The Left's Deception

[Doomsday Dallas]

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

[Patrick Chewing]

That's one of the dumbest Asian kids I have ever seen.

It's amazing how Liberals become Liberals and vote Liberals without even knowing anything about the country's politics.

"You're a fascist!"

"What makes me a fascist?"

"Uhhhhh...."

:oldlol:


These poor kids are brainwashed.

[Bill Gates]

That guy is spot on, and he owned that liberal Asian kid. However, the main people pushing the idea that CEO's and America's wealthy are conservatives ARE CONSERVATIVES. They are the ones pushing the false idea that lefties are the poor ones asking for handouts. When in fact the most handouts and anything resembling "communism" goes to the red deep south Bible belt states. And most of the tax money that pays for those handouts comes from the blue cities.

And that can be seen right here in this forum, where it's the MAGA posters acting as though they have their shit together and are well off and assuming it's the lefties who are poor.

All the blue areas are the high GDP areas. All the red areas are the low GDP poor areas. But if you were to ask a typical MAGA voter he would likely tell you it's the opposite.

[Bill Gates]

The entire reason though, that wealthy people tend to lean left, is that once a human has conquered their lust for material items, and is no longer interested in more wealth, the natural order that follows is philanthropy. Helping those in need, feeding the hungry, social injustices, correcting the wrongs in society, fighting for equality, etc. And that is the left's entire philosophy, so naturally they will be more attracted to that.

California and New York hold the most rich people, so naturally those states lean left, while Mississippi and Louisiana hold the most poor people, so naturally those states lean right. It isn't because everyone in California was fooled by "The Left's Deception" and everyone in Mississippi was too smart to be fooled by it. It's because leftist views fall in line with the rich's desire to help the poor people out.

[Norcaliblunt]

How come no right wing deception analysis from you OP?

How come 15 years ago when conservatives were ready to go independent your boy Ron Paul led everyone back to the “mainstream” Republican Party?

Same question could be asked about Bernie Sanders. Why did so called independent progressive free thinkers get led back to the democrats?

So OP why do you play partisan politics all day?

[Patrick Chewing]

How come no right wing deception analysis from you OP?

How come 15 years ago when conservatives were ready to go independent your boy Ron Paul led everyone back to the “mainstream” Republican Party?

Same question could be asked about Bernie Sanders. Why did so called independent progressive free thinkers get led back to the democrats?

So OP why do you play partisan politics all day?

Perhaps the OP doesn't lean Left? And perhaps The Left's Deception is so damaging to the country and to the overall discourse in this country that it must be called out. I mean, we can just start calling Liberals racists or better yet, cannibals all day until it sticks. But we don't do that.

[Bill Gates]

The right's main deception is that trickle-down works. That making the rich even richer helps the middle class. But it has been shown time and time again to fail. The rich have never been more wealthy than they are right now and here they are complaining about the middle class shrinking. And they have been conditioned to believe that any kind of handout is communism. The reality is that much of the right, particularly the deep state mobile home right, NEEDS a handout. And all the companies that they pay bills to need them to get that hand out.

[Norcaliblunt]

Perhaps the OP doesn't lean Left? And perhaps The Left's Deception is so damaging to the country and to the overall discourse in this country that it must be called out. I mean, we can just start calling Liberals racists or better yet, cannibals all day until it sticks. But we don't do that.

Perhaps the Op is a mainstream clown disguising himself as a free alternative thinker who really is a bitch ass republican.

Yeah that sounds about right.

I’ve been calling dude out for years and he never proves me wrong.

[ArbitraryWater]

The entire reason though, that wealthy people tend to lean left, is that once a human has conquered their lust for material items, and is no longer interested in more wealth, the natural order that follows is philanthropy. Helping those in need, feeding the hungry, social injustices, correcting the wrongs in society, fighting for equality, etc. And that is the left's entire philosophy, so naturally they will be more attracted to that.

California and New York hold the most rich people, so naturally those states lean left, while Mississippi and Louisiana hold the most poor people, so naturally those states lean right. It isn't because everyone in California was fooled by "The Left's Deception" and everyone in Mississippi was too smart to be fooled by it. It's because leftist views fall in line with the rich's desire to help the poor people out.


True, however that boils over to a lot of bullshit and policies that end up helping no one cause theres no actual need nor correlation (climate change = eliminating cows, plastic straws, etc.) and in return even over-taxes average citizens, so one has to wonder how much good intent there actually is behind these policies, when they all just infringe on citizens and seem to limit their freedoms.

The main gripe anyone has and the biggest divide between left and right, even more than transgenderism, is immigration. I dont think any elite lefty politicians truly think society is better off by having everyone from everywwhere come in, unchecked even.

Seems to be pretty blatant order through chaos / divide and conquer.

The left has become the party of nonsense in many ways, because through their appeal to tolerance and acceptance, theyve gone overboard and have been hijacked by lunatics, which end up promoting either completely degenerate things or plain false ones (men being women for one).

[ILLsmak]

I think our founders knew what’s up.

The idea of welfare or wealth redistribution, to me, is not wrong. The part that is really bad is that it’s a single entity, at the most left, that is in control. One consolidation of power servicing millions of citizens. The best idea is to have smallish groups (think city and state) that are working together. Then everything is checked over and over again by people in a slightly different situation and you go outward until it is ‘the whole country.’

