethnic identity focus.

I'm happy to think of myself as British because I was born here and I generally support our values but if I had to 'identify' according to my bloodline I'd hate the fucking Brits.

It's one thing to expect me to support liberal democracy, it's another to expect me to identify with ethnonationalists who, a generation ago, would have been happy kicking the shit out of Paddies.

Maybe it's easier in Australia or South Africa to imagine that history and blood bind white people together but that's not the experience we have had in Europe.

Can we find a better word for “historically based, close cultural alignment” than “blood”. Or even “race”.

I know history and geography align with pigment. But that quirk makes the cats restless.

I’d push for “dickumdoswampickaxe”. Which is what my mother used to say in 1950s UK classrooms when she was asked to speak “Australian”. But that’s just a thought.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

Look who is a speaker at NECSS in July...
https://necss.org/amanda-marcotte/

What the hell is she doing at a conference related to "skepticism"?

Lots of reason. You could be skeptical that she was born female, had ever heard a catcall outside of movies or that she could be ever taken seriously by anyone, ever.

[HoneyWagon]

Look who is a speaker at NECSS in July...
https://necss.org/amanda-marcotte/

What the hell is she doing at a conference related to "skepticism"?

Lots of reason. You could be skeptical that she was born female, had ever heard a catcall outside of movies or that she could be ever taken seriously by anyone, ever.

There is a 100% chance her talk will mention Dawkins, Harris and Krauss (and how they are making Atheists become alt-right misogynist Islamophobic TERF ethnostaters who love Trump).
75% chance she get in a few sentences about Peterson too.
0% chance PZ will get a cursory nod.

[Hunt]

Look who is a speaker at NECSS in July...
https://necss.org/amanda-marcotte/

What the hell is she doing at a conference related to "skepticism"?

Maybe she got tired of Scientology.

[Brive1987]

If children are so important what motivates people to have them are affordable child care services, better and cheaper education, tax breaks and work-related incentives, FAR more than "traditional job descriptions".

Australians want more children than they actually have, according to newly released data collected as part of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey.

Analysing data over 15 years, the study reports that by age 40, Australian men and women desire 1.5 more children than they actually have. Women are also having children at later ages than previous cohorts: only 30% of Australian men and women report having their desired number of children by age 35.

Australian women WANT more children. The problem isn't with a lack of "traditional values", but with a demanding job market and limited welfare for families and child care.

Australia also has a very limited welfare state to support working families, while workplace norms emphasise long work hours. Mothers in Australia are most likely to reduce to part-time work when children are preschool-aged: Australian women report some of the highest part-time employment rates in the world.

The Australian workplace has also failed to meet the demands of modern families. Few offer reduced work time and flexible work arrangements to working parents. Australian workers report some of the longest weekly work hours in the world, imposing time demands that are often incompatible with raising children.

There is a bigger philosophical argument to be had than simply finding new ways to throw more tax money at a broken system.

The premise that a healthy society should have Mum and Dad on the wage-slave coal face bears thinking about.

[Old_ones]

I don't have anything to say to most of that, but I just want to point out that nobody identifies as a "liberal civic nationalist" or a "civic nationalist". That's a term of abuse that you got from that stupid nazi cunt Lauren Rose, and I dispute the validity of it as an "identitarian group" (or even a label). First of all, the word "civic" is some misguided attempt to differentiate people who have an affinity for the values and ideals of their nation instead of identifying primarily with their racial collective. The fact that this is about ideas like what my society stands for and was founded upon makes it not my fucking identity group. As in, I wasn't born an "American civic nationalist" anymore than I was born a metalhead or a fan of Nietzsche's writing. Those are ideas that I elected based on my own thought processes once I matured and came to understand them. Second of all, there is no need to use this ugly contrived label when the word "patriot" would suffice. Patriots understand the philosophy, history and values of their country was founded on, and elevate those over other considerations, like petty identitarianism. If I considered myself a white person first and an American second then I wouldn't be a patriot. I don't know much about Australia, though. Maybe your constitution is founded on blood and soil and it makes total sense to view Australian values as being part of some white ethnic identity focus.

