The left right dichotomy is retarded...

The left right dichotomy is retarded. The problem is atheist materialism and it's use of scientists and so-called experts as the new priest class. I fear there is no way to bring the sacred back into the lives of the people. That is our only hope.

If the far left and far right could manage to recognize their common enemies and find common ground for a third position, that would work too, but that seems impossible with algorithms running the lives of people with little conscious awareness. Trump was a tremendous failure and now there's no one to get behind. At least the left has the progressive movement, people like Tulsi. All the right has is Rand Paul. We finally got an outsider in office and he turned into a neocon. I fear there really is no turning back without violent catastrophe.

Attached: 1557407881931.jpg (498x565, 41K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Original Wilfred was far superior.

Attached: 1207619_landscape.jpg (480x270, 38K)

What's that show about the kid who has an imaginary friend. That used to come on PBS here on Sundays. I quite liked that.

>The problem is atheist materialism
let's all worship supernatural beings who's existence cannot be proven :)
allahu akbar :))

Science does not require a "priest class" (LMAO what a retard), you traitorous subhuman chirstkike. The thing about science is that anyone can repeat an experiment that has been proven, regardless of their own stature. Whereas your subhuman priests and all the other faggots who have been ruining society continue to spew mentally deficient fairy tales who have been debunked centuries ago without any consequence BECAUSE you have a priest class. Fucking retarded traitor.

It's a show about a dude who can understand his girlfriend's dog "Wilfred". The dog in fact secretly dislikes her current boyfriend and plots to sabotage their relationship. The show is shot on 16mm film and has that charming unrestrained film-student sort of feel to it. It's pretty interesting.

>watching (((tv)))

Attached: 1557454858186.jpg (1536x1400, 971K)

I'm not a Christian. You miss the point. Atheists have replaced religion with materialism, and use so called scientists and experts as the new priest class, as if their word was law from on high.

I know that. I was asking about a different Irish show, about a kid with an imaginary friend.

What. I would consider myself a "don't care" Atheist, but I'm also post-consumerism. I don't care about people who want to polarize me or try to rile me up for shit nobody really cares outside of Twatter and places I don't live
Materialism itself is not the issue, its that there is no school course or "recipe" for spiritualism in western society
we didn't replace Churchgoing with a happy "alternative sunday" singing 80ties songs with brunch or fun (as many hardboiled atheist do)
the issue is, that if you are truly enlightend you would also be post-usual-politicial systems, because they have all their fault and are by definition not based on humanity or any sort of ethics

I wasn't pigeonholeing all atheists, I was just trying to be brief. Indeed, Buddhists are atheists. You could say Taoists are as well.

You also get to another point I made. There needs to be a third position. To me, small, homogenous communities living self sufficiently with a benevolent almost unnecessary government would be ideal. I registered Green 20 years ago.

But yes, these people do replace church with other things. For them, WW2 is the new creation myth, racists are the ultimate evil, Hitler is the devil, and k ky technology can liberate us. There are many non religious people who feel this way.

More like mining Butttorrents.
Sorry I don't know. Maybe someone else does.

>The problem is atheist materialism
just mention the jew

It really wasn't, both versions are sitcoms geared towards betas.

It's bigger than that, but yes.

Attached: 1516476348141.jpg (1280x960, 50K)

> The left right dichotomy is retarded
> Dawkins' Cult versus Jewsus Kike worshippers isn't

Do you realize the irony of your own post? You've made a fool of yourself.

Attached: yin-yang-ios-7-symbol_318-34386.jpg (626x626, 29K)

based Ivan bringing the bants

Attached: Ameridumdumb.png (1179x777, 256K)

What a lot of you will need to learn is why every president ends up following parts of the pre-existing system no matter what they said before.

1. The System is Multi-faceted: it’s success depends on making workable decisions on Economics, National Security, Education, Healthcare, Law on Paper, Law Enforcement in practice, and many more things.
2. The System is High Stakes: make a sufficiently incorrect series of decisions in any direction and results can be catastrophic. Law enforcement too strict? Misery. Too lax? Also misery.

3. The System is Intersectional: the variables are also modulating each other. The Economics effect every material decision in every sphere- the Soviet Union collapsed because the math didn’t work out, the relationship between expenditures and the productive capacity was too dysfunctional to maintain power.

4. The System is Segmented: the ability of executive leadership to be effective is dependent on the entire chain of command and implementation- laws mean nothing without enforcement. Enforcement needs bodies,needs force, needs referees, needs advocates, needs activists. The Mueller Report shows people under Trump ignoring orders- his actions are limited by what people are unwilling to do. Every Segment of the System with value has Leverage in that value, which can be used for it to advocate for or against an order.