Legislating shit for everyone is suspect usually. The country is just not the same. There are very solid pillars of what it means to be human and a citizen and what that affords you already offered by our government. If you can draw a line to something then yeah, good on ya, and they should add that, but mostly let things be different. People will be happier.

When politics is about legislating for the whole country you get two sides who loathe each other and believe the other is ruining their life. Hmm.

-Smak

[90sgoat]

The entire reason though, that wealthy people tend to lean left, is that once a human has conquered their lust for material items, and is no longer interested in more wealth, the natural order that follows is philanthropy. Helping those in need, feeding the hungry, social injustices, correcting the wrongs in society, fighting for equality, etc. And that is the left's entire philosophy, so naturally they will be more attracted to that.

Ahahahahahaha.

This is so hilariously wrong.

Rich people stop desiring material goods sure, at least some of them, but then they start desiring power.

It's the saying, a poor man wants to be rich, a rich man want to be king and a king want to be god.

Rich people are on board with the left because they see their needs best met with the left. The woke agenda can weaken foreign competition such as China and Russia. It's also a necessary payment to the woke class of people who would otherwise cause a lot of problems.

[j3lademaster]

That's one of the dumbest Asian kids I have ever seen.

It's amazing how Liberals become Liberals and vote Liberals without even knowing anything about the country's politics.

"You're a fascist!"

"What makes me a fascist?"

"Uhhhhh...."

:oldlol:


These poor kids are brainwashed.You can't make that conclusion based on one clip, a lot of people are shit at public speaking. I know brilliant, brilliant people in the financial industry who are wasted on it and should be working on rockets who look like absolute bumbling idiots when they try to give presentations.

[j3lademaster]

Ahahahahahaha.

This is so hilariously wrong.

Rich people stop desiring material goods sure, at least some of them, but then they start desiring power.

It's the saying, a poor man wants to be rich, a rich man want to be king and a king want to be god.

Rich people are on board with the left because they see their needs best met with the left. The woke agenda can weaken foreign competition such as China and Russia. It's also a necessary payment to the woke class of people who would otherwise cause a lot of problems.
Huh? You must be getting too 'beautiful mind' on me here. Please dumb this down for me.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Remember Chewing has no college degree.

[Doomsday Dallas]

Harris vows to build "opportunity economy" focused on the middle class 10 min ago (CNN)


“As president, I will be laser-focused on creating opportunities for the middle class that advance their economic security, stability and dignity. Together, we will build what I call an ‘opportunity economy.’”



Sure... Kamala... Sure.

[90sgoat]

:lol

[SATAN]

The OP's Delusion :lol

[ZenMaster]

The right's main deception is that trickle-down works. That making the rich even richer helps the middle class. But it has been shown time and time again to fail. The rich have never been more wealthy than they are right now and here they are complaining about the middle class shrinking. And they have been conditioned to believe that any kind of handout is communism. The reality is that much of the right, particularly the deep state mobile home right, NEEDS a handout. And all the companies that they pay bills to need them to get that hand out.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?518435-Stock-market-panic-around-the-world-due-to-fears-about-the-US-entering-a-recession&p=14935794&viewfull=1#post14935794

[rmt]

The entire reason though, that wealthy people tend to lean left, is that once a human has conquered their lust for material items, and is no longer interested in more wealth, the natural order that follows is philanthropy. Helping those in need, feeding the hungry, social injustices, correcting the wrongs in society, fighting for equality, etc. And that is the left's entire philosophy, so naturally they will be more attracted to that.

California and New York hold the most rich people, so naturally those states lean left, while Mississippi and Louisiana hold the most poor people, so naturally those states lean right. It isn't because everyone in California was fooled by "The Left's Deception" and everyone in Mississippi was too smart to be fooled by it. It's because leftist views fall in line with the rich's desire to help the poor people out.

LOL - (imo) what a totally IDEALISTIC view you have of man. Throughout history man has strived for POWER - in order to get MORE material stuff.

Double LOL - those leftist views are sure helping all those homeless in CA.

[Off the Court]

LOL - (imo) what a totally IDEALISTIC view you have of man. Throughout history man has strived for POWER - in order to get MORE material stuff.

Double LOL - those leftist views are sure helping all those homeless in CA.

No he's right, it's been shown that once a person hits a certain income and net worth level that most stop chasing. And it is too silly believe that the typical wealthy gated suburban doctor or lawyer votes left in search of power. Like how does that make them more powerful?

From what I can see, the ones that are in search of power lean right. That would be Elon and Donald who are totally ego driven.

[Off the Court]

Yeah now that I think about that is dumb a theory.

Wealthy people that do want more power and wealth? They would vote for the side that wants to give them tax breaks. Not the side that wants to tax them more and spread it around.

[gbaLL]

im a good kid
i hu$tle 4 $
i want good grade$
birthday ba$h

[ILLsmak]

No he's right, it's been shown that once a person hits a certain income and net worth level that most stop chasing. And it is too silly believe that the typical wealthy gated suburban doctor or lawyer votes left in search of power. Like how does that make them more powerful?

From what I can see, the ones that are in search of power lean right. That would be Elon and Donald who are totally ego driven.