I didn’t actually say anybody sets out to identify with that label. My point was that no one gets away from a club membership based on some form of commonly valued set of traits or beliefs. And pretty much anyone outside the club gets to be a problem. That’s why it’s amusing to see Kirb frothing at the mouth at his ideological enemies - for being so damned ideological. His screeds do deserve an occasional response.

But I appreciate your rant. Especially the sophisticated line that the choices are liberal valueist (how’s that for a new label which is more specific than “patriot”) or a Jew crushing, Muslim munching, Black bashing ‘blut and boden’ racist. :mrgreen:

And poor cunt Lauren Rose. She didn’t even get a footnote in the Wikipedia article.

I suppose "patriot" was a stupid word to suggest because I'm thinking within my own context and not differentiating between different forms of government there. In practice though, I think most countries have some sort of constitution or charter as their basis at this point, and most of them aren't explicitly based on ethnicity. I hadn't heard the term "civic nationalist" and I've never met anyone who self-applies it, so forgive me if I don't use it.

You could say that any value system, ideology or fandom creates an identity of sorts. You can be a communist, a metalhead or a pacifist and those all create some sort of identity. Same goes for people who want an inclusive representative republic founded on enlightenment values instead of [whatever it is you are actually arguing for - has that ever been established?]. To me these identities are different from those of the identitarians because the identitarians stress the trivial identities like race, sex and sexual preference. I know culture is partially about indoctrination, so their is a geographical component to it, but it's also largely individual and based on personal preferences. The reason it ends up being geographical is that most people learn one culture and value system, and don't go shopping for a new ones. I have a friend, on the other hand, who got interested in Japanese culture and ended up teaching himself the language and immigrating there. He doesn't have a drop of Asian blood - his family is mostly Norwegian American. He just turned out to be a total weeb for some reason. If there were a causal link between race and culture, then people like him shouldn't exist. Similarly, its not terribly uncommon for people to switch political parties or adopt new ideologies. That is essentially the same thing, just a less radical version of it.

As for that last part:

But I appreciate your rant. Especially the sophisticated line that the choices are liberal valueist (how’s that for a new label which is more specific than “patriot”) or a Jew crushing, Muslim munching, Black bashing ‘blut and boden’ racist.

I'm not sure what you think is the nuanced blending of those two things, or the third option. Maybe you can spell out how you can base a society on ethnic solidarity but not have it be racist, or find a middle ground between a color blind society, and one in which race is given explicit importance.

[Keating]

The definition of racism kinda breaks down for me there. I’m not convinced it’s inherently racist to not be Race X, not live in the country where Race X originates and also prefer to not have Race X around you in your own country, but want the best for Race Xers in their own country and be very willing to help them make Race X Country the best it can be by their own definition.

Can you only not be racist if you shun your racial heritage and only live among different races?

[Kirbmarc]

The definition of racism kinda breaks down for me there. I’m not convinced it’s inherently racist to not be Race X, not live in the country where Race X originates and also prefer to not have Race X around you in your own country, but want the best for Race Xers in their own country and be very willing to help them make Race X Country the best it can be by their own definition.

Can you only not be racist if you shun your racial heritage and only live among different races?

The problem is that unless you live in a segregated area you ALREADY live among different races. So what are you going to do to change that? Steersman-like "population transfers"? Apartheid? Explictly discrimination laws? Final Solutions?

Also there is a wide amount of evidence that isolation stifles cultural exchange and integration, and instead promotes cultural clash and conflict. If you're concerned about the growth of a Muslim supremacist culture (which is a legitimate concern to have) surely the answer cannot be to stick all muslims together in an "ethnic enclave" and let the supremacist culture grow?

Or are you in favor of ethnic cleansing, sorry "population exchange"?

We live in a world where people move around, intermarry, trade with and influence each other like never before. I can understand regulating the process to make sure that cultural clashes are minimized, integration is favoured, and human rights are protected at the best of our abilities. I'm no fan of "open borders" and especially of the laissez-faire approach to ethnic enclaves/ghettoes.

But to want racial separation is by its nature going to trample on people's rights and to promote cultural conflict and violence. Because after all not all countries are equally potentially successful in terms of economic growth.

Sub-Saharan Africa will see a tremendous increase in population in the coming years. I'm far from sure that Sub-Saharan African countries will be able to develop enough to support their booming populations.