5. The System requires Sturdiness: The System has to contend with internal and external threats and stress at ALL times. Republicans stir up tremendous fervor for National Security because if it is found to be lax malevolent entities WILL exploit the vulnerabilities. If the vulnerability is economic, they will strike there, if it is policy, if it is law enforcement, if it is public credibility- doesn’t matter what the vulnerability is, what is visibly vulnerable is what will be targeted.

When you take the parameters into account, the number of ideal actions drops significantly.

You're half right. You make it seem impossible to change anything significant but you miss out the main reason - powerful people will not sacrifice their own power and money for the good of the nation.

Government employees exist primarily to be employed by the government, their actual occupation is secondary to keeping themselves employed by the government. If any President came up with a brilliant plan to cut government expenditure in half while maintaining the same level of everything you listed it would be blocked if it involved a significant number of powerful government employees losing their 6 figure jobs and hordes of underlings.

Assuming that's true, all the more reason for violent revolution. How do you go from being an isolationist, to increasing the military budget to $750 billion and threatening a coup in Venezuela and was with Iran? WTF?

The system is tainted. It's a bad system. The left an right must converge to destroy it.

This as well. If a system coul be implemented to give everyone a job paying $100,000 a year at the cost to the wealthy, it would never happen.

The left doesn't exist anymore in mainstream American politics. The only left leaning centrists have gone underground because they're not progressive enough for the insane purple haired monsters roaming the streets in dildo parades.

You won't get any help from the monsters and most of the left leaning centrists are now seeing out their time on this earth with a morbid depressive haze enveloping their perspective. They won't betray their ideals by going right wing and they don't believe in the whole tree of liberty being refreshed with the blood of tyrants thing.

It's essentially the right vs the monsters with the left leaning centrists who think it would be quite nice if poor people had more money and the government stopped food companies poisoning our food going either way or no way at all.

I think the US military budget is well over a trillion now by the way.

Any effective System is going to be self-serving to a certain extent. Oligarchy is virtually universal because having an asset long-term means having the force to protect it. If you can’t protect it, it will get taken by somebody eventually. A government made up of people too self-sacrificing will have them quickly taken advantage of by more selfish actors.

People love a martyr, but you don’t want them running things. Do you want somebody with a suicidal impulse decide military policy? Do you want a government that would rather die nobly or one that prioritizes survival?

The reason oligarchy rules the world is because greed is more sustainable than suicidal altruism. Greed has too much control right now- everyone feels it. But in giving up some of that control the entire thing becomes vulnerable. Taking that vulnerability too far creates enormous risk, not doing enough does too when political violence is escalating. It’s a tough balance.

I'm not saying department heads should throw themselves in to the slaughterhouse willy nilly, I'm saying that when the President orders a department to be shut down, half of its staff sacked and the other half subsumed by a similar department the head of that department shouldn't be running around looking for political ammunition to use against the President in order to avoid having his department shut down.

No, oligarchy rules the world because of Neoliberal subversion and a rigged monetary system.

You're partially right. Hillary and Obama were center right if you want to get down to it though.

There are real leftists. Nader is a leftist. And I mentioned Tulsi.

You go from isolationist to neo-conservative because all the stressed out large men in military uniforms with countless medal decorating their chest come give you a PowerPoint presentation of who and what is trying to kill you, how, through what means, through what degree of capability. And then some policy nerds will tell you through what level of public support, what we can do to mitigate it on policy, how to market the policies to decision makers and the public, to what degree are decision makers and public informed of the reality of the situation, to what degree are they misinformed, by who, for what purpose, to what effect, on and on and on.

Understand that the executive National Security decisions are by their nature, based on the most privileged and hidden information in the world in many cases. Which means that what decisions are optimal is harder to see with clarity outside of the highest spheres of power.

You think these systems will just do whatever POTUS says even if he ignored all of the new information he just received? Depends on the loyalties of people in the jobs that matter at the end of the day. Look at the giant Chinese agriculture famine last century for a perfect example of a new leader breaking the system to try something radically different and tens of millions suffered and died for it.

You need to graduate to a higher level of discourse here friend, this isn't high school civics. A man of principle would stand his ground. Threats? There are no fucking threats to us, only business interests. Are you insane? How is Venezuela threatening us? And the Iran hit is just more bending the knee to King David.

You sound like meat. Would you give up your job as part of a government spending reduction initiative for the good of the nation?


I'm both but not even left wing. Have fun.

Oligarchy ruled the Romans. Neoliberalism is just the new name of the eternal They. It was the British Empire before the Americans. And in the end it was the Soviets too. Stalin changed the fashion and mission statement of the Czars, but he kept the power and it’s methods, and he kept a lot of the ceremony and splendor, if with a new and modern decor.

The third position is literally National Socialism and it’s offspring ideologies.