I dunno if I wanna decide which side they’d go, but if you’d seriously consider what I wrote, I’ll write what I feel about people acquiring power. Not on tablet.

Spoiler would be people seek power in every aspect of their life, and once they are at their max riches they focus on obtaining power over people / their situation.

This is just my pov after dealing with a lot of people. I’d like to think it is understood psychologically. Lemme know.

-Smak

[ZenMaster]

The deceipt runs deep, even here on ISH where Off the court is always first to point out about how e.g California has such a high average income and they're all so succesful, so the rest of the country should definitely vote like them, but reality paints a different picture.

Removing oligarchs and very rich people, the median salary - what the actual average Joe makes - in California is at 54K per year. This is 44% higher than Mississippi, where the average person only takes home 37,5K per year, a difference of $16,500 per year. So what do you get on that 16,5K?

Most people who work feels like they need a car, and holy shit an average car in California is almost 21% cheaper than Mississippi, how awesome how they provide affordable transportation and give people more opportunities, except you'll be paying 53 cents off the difference on each gallon of fuel while you own the car, as fuel in California is almost 70% more expensive than Mississippi.

Want a 1 bedroom apartment inside or outside a city center? You'll be paying more than twice as much at +2K per month rental and Californians on average pay almost 70% more on housing.

How about some stuff that's good for you no matter how much money you have, e.g groceries like eggs and chicken breast. Well 2.2 pounds of chicken breast and a dozen eggs will run you 13.49 in Miss and 16,54 in Cali, because on average Californians pay 23% more for groceries.

I bet a lot of people also think that Mississippi is just a bunch of worthless unemployed hicks living in trailer parks, but even those trailers cost money, and more than tents. Unemployment rate for Miss is 2.7%, almost half of the 5.2% in Cali.

Turns out that total cost of living is about 41% higher in Cali vs Miss and that 16,5K more per year has very fast legs, with almost 2x the chance of being unemployed. People from the deep sout living in trailer parks have ironically by Hollywood been painted as the lowest of the low, but if you think those people are worse off than in tent cities, it's because you're out of touch:


https://youtu.be/IzLC48jZPrc


California is a failed oligarch state with the average people not being much better off than in the poorest state in the whole US and the worst thing for Americans is to vote in politicians from there who are proud of the general development there in the last 20 years.

https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/mississippi-usa/california-usa

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/14/median-annual-income-in-every-us-state.html

[rmt]

The entire reason though, that wealthy people tend to lean left, is that once a human has conquered their lust for material items, and is no longer interested in more wealth, the natural order that follows is philanthropy. Helping those in need, feeding the hungry, social injustices, correcting the wrongs in society, fighting for equality, etc. And that is the left's entire philosophy, so naturally they will be more attracted to that.

California and New York hold the most rich people, so naturally those states lean left, while Mississippi and Louisiana hold the most poor people, so naturally those states lean right. It isn't because everyone in California was fooled by "The Left's Deception" and everyone in Mississippi was too smart to be fooled by it. It's because leftist views fall in line with the rich's desire to help the poor people out.

Since they have CONQUERED their lust for material items, why don't these left leaning, wealthy people GIVE AWAY their money to help those in need, feed the hungry, social injustices, correct the wrongs in society, fight for equality? Does doing this (giving away their wealth) cause them to maintain all these wonderful, altruistic, philanthropic qualities or does (re-)joining the "unwashed masses" bring back the age old drive for power and material items?

What a fickle philosophy.

[Bill Gates]

Since they have CONQUERED their lust for material items, why don't these left leaning, wealthy people GIVE AWAY their money to help those in need, feed the hungry, social injustices, correct the wrongs in society, fight for equality? Does doing this (giving away their wealth) cause them to maintain all these wonderful, altruistic, philanthropic qualities or does (re-)joining the "unwashed masses" bring back the age old drive for power and material items?

What a fickle philosophy.

What do you mean why don't they? They do! Look at Warren Buffet, Mackenzie Scott, all the names mentioned in the OP's video. Scott has given away BILLIONS.

The reality is that all you need to have literally anything you want is $1B. Once most hit that level they are then trying to earn their spot in heaven by helping others. The world isn't full of evil hearted power hungry satanists. There is SOME of that sure, but most wealthy people do in fact have good intentions. You can bet that the average doctor gives to charity.

Scott isn't locked in so she can throw everything she has around. For Jeff Bezos and others, for them to give away all their billions it would require them to sell off all their shares of the company they created, so they are locked in. But the Buffett "pledge" is a concept many of them have bought into that more or less allows them to keep most of their wealth until they die. That way it can grow to it's optimal amount.

[Bill Gates]

The deceipt runs deep, even here on ISH where Off the court is always first to point out about how e.g California has such a high average income and they're all so succesful, so the rest of the country should definitely vote like them, but reality paints a different picture.

Removing oligarchs and very rich people, the median salary - what the actual average Joe makes - in California is at 54K per year. This is 44% higher than Mississippi, where the average person only takes home 37,5K per year, a difference of $16,500 per year. So what do you get on that 16,5K?

Most people who work feels like they need a car, and holy shit an average car in California is almost 21% cheaper than Mississippi, how awesome how they provide affordable transportation and give people more opportunities, except you'll be paying 53 cents off the difference on each gallon of fuel while you own the car, as fuel in California is almost 70% more expensive than Mississippi.