So people WILL migrate to survive. Now this could be a controlled project which coordinates international efforts to make sure the negative effects of these migration are minimized. Or it could be chaos and conflict.

But one thing is sure, building walls won't magically make things better.

[Shatterface]

Can we find a better word for “historically based, close cultural alignment” than “blood”. Or even “race”.

Call it what you want but in what way does it bind those of us with Irish ancestry with mainland Britain?

As soon as you bring 'shared history' into it we are faced with the fact that shared history is largely one of mutual antagonism.

I'm British because I was born here not because my ancestors were. It's no good appealing to my sense of ethnic solidarity because I don't have any.

My loyalty to the country is based on conditional civic values like liberty, democracy, etc. not history.

[Brive1987]

The definition of racism kinda breaks down for me there. I’m not convinced it’s inherently racist to not be Race X, not live in the country where Race X originates and also prefer to not have Race X around you in your own country, but want the best for Race Xers in their own country and be very willing to help them make Race X Country the best it can be by their own definition.

Can you only not be racist if you shun your racial heritage and only live among different races?

The problem is that unless you live in a segregated area you ALREADY live among different races. So what are you going to do to change that? Steersman-like "population transfers"? Apartheid? Explictly discrimination laws? Final Solutions?

Also there is a wide amount of evidence that isolation stifles cultural exchange and integration, and instead promotes cultural clash and conflict. If you're concerned about the growth of a Muslim supremacist culture (which is a legitimate concern to have) surely the answer cannot be to stick all muslims together in an "ethnic enclave" and let the supremacist culture grow?

Or are you in favor of ethnic cleansing, sorry "population exchange"?

We live in a world where people move around, intermarry, trade with and influence each other like never before. I can understand regulating the process to make sure that cultural clashes are minimized, integration is favoured, and human rights are protected at the best of our abilities. I'm no fan of "open borders" and especially of the laissez-faire approach to ethnic enclaves/ghettoes.

But to want racial separation is by its nature going to trample on people's rights and to promote cultural conflict and violence. Because after all not all countries are equally potentially successful in terms of economic growth.

Sub-Saharan Africa will see a tremendous increase in population in the coming years. I'm far from sure that Sub-Saharan African countries will be able to develop enough to support their booming populations.

So people WILL migrate to survive. Now this could be a controlled project which coordinates international efforts to make sure the negative effects of these migration are minimized. Or it could be chaos and conflict.

But one thing is sure, building walls won't magically make things better.

Stop unaligned immigration, set strong culturally based house rules, zero tolerance for cultural terraforming, no special rights or services to accommodate relative dysfunction, celebrate your special historical heritage without a black armband, provide financial incentives for the FO in FIFO to make their escape.

That’s more of a start than any of your unicorn solutions.

[Brive1987]

“I am the Greatest”

[Keating]

This argument is weird because the extremes get argued instead of the degree. Imagine a % slider. The argument isn’t over 0% mix vs 100% mix, but more like 10% vs 40%, if I’m gauging things right?

[Keating]

I don’t think that affects the principle of my last point, though. I don’t see how that scenario is inherently racist, if impractical. Calling it such isn’t helpful.

[Brive1987]

liberty, democracy,

It must confuse you during that sleepy wake-up fugue every morning wondering whether your freedom and democracy makes you German or French.

Then you wake up screaming because you’re a Pom.

Commiserations.

[Brive1987]

“I am the Greatest”

In fairness, there are probably not that many 83 page competitors out there for tricky dicky to worry about.

[Brive1987]

This argument is weird because the extremes get argued instead of the degree. Imagine a % slider. The argument isn’t over 0% mix vs 100% mix, but more like 10% vs 40%, if I’m gauging things right?

Imagine if governments actually specified their target ethnic blends for the next 10, 20, 50 and 100 years. Modeling from immigration (which they control) and natural increase. And were then held accountable.

Truth is they have no idea what they are doing. Short of injecting low quality workers to drive infrastructure growth and hence artificial GDP growth.

The fools we suffer gladly are the fools that will fly us into the ground.

[Brive1987]

British police have arrested a 78 year old pensioner for murder. He was being robbed at the time.

One suspect, armed with a screwdriver, forced the 78-year-old into his kitchen after he discovered them, while his accomplice went upstairs, Scotland Yard said.