>atheist materialism
just say materialism. Atheist is redundant because there's no god to be found in the material world.


Attached: 111.png (777x2777, 905K)


Attached: 222.png (1222x3222, 924K)


Attached: 333.jpg (1222x3555, 677K)


Attached: 444.png (852x550, 517K)


Attached: 555.jpg (777x4444, 658K)


Attached: 611.jpg (1222x4777, 770K)

jewish vs non jewish is the only political stance that matters

I'm an esoteric Taoist friend, thank you for posting.

materialism was effectively created by religious people thinking they could learn about the creator by examining the creation
You could easily be a theist materialist through any number of rationales

I'm aware, I'm trying to get people to come to that on their own. Left economics, socially conservative.

We have proof that Earth is the center of the universe and atheist scientists have denied it through and through. I don’t know whether the atheists are as much an enemy as the jews but the world’s biggest whitepill being buried

>I'm aware, I'm trying to get people to come to that on their own. Left economics, socially conservative.

Attached: you dontsay.png (1186x1356, 480K)

>We have proof that Earth is the center of the universe
Are you retarded?

I believe the only way to right the world is completely destroying the current one.

If the universe is infinite literally anything can be the centre of the universe you retard.

You are thinking of all these countries and interventions as separate, isolated happenings, maybe not even temporally separated.

It’s not the threat of Venezuela.


1. How does Venezeula’s status effect the US? If it collapses, it is unquestionably a giant refugee crisis. Which is a giant public relations crisis, a giant law enforcement crisis, a giant humanitarian crisis, a giant economic crisis, a giant crisis in terms of how the US’s response demonstrates competence or incompetence, constructive or destructive effects.

2. What level of involvement is Russia playing in Maduro’s apparatus? The more control regimes in opposition to the US exert in neighboring countries is always going to be a threat. Proxy conflicts exist at all scales- we show too much weakness it will be exploited. Tl;dr bad neighbors make a bad neighborhood.

We don’t want war with Venezuela. Not really. We want Maduro out and Russia to fuck off engaging with Central and South America on foreign policy. So far we don’t want that enough to perform an outright coup. But if we don’t at least present that threat to Maduro credibly, he’s unlikely to fuck off, and he hasn’t.

Venezuela is shit-testing the US and how involved we’ll get at the same time Iran is, and China is, and Russia is, as non-state terror groups are, as foreign corporations and intelligence services are- all points of stress happen concurrently. You show too weak of a posture and EVERYBODY sense weakness. Like sharks picking up a blood trail. Your violent revolution would send more fronts of hostility in every direction than a majority of people have any ability to grasp. And shit, it’s not impossible you end up with a more enlightened infrastructure after the millions of deaths, but it’s also pretty likely you get Hitler, Pol Pot, Napoleon, Caesar, Stalin, Putin, Gadafi, etc.

>Left economics, socially conservative.
Looking at economic or political ideas is kind of silly. They are responses to situations.
These things are extensions of fundamental philosophies on the nature of the world applied to situations. A person who classifies themselves by these transient things is not really reliable. People who share a method of understanding the world will come to the same conclusions in these things. Thus a person aught to identify themselves by more meaningful criteria such such as 'why do you think you exist', 'what causes a person to have an idea', 'what is the nature of the experience of reality you are having', 'why do people interact with each other', and other such things.
A person who doesnt know their position on this, and knowing your position requires actually being able to defend it, not just having some sense that thats how it is.

Also hitler was right because he did not want to abolish class. Right is everything to the right of 'abolish production class'.

>1. How does Venezeula’s status effect the US? If it collapses, it is unquestionably a giant refugee crisis. Which is a giant public relations crisis, a giant law enforcement crisis, a giant humanitarian crisis, a giant economic crisis, a giant crisis in terms of how the US’s response demonstrates competence or incompetence, constructive or destructive effects.
Build a wall, put up a sign saying fuck off we're full. Don't care about the international response because the US is large enough and geographically diverse enough to be self sufficient barring some esoteric luxuries (also smartphones) that could be replaced within 10 years with enough R&D.

>2. What level of involvement is Russia playing in Maduro’s apparatus? The more control regimes in opposition to the US exert in neighboring countries is always going to be a threat. Proxy conflicts exist at all scales- we show too much weakness it will be exploited. Tl;dr bad neighbors make a bad neighborhood.
Who gives a shit about Russia? They're not even communist anymore. "Global control" is no longer part of their core ideology. The only times the USA has abandoned isolationism before the year 2000 was in response to a direct attack or to prevent global domination by a single power with the avowed intent of global domination including the USA. That's the way it should be.

Note, I'm not denying the possibility that Russia wants to control the world, I'm just saying that it's no longer part of their core ideology. They're not running around claiming the entire world as their de jure lebensraum anymore so they're not a valid target for an isolationist nation.