Want a 1 bedroom apartment inside or outside a city center? You'll be paying more than twice as much at +2K per month rental and Californians on average pay almost 70% more on housing.

How about some stuff that's good for you no matter how much money you have, e.g groceries like eggs and chicken breast. Well 2.2 pounds of chicken breast and a dozen eggs will run you 13.49 in Miss and 16,54 in Cali, because on average Californians pay 23% more for groceries.

I bet a lot of people also think that Mississippi is just a bunch of worthless unemployed hicks living in trailer parks, but even those trailers cost money, and more than tents. Unemployment rate for Miss is 2.7%, almost half of the 5.2% in Cali.

Turns out that total cost of living is about 41% higher in Cali vs Miss and that 16,5K more per year has very fast legs, with almost 2x the chance of being unemployed. People from the deep sout living in trailer parks have ironically by Hollywood been painted as the lowest of the low, but if you think those people are worse off than in tent cities, it's because you're out of touch:


https://youtu.be/IzLC48jZPrc


California is a failed oligarch state with the average people not being much better off than in the poorest state in the whole US and the worst thing for Americans is to vote in politicians from there who are proud of the general development there in the last 20 years.

https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/mississippi-usa/california-usa

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/14/median-annual-income-in-every-us-state.html

California is the epitome of capitalism. They have the highest GDP in the US, by far. They make more money than most of the deep south states all combined. And the result is exactly what you see. No middle class. You are either extremely well off, or near homeless. So it is an absolute no brainer for everyone there to want socialism. The wealth disparity is right in their face every day. How could they possible be on the side that wants to give the rich more tax cuts and remove handouts for the poor?

If Mississippi's GDP magically transformed into that of California, it would evolve into the exact same thing. A big Silicon Valley of billionaires mixed with lots of homeless who can't afford to be there any more. EXTREME capitalism.

[rmt]

What do you mean why don't they? They do! Look at Warren Buffet, Mackenzie Scott, all the names mentioned in the OP's video. Scott has given away BILLIONS.

The reality is that all you need to have literally anything you want is $1B. Once most hit that level they are then trying to earn their spot in heaven by helping others. The world isn't full of evil hearted power hungry satanists. There is SOME of that sure, but most wealthy people do in fact have good intentions. You can bet that the average doctor gives to charity.

Scott isn't locked in so she can throw everything she has around. For Jeff Bezos and others, for them to give away all their billions it would require them to sell off all their shares of the company they created, so they are locked in. But the Buffett "pledge" is a concept many of them have bought into that more or less allows them to keep most of their wealth until they die. That way it can grow to it's optimal amount.

I wouldn't need $1B (nowhere near that) to have literally anything I want.

Very general assumption about most wealthy having good intentions.

Have we really jumped in this thread from wealthy gated surburban lawyer or average doctor to Warren Buffett and Jeff Bezos. Are Buffett and Bezos representative of "wealthy/rich people" in California and New York? We have very different definitions of rich/wealthy people (mine not referring to one of a kind, truly exceptional people).

[ZenMaster]

I wouldn't need $1B (nowhere near that) to have literally anything I want.

Very general assumption about most wealthy having good intentions.

Have we really jumped in this thread from wealthy gated surburban lawyer or average doctor to Warren Buffett and Jeff Bezos. Are Buffett and Bezos representative of "wealthy/rich people" in California and New York? We have very different definitions of rich/wealthy people (mine not referring to one of a kind, truly exceptional people).

It's like Bill Gates has all the arguments about why the current system is rotten, but for some reason can't put together a conclusion that it actually does need change. In the other thread he was using Starbucks as an example of how they country is doing just fine, except Starbucks recently changed to discount their menu options and decrease the size of their products, and just about a week ago also fired their old leadership.

There's around 3200 known billionaries in the western world currently and his prime example of a good hearted billionaire is Mackenzie Scott who just gives all her money away(because you only need one billy to have everything you want), except in reality she's sitting on 33 billion in cash.

[Bill Gates]

What have switched to now? Starbucks? The difference in wealth between the average doctor and a billionaire? The way to create a middle class in California? (more socialism)

All of these topics are different than the OP's video, which points out that it is leftists who are make up the wealthy class, and not conservatives. I tried to explain why that is, and it is because once a person gets to a place where material objects aren't a thing any more, they evolve into philanthropy. Not literally all of them, people like Elon want even more power. But the average 1% American is like that.

Don't you guys know any wealthy families? Are they evil power hungry maniacs? Or are they good people? Regardless of their political leanings, odds are they have good intentions. Again not all of them, but most.

[Doomsday Dallas]

Don't you guys know any wealthy families? Are they evil power hungry maniacs? Or are they good people? Regardless of their political leanings, odds are they have good intentions. Again not all of them, but most.


I would argue that almost all of them are corrupt... insider trading, market manipulation, ponzi schemes, back door deals, and let's not forget what true fascism looks like:

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/corporate-fascism.jpg



So... essentially.... Bill Gates is the government.

You think Bill Gates isn't sucking the Government's dick everyday? You're fooling yourself.

you don't get to become a corporate billionaire without having some dirt, or being controlled... otherwise, the business eventually goes bankrupt or stays mediocre. The corrupt rise to the top.