A struggle ensued, during which “one of the males found inside the property sustained a stab wound to the upper body”, according to the police.

Doesn’t seem right.

[JayTeeAitch]

British police have arrested a 78 year old pensioner for murder. He was being robbed at the time.

One suspect, armed with a screwdriver, forced the 78-year-old into his kitchen after he discovered them, while his accomplice went upstairs, Scotland Yard said.

A struggle ensued, during which “one of the males found inside the property sustained a stab wound to the upper body”, according to the police.

Doesn’t seem right.

Not 100% sure but I think an arrest is likely in a situation like that. The spaz outs should wait until if/when he's charged.

[Hunt]

It's always a great time to inject a little Star Wars back into the pyt, isn't it? There's always room for Jello.

My review of the first 20 minutes of Last Jedi:

Horrible, juvenile use of humor. To mimic Darth Vader: The infantilization of Star Wars is now complete. Lame, ludicrous humor only a 9 year old could appreciate. The old "pretend to not hear" ploy? Really, in a Star Wars movie? I was half expecting the officer to say "Can you hear me now?" I would have died of severe facepalm but would not have been surprised. The usual panoply of supervaginas doing what supervaginas do. Bombing in space ! (?) Not if you're in orbit, but apparently they aren't. Fisher looking more terribly unhealthy than I even remembered. Looking at her, not at all surprised she died; what a waste. Luke disgustingly drinking milk from the boobs of some kind of space cow that sits on the windswept slopes of rocky island? Sure, why not.

So far, horrible, horrible movie. Stay tuned.

[Hunt]

Also, is it my imagination or is there a preponderance of very ugly people in this movie? Everyone in the original was beautiful...except Porkins, of course.

[MarcusAu]

Also, is it my imagination or is there a preponderance of very ugly people in this movie? Everyone in the original was beautiful...except Porkins, of course.

Not really my kink - but to each their own I suppose:

sexy_jabba.jpg

(118.19 KiB) Downloaded 176 times

[Hunt]

I'm not quite geeky enough to remember, but Jabba was added to the original in the remaster they did in the 90s, so he doesn't count.

[Keating]

Jabba identifies as being in the original shoot, however.

[Hunt]

Just looked him up and the guy who played Porkins was also the "Top men" guy in Raiders of the Lost Ark, and also the corpulent, corrupt police lieutenant in Batman. Who knew?

[Keating]

If you're concerned about the growth of a Muslim supremacist culture (which is a legitimate concern to have) surely the answer cannot be to stick all muslims together in an "ethnic enclave" and let the supremacist culture grow?

Bedtime preparation thought: How sure are you that there are enough non-muslims to have the desired effect, rather than toxic muslimity rubbing off on the people you've put there?

[mike150160]

The definition of racism kinda breaks down for me there. I’m not convinced it’s inherently racist to not be Race X, not live in the country where Race X originates and also prefer to not have Race X around you in your own country, but want the best for Race Xers in their own country and be very willing to help them make Race X Country the best it can be by their own definition.

Can you only not be racist if you shun your racial heritage and only live among different races?

That's the sneaky one. If that's your preference that's racist. In practice, I suspect, it won't be race because unless they're displaying some visual, behavioural or cultural clues, all you really have is accent and skin colour.

Personally, I don't give a shit as long as they obey the law.

[John D]

British police have arrested a 78 year old pensioner for murder. He was being robbed at the time.

One suspect, armed with a screwdriver, forced the 78-year-old into his kitchen after he discovered them, while his accomplice went upstairs, Scotland Yard said.

A struggle ensued, during which “one of the males found inside the property sustained a stab wound to the upper body”, according to the police.

Doesn’t seem right.

Not 100% sure but I think an arrest is likely in a situation like that. The spaz outs should wait until if/when he's charged.

Britain is fucked. The crime rate may be on the rise. I am speculating, but the US went through some of this nonsense.

People in the 60s and 70s where often of the opinion that a person became a criminal because they were victims themselves... victims of poverty... so people became very lenient with criminals. "Oh that poor boy, he just hasn't been loved enough." In the 70s and 80s people were getting arrested for defending themselves and their property. It was happening all the time. A lot depends on the state, but people were going to jail for shooting home intruders. Eventually, the people got sick of it and elected "law and order" style politicians. Laws have changed because, really, people don't like criminals. I think this is one of the factors that has driven down the crime rate here.