The corrupt sponsors and props up the corrupt.



Did the pandemic not teach you anything? Pfizer is basically apart of the Goddamn Government.

Mainstream Media is apart of the Government.

It's all centralized. connected through secret handshaking elitists.



Same can be said for the entertainment industry... the most famous & powerful celebrities tend to be the most disgusting human beings... you think the business and political world is any different?



https://youtu.be/B1QVeR_p7WQ

[SATAN]

The irony of OP saying all this while voting for a conman and compulsive liar is pretty crazy. :lol

[Doomsday Dallas]

Like seriously... how are people still blind to the fact that this woke ideology was one that has been manufactured and shoved down the masses throats?

How can people not see it?

When you are a corporation... and you lose Billions of dollars going WOKE... it's not because the people within that corporation have good intentions and mean well and want to send a positive message.

It's called an agenda... there's a woke agenda, and to be fair, there is an alt right agenda too. Both manufactured and served up to masses.


While we the people are distracted over unimportant identity politics... It takes our attention off the true enemy:

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/corporate-fascism.jpg

[Doomsday Dallas]

https://youtu.be/V9XeyBd_IuA



it is what it is.

It's all one Corporation

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/corporate-fascism.jpg

[gbaLL]

^ Trump

[Patrick Chewing]

The irony of OP saying all this while voting for a conman and compulsive liar is pretty crazy. :lol

Find me a politician that doesn't lie or bend the truth. I'll wait.

[Off the Court]

https://youtu.be/V9XeyBd_IuA



it is what it is.

It's all one Corporation

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/corporate-fascism.jpg

Money and corporations have always influenced politics. In every country. Since the beginning of time. You'd find it in ancient Rome or Greece.

Hell cartels are influencing politics south of us.

That isn't what fascism is. Fascism goes beyond money. Fascism is being ruled by an evil dictator. Hitler didn't care about money, he cared about ruling the world. That's fascism.

[ZenMaster]

What have switched to now? Starbucks? The difference in wealth between the average doctor and a billionaire? The way to create a middle class in California? (more socialism)

All of these topics are different than the OP's video, which points out that it is leftists who are make up the wealthy class, and not conservatives. I tried to explain why that is, and it is because once a person gets to a place where material objects aren't a thing any more, they evolve into philanthropy. Not literally all of them, people like Elon want even more power. But the average 1% American is like that.

Don't you guys know any wealthy families? Are they evil power hungry maniacs? Or are they good people? Regardless of their political leanings, odds are they have good intentions. Again not all of them, but most.

The conversation goes where it goes, talking about more than one specific thing at a time is OK.

Back when the Republican party was considered the party of people where material objects aren't a thing and they evolve into philantropy, did you also consider the average 1% American to be having mainly good intentions? Did you argue that the occupy wallstreet movement was wrong to protest?

Funny how you'd mention Elon as power hungry, the former democrat who stayed out of politics as much as possible while Zuckerberg, Bezos and others actively interferred with US elections both using their platforms to supress and create disinformation(which they stiil do), as well as their money.
Jack Dorsey created a platform which only made a little bit of profit in 2 out of the 8 years that he ran it, but he was given billionaire money to keep it roling because it was such an effective tool to influence opinion. Thank god Elon used the law and his own money to buy that shit.

I've been around a lot of rich people, and most of them have a desire for power within the context of them wanting to secure profit in the future as well - it's for this reason lobbying companies exists and are heavily used, though you don't often hear about it.
Try sitting at a table with some hedge fund managers, philantropy my ass.
You're right that there is culture within the rich to give donations and what not that come with tax benefits, but it's mainly self serving and to make yourself look good(also sometims to launder some money), hence why they never actually give away most of their money and Scott still has 33 billion on her account.

[rmt]

It's surprising to me - this (IMO) misconception of what human nature is - what it has always been and always will be - maybe read a world history book - one that's not been woke-ified. If you don't want to read, see the same theme in Game of Thrones or The Last Kingdom.

And that is why the Constitution/Bill of Rights is important - we have the right to say what we want, worship, defend ourselves, etc - no matter what corrupt politician/entity throughout history comes along.

[Bill Gates]

It's surprising to me - this (IMO) misconception of what human nature is - what it has always been and always will be - maybe read a world history book - one that's not been woke-ified. If you don't want to read, see the same theme in Game of Thrones or The Last Kingdom.

The misconception is that humanity is going in the wrong direction. That you're being tricked by power hungry Satanists.

Society as a whole is on the right path, regardless of what politicians are selling. Sure there are bumps in the road. And there are some misguided souls in search of power. But overall? We are advancing, progressing, doing better than we were yesterday, etc.

Maybe don't take Game of Thrones so seriously.

[rmt]

The misconception is that humanity is going in the wrong direction. That you're being tricked by power hungry Satanists.

Society as a whole is on the right path, regardless of what politicians are selling. Sure there are bumps in the road. And there are some misguided souls in search of power. But overall? We are advancing, progressing, doing better than we were yesterday, etc.

Maybe don't take Game of Thrones so seriously.

power hungry Satanists? LOL.

What is advancing/progressing is TECHNOLOGY (suped up now) - not human nature. Watch human nature (which has not changed) play out in AI.

[Bill Gates]

power hungry Satanists? LOL.