Just last year in Detroit an old woman shot two intruders while they where climbing out her window and running away across her yard. The media turned her into a hero, and there was no prosecution. I think the punks survived, but most people where thinking, "Oh, too bad she was not a better shot."

A turning point in the discussion was the case of Goetz shooting a bunch of punks on a New York subway in 1984. The leftest media labeled him as a lunatic from the start, but people made him a hero. At that time New York was super dangerous.... a real shit hole. Punks would approach people on the subway train or at the station and get right in their space and scowl and threaten in order to get people to give them money. Everyone living there hated it, but the progressive elites had been ignoring the problem.

The left hated Goetz with a passion and saw him as a racist and paranoid ass. Lou Reed even included a Goetz reference in one of his anti-capitalist songs.... and this is really around the time when I started to dislike many musicians. Haha. This is off track, but I get so annoyed by the lyrics of many songs I used to love. I was listening to the Doobie Brothers "Love the One You're With" and thinking... "Fuck, that is some shitty advice." They should be singing "Don't stick your dick in crazy." I'd dance to that!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_New_ ... y_shooting

[John D]

Haha... I love this one quote:

Harvard Professor of Government James Q. Wilson explained the broad sentiment by saying, "It may simply indicate that there are no more liberals on the crime and law-and-order issue in New York City, because they've all been mugged."[49]

[John D]

While browsing old interblog stories I come to this one to answer the question currently being asked "Who needs an AR-15 to defend themselves?" Well, it looks like the AR-15 works real good!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ok ... rs-n739541

[MarcusAu]

While browsing old interblog stories I come to this one to answer the question currently being asked "Who needs an AR-15 to defend themselves?" Well, it looks like the AR-15 works real good!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ok ... rs-n739541

Yeah, I understand that Detroit has a more enlightened approach to security

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRNVxHPJ0hM

[John D]

Songs that I now hate:

Emerson Lake and Palmer "Lucky Man"
John Lennon "Imagine" (fuck this fucking song... fuck!)
Doobie Brothers "Love the One Your'e With"
Boston "Peace of Mind"

[MarcusAu]

Here's one I can still enjoy...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftZ3UCdTuWQ

[John D]

Sympathy for the Devil... haha... fantastic. Driving in the car with this turned way up and singing.... "Who...who.............who...who..........who...who"

[Barbie's Boyfriend]

Songs that I now hate:

Emerson Lake and Palmer "Lucky Man"
John Lennon "Imagine" (fuck this fucking song... fuck!)
Doobie Brothers "Love the One Your'e With"
Boston "Peace of Mind"

"I don't care too much for $$$. $$$ can't buy me love"

I heard that when John Lennon died in 1980, he left Yoko Ono $200 million !!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srwxJUXPHvE

[Bhurzum]

Songs that I now hate:

Emerson Lake and Palmer "Lucky Man"
John Lennon "Imagine" (fuck this fucking song... fuck!)
Doobie Brothers "Love the One Your'e With"
Boston "Peace of Mind"

No great loss tbh, all hippy shit. Why not jam this on (real loud) and wreck the house whilst it blares?



Zeig howdy!

(my back is killing me with all this pipe-laying!)

[Barbie's Boyfriend]

Songs that I now hate:

Emerson Lake and Palmer "Lucky Man"
John Lennon "Imagine" (fuck this fucking song... fuck!)
Doobie Brothers "Love the One Your'e With"
Boston "Peace of Mind"

Love the One You're With was NOT the Doobie Brothers;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY4HI_vqf0c

[Barbie's Boyfriend]

The greatest band to come out of England in the 70s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zCeo605mOI

[Barbie's Boyfriend]

Here's an Early 80s band from John D's neck of the woods that I am sure he will love:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MuQ7ek12KY

[John D]

Often, though, The Beatles redeemed themselves. As they got more successful they admitted to their own faults. John Lennon used to hit his girlfriend etc. He admitted to it and at least tried to improve. You can see it in their music. and.... closer to the end of his life Lennon realized most of his hippie shit was just that.. naive hippie shit. Too bad his fans haven't realized this... so they still sing that fucking "Imagine" song. (not that he might not sing it if he were still alive... just to make the money... haha).