What is advancing/progressing is TECHNOLOGY (suped up now) - not human nature. Watch human nature (which has not changed) play out in AI.

Human nature leans toward positivity, toward love, toward helping each other. Otherwise we simply would not exist.

That is the nature of all living creatures, to help your own species. It's in our DNA.

You see that there are some bad power hungry individuals out there, and you use them to paint that over ALL wealthy people. And that is the misconception. But the reality is that if everyone with an ounce of power were out to get us, we'd all be screwed. Luckily, most people are good natured. Wouldn't you say that your own intentions are positive?

[Bill Gates]

Most negativity in humans is actually found within the poor, not the rich. That's where most of the people who are willing to sell drugs, steal, sell women, murder etc for their own personal gain are. Hence that segment of society being worse off.

[rmt]

Human nature leans toward positivity, toward love, toward helping each other. Otherwise we simply would not exist.

That is the nature of all living creatures, to help your own species. It's in our DNA.

You see that there are some bad power hungry individuals out there, and you use them to paint that over ALL wealthy people. And that is the misconception. But the reality is that if everyone with an ounce of power were out to get us, we'd all be screwed. Luckily, most people are good natured. Wouldn't you say that your own intentions are positive?

So why does the male lion on taking over a den - kill all the cubs? It's to protect himself (from future challengers) and protect HIS lineage.

LOL - are you trying to turn this on me? No, I have no idea what I would do if I were desperate enough. I believe that man has a sinful nature. The constant war throughout history should be a sign to you that man is power-hungry. Why, after all this time, is there still war? Hasn't enough time passed that we've all progressed and learned our lesson? The answer is no.

[rmt]

Most negativity in humans is actually found within the poor, not the rich. That's where most of the people who are willing to sell drugs, steal, sell women, murder etc for their own personal gain are. Hence that segment of society being worse off.

So, it's not human nature itself but his circumstances? If he is well-fed and well off, his nature miraculously changes to philanthropy/kindness. What happens when circumstances happen that affect his prosperity? Does his human nature revert back to negativity/power/wealth seeking?

[Doomsday Dallas]

Money and corporations have always influenced politics. In every country. Since the beginning of time. You'd find it in ancient Rome or Greece.

Hell cartels are influencing politics south of us.

That isn't what fascism is. Fascism goes beyond money. Fascism is being ruled by an evil dictator. Hitler didn't care about money, he cared about ruling the world. That's fascism.


and to this day... people say Fascism is the extreme far right. Incorrect.

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2FFZ6BE3IkgM0PMva70oh6Lhwvv8p9QpJm xifRcebVUL4.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3Ddaec339ae86d0b 902460f7ed65b79f4a1139f37b

[Bill Gates]

So, it's not human nature itself but his circumstances? If he is well-fed and well off, his nature miraculously changes to philanthropy/kindness. What happens when circumstances happen that affect his prosperity? Does his human nature revert back to negativity/power/wealth seeking?
Generally speaking people out to harm gravitate toward bad circumstances, and those out for good will gravitate toward positive circumstances. Again, I am generalizing. But all things equal, two people born under the same circumstances, the one out to do harm will likely find himself in a worse place than the one out to help.

But also, YES, if you are born with a lots of wealth, you will likely be more charitable. This isn't black and white.



Are you of the belief that a wealthy neighborhood houses more evil thoughts than a ghetto? If so you should probably unplug from the internet and go experience these two places for yourself.

[Bill Gates]

and to this day... people say Fascism is the extreme far right. Incorrect.

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2FFZ6BE3IkgM0PMva70oh6Lhwvv8p9QpJm xifRcebVUL4.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3Ddaec339ae86d0b 902460f7ed65b79f4a1139f37b

Fascism would be under the extreme rule of a dictator, far right. Anarchy would be under no rule at all, everyone fends for themself, far left. The two are polar opposite, right and left.

That image is a line though, the political spectrum is a plane.

[Doomsday Dallas]

Fascism would be under the extreme rule of a dictator, far right. Anarchy would be under no rule at all, everyone fends for themself, far left. The two are polar opposite, right and left.

That image is a line though, the political spectrum is a plane.


Yea people got that backwards...

the further you go right... it is less government... which is anarchy

further left is more government... which is authoritarian



Fascism does not mean there is a dictator.



If you know someone who's a fascist, that person is probably into control. A fascist is a follower of a political philosophy characterized by authoritarian views and a strong central government — and no tolerance for opposing opinions.

We all the know the far left to be the party of intolerance and government control... this is common sense. Common sense that today's liberalism has gone full fascist.

Today's far right however, does not mean less government... They are still big on military, strict laws (just not gun laws), harsh on crime.

Both are still authoritarian.


Republicans tend to wage wars & lock people up, Democrats tend to trample on individual freedoms and call it "Social Justice"... pick your poison.

[Bill Gates]

You have it completely backwards. The "CHAZ" Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone was a lawless anarchy situation in Seattle. It was the extreme left. The opposite of that is North Korea, Muslim countries, etc. that is the extreme right.

But like I tried to explain to you earlier, it isn't as simple as a straight line. The political spectrum is 2D plane. You can have a left leaning dictator, or a right leaning dictator. A leftist and and a liberal can be two different things.

It's all semantics though, if you want to declare that anarchy is the right go ahead, but I doubt that catches on.

[bladefd]

Yea people got that backwards...

the further you go right... it is less government... which is anarchy

further left is more government... which is authoritarian



Fascism does not mean there is a dictator.




We all the know the far left to be the party of intolerance and government control... this is common sense. Common sense that today's liberalism has gone full fascist.

Today's far right however, does not mean less government... They are still big on military, strict laws (just not gun laws), harsh on crime.

Both are still authoritarian.


Republicans tend to wage wars & lock people up, Democrats tend to trample on individual freedoms and call it "Social Justice"... pick your poison.

You are truly clueless, aren't you?

[Doomsday Dallas]

You are truly clueless, aren't you?


Far Right = Less Government

Far Left = More Government

Why is that so hard for everybody to understand?

https://www.reddit.com/r/libertarianmeme/comments/1d3ih9l/the_accurate_political_spectrum/

^ The only political spectrum that matters.



instead... this is what the rest of the world believes:

Far Right = Fascism

Far Left = Socialism & Communism

Fascism & Communism & Socialism are pretty much the same f*cking thing.

The Nazi Party, officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party

[Doomsday Dallas]

You have it completely backwards. The "CHAZ" Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone was a lawless anarchy situation in Seattle. It was the extreme left. The opposite of that is North Korea, Muslim countries, etc. that is the extreme right.

But like I tried to explain to you earlier, it isn't as simple as a straight line. The political spectrum is 2D plane. You can have a left leaning dictator, or a right leaning dictator. A leftist and and a liberal can be two different things.

It's all semantics though, if you want to declare that anarchy is the right go ahead, but I doubt that catches on.


The "CHAZ" Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone was just a bunch of idiots.

but... let's say a "CHAZ" happens in North Korea... are those people still extreme left? They would essentially become Far Right Freedom Fighters at that point, would they not?



You can say there is a difference between a left leaning dictator and a right leaning dictator. But I say what's the difference?

[rmt]

The "CHAZ" Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone was just a bunch of idiots.

but... let's say a "CHAZ" happens in North Korea... are those people still extreme left? They would essentially become Far Right Freedom Fighters at that point, would they not?



You can say there is a difference between a left leaning dictator and a right leaning dictator. But I say what's the difference?

2 0f 3 kids in Seattle now - downtown Seattle is dead.

[RRR3]

As a historically left-wing movement, this reading of anarchism is placed on the farthest left of the political spectrum, usually described as the libertarian wing of the socialist movement (libertarian socialism).

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


Doomsday Dallas is BRAINDEAD :roll:

[Bill Gates]

The "CHAZ" Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone was just a bunch of idiots.

but... let's say a "CHAZ" happens in North Korea... are those people still extreme left? They would essentially become Far Right Freedom Fighters at that point, would they not?



You can say there is a difference between a left leaning dictator and a right leaning dictator. But I say what's the difference?

You're problem is that you are only viewing it all on a straight line.

https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-7d0635056e6befcd71e82f2114c73186-pjlq

The difference between a left and right wing dictator would be how the economy is handled.

Chaz would absolutely be extreme left in N. Korea. Pure anarchy is 100% leftist. Law and Order are the Conservative backbone.

[Bill Gates]

As shown on that chart, Obama and Biden aren't even really leftists. They are centrists. The US hasn't ever really seen a true left leaning progressive like Sanders.

If you are looking for a real misconception in society, that's it.

[Doomsday Dallas]

https://youtu.be/ui-Jbaw8rZc


https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/551e1babe4b0aa77af01e45f/1462484387144-SR29J02ZZYCMS9N8D71J/image-asset.jpeg

[Bill Gates]

The Nazis were not even close to socialist. That name was given to them way before Hitler came into the picture.

[Doomsday Dallas]

The Nazis were not even close to socialist. That name was given to them way before Hitler came into the picture.

They were very much Socialist... just not they type of Democratic Socialism that you think of.



This is where it gets mucky. The simple answer first is that Hitler didn't have an actual economic program. He hated communism and capitalism as he believed they were both controlled by a cabal of international Jews trying to destroy Germany. So in a half-baked manner, he formed an embryonic concept of how an economy would work to suit the German Master race. It relied off the belief that German civilization was obviously the greatest, so a German had a right to create and own his creations. But the German was also nothing without his Volksgemeinschaft (national ethnic community) and thus his productivity should benefit the people. Putting profit before one's race was a Jewish trait, and a German would never do that. Sacrifice for the community, whether physical or financial, was expected.

So that leads us to the next question, why call themselves socialists? Well as you somewhat hinted at, Hitler had a very different concept of socialism than what the Marxist dominated definition was at the time. In fact in Mein Kampf he repeatedly attacks the Marxists for corrupting what socialism is and that his definition was the accurate one. But we also need to remember there is a very specific word that preceeds the socialist in his party's name: national-(ist).

Now we know race is paramount to anything Hitler did or believed, and this is no different with his unique view of what nationalism means. To the Nazis nationalism and race are the same thing. Remember the Volksgemeinschaft. To be German meant you had German blood. This is how Hitler justified German Jews as not actually being German. So we see that the socialism he is preaching, to sacrifice all for one's racial community, is very different than what traditional socialism means, which is a solely economic model. In Hitler's mind, socialism as he meant it was a racial and ideological model too.

[Bill Gates]

They were very much Socialist... just not they type of Democratic Socialism that you think of.

Hitler didn't create the name "Nazi" it was around long before him, but going by what you just posted the name "socialist" has to do with race and nothing to do with economy.

[Doomsday Dallas]

Hitler didn't create the name "Nazi" it was around long before him, but going by what you just posted the name "socialist" has to do with race and nothing to do with economy.


I think I just explained that in my previous post... and furthermore I hope the William Cooper video I posted helps elaborate my point on limited government & anarchy being a far right concept.

Does ending the Fed kinda sound like anarchy to you? Idk, does to me.

https://static.news.bitcoin.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/AwG0baxc-blog-featured-image-ron77-paul-end-the-fed.jpg




Paul argues that "in the post-meltdown world, it is irresponsible, ineffective, and ultimately useless to have a serious economic debate without considering and challenging the role of the Federal Reserve."

In End the Fed, Paul argues that the Federal Reserve was created to bail out banks when they got into trouble. He says that this is bad for competition in banking, as it strengthens the big banks.

Paul argues that the Fed is both corrupt and unconstitutional. He states that the Federal Reserve System is inflating currency today at nearly a Weimar or Zimbabwe level, which Paul asserts is a practice that threatens to put the United States into an inflationary depression where the US dollar, which is the reserve currency of the world, would suffer severe devaluation.

A major theme of the work is the idea of inflation as a hidden tax making warfare much easier to wage. Because people will reject the notion of increasing direct taxes, inflation is then used to help service the overwhelming debts incurred through warfare. In turn the purchasing power of the masses is diminished, yet most people are unaware. Under Ron Paul's theory, this diminution has the biggest impact on low income individuals since it is a regressive tax. Paul argues that the CPI presently does not include food and energy, yet these are the items on which the majority of poor peoples' income is spent.

He further maintains that most people are not aware that the Fed—created by the Morgans and Rockefellers at a private club off the coast of Georgia—is actually working against their own personal interests. Instead of protecting the people, Paul contends that the Fed now serves as a cartel where "the name of the game is bailout", i.e. privatized profits but socialized losses.

Paul also draws on what he argues are historical links between the creation of central banks and war, explaining how inflation and devaluations have been used as war financing tools in the past by many governments from monarchies to democracies.

Ron Paul came close... He's the one that could see it for what it is.



Oh and btw... I've called Trump one of the biggest Socialists that the country has ever seen, he became an extreme socialist when the right type of crisis fell in his lap. He socialized trillions upon trillions in that final year.

Trump was a Socialist.

[Bill Gates]

The Fed handles our monetary policy, not our laws.

You know what sounds like anarchy to me? "Defund the Police"

The Police, you know, the guys who actually go out and enforce our laws to prevent all out anarchy from happening?

[RRR3]

The Fed handles our monetary policy, not our laws.

You know what sounds like anarchy to me? "Defund the Police"

The Police, you know, the guys who actually go out and enforce our laws to prevent all out anarchy from happening?
He's dumb as a rock, even other conservatives on here don't take him seriously :lol

[bladefd]

Far Right = Less Government

Far Left = More Government

Why is that so hard for everybody to understand?

https://www.reddit.com/r/libertarianmeme/comments/1d3ih9l/the_accurate_political_spectrum/

^ The only political spectrum that matters.



instead... this is what the rest of the world believes:

Far Right = Fascism

Far Left = Socialism & Communism

Fascism & Communism & Socialism are pretty much the same f*cking thing.

The Nazi Party, officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party

If we use the left-right scale to refer to a government, anarchy is far left. Authoritarian is far right. If we use the left-right scale to refer to economics, communism is far left and corporatism is far right.

Fascism is authoritarian by every book definition. You are conflating terms. Nazis were never socialist even though they use that term in their acronym - their ultimate enemy was always socialism/communism, if you ever read up on Hitler and his Mein Kampf.

[SATAN]

Does ending the Fed kinda sound like anarchy to you? Idk, does to me.



You have strayed too far from reality, my friend. :facepalm

[ILLsmak]

districts / states makes the most sense. Once power consolidates too much, it gets ****ed up. The strange thing is that the two party system is a consolidation of power, no matter how many states there are haha. Even though there are small differences, it's still the same bullshit. It's amazing we have accepted it.

Anarchy is not the answer. True democracy is not the answer. It's hard for me to explain, but IF people can join together and create power structures, I believe they hold onto more power. The only way a democracy could retain power is if once the vote was settled that everyone fell in line with the majority. That doesn't seem like it will happen. However, with people joining together and being useful, creating things the 'whole' needs more than just a singular person, I believe it's easier for them to retain power even if the political tide is against them. There isn't as much of a swing.

True democracy seems very tilted towards a single entity that can sway the masses.

Dunno if what I said makes sense, but in short, the ideal is a bunch of small but consistent power structures that all have to work together to accomplish the end. The single person should find their place within one of the power structures or sympathize with it. I don't see how that is theoretically impossible, either, as such things as benevolent anarchy or socialist democracy are, because even though there is a need for everyone to join together to 'govern,' they aren't really dependent on the government because they have their own power structure.

Who knows lol All I see these days is people getting more and more irrational.

-Smak