Multiverse is an outdated interpretation of the inflation theory. Inflation theory arose because atheist scientists couldn’t stand the idea that space is nearly perfectly flat and the empirical evidence all points to creation by a divine being. NASA’s website admits this
“WMAP has determined the geometry of the universe to be nearly flat. However, under Big Bang cosmology, curvature grows with time. A universe as flat as we see it today would require an extreme fine-tuning of conditions in the past, which would be an unbelievable coincidence.”

Burger, your view is too nuanced and correct. Don't you know you're just a "zionist shill" for suggesting there are legitimate concerns for the US? How dare you imply that the US has sovereignty or should do anything at all to try to curb an obvious disaster that is developing.

>stop paying attention to them
>start paying attention to meeeeeee

Are you saying that you can comprehend the scale of a universe created by a perfect creator as anything other than infinite despite you not being on the same level as the creator?

Heresy you fucking retard.

Fuck off the American one was a lot better than the aussie normalfag shit.

>To me, small, homogenous communities living self sufficiently with a benevolent almost unnecessary government would be ideal.
you should read up on Distributism

Attached: chesterton-on-capitalism.jpg (840x840, 112K)

Bullshit. Feminism destroyed the family.

As opposed to the Christian version of Nihilism?
>nothing else matters except jesus

Its another episode of desperate commie wants to latch unto other peoples success.

Attached: 1477106592084.jpg (812x531, 189K)

materialism dosnt say ideas dont exist, it says ideas only exist in the mind, and are generated from the minds experience of reality.

This kind of thinking, that the screen you are reading this on is a real thing and your experience of it, the idea you have in your mind, comes from your senses interacting with this thing. This is a materialist concept.

Most people, are neither materialists or idealists. THey are some mixture of the two. A real, pure, idealist, would reject the existence of the screen in absence of his mind, or maybe he will say reality is a projection of the shared minds of many people. Different kinds of idealists, there is lots of room for imagination when you reject the requirement for any sort of empiricism. :^)

Most people in the modern era, they are idealist in so far as they will tend to have ideas pop into their head and never really consider them, just insist they are correct, and get angry if someone tells them otherwise, even if they provide proof. Idealism is what allows the SJW movement to exist. They have decided people are all equal in an absolute total sense (something no socialist has ever insisted) and therefore, now immune to any possibile considerations to the contrary, they see any unequality as evidence that some sinister force of racist/biggots/society is selectively oppressing things. Just like a superstitious person would think some god or spirit has cursed them or others for their afflictions, the sjw thinks similarly.
It is true, of course, that they selectively use materialist thought processes some of the time. They invent non empirical base assumptions with their idealism, but then use materialist causality to explain everything as a result of them.
Yes most of society is confused.

No, I'm not. Again, I'm an esoteric Taoist, paying attention to the ecology is fundamental. What I'm thinking, is that there is no disaster brewing, that this is all a scheme to extort power from the people. I'm thinking the federal government is too big and powerful. Non of that shit affects me in Kentucky. But inflation does. Wasted money does.

and where did feminism come from?
it was the capitalists pushing for more women in the workforce to achieve lower wages which are necessary to sustain the capitalist model
Feminism grew strongest in the most capitalist society in history.

I know Chesterton and I agree.

>anyone can repeat an experiment
Very racist senpai

This thread is covered in tin foil.

Attached: 1557739527208.png (2400x2400, 67K)

You’re the heretic if you don’t see the lies put in front of you. We’re not some insignificant rock in an infinite universe, we are the center of it. The temperature of the entire universe aligns and splits evenly with us, confirmed by 3 separate satellites. That’s not all that’s aligned too, check this out

“In this paper, by considering the preferred axis in the CMB parity violation, we find that it coincides with the preferred axes in CMB quadrupole and CMB octopole, and they all align with the direction of the CMB kinematic dipole. In addition, the preferred directions in the velocity flows, quasar alignment, anisotropy of the cosmic acceleration, the handedness of spiral galaxies, and the angular distribution of the fine-structure constant are also claimed to be aligned with the CMB kinematic dipole.”

My only enemy is Islam

they can take their fiat money, what good is it? The factories and mines and farms and such are now free from their control, they can go starve with their dollars.
US houses are shit, drywall construction fall apart after a couple decades. They should all just be torn down and replaced with nice comfy commieblocks.

Moone Boy

Russia is in this state because we put them there to some extent. We do not want another Cold War with a giant economic and geopolitical bloc that poses an existential challenge to us.

Russia is not that to us economically or militarily right now. But in a more permissive environment, they could expand more if they felt the desire to. Dugin clearly does, he believes in a Eurasian bloc. And there IS one already, if less formalized than Eurasianianism.

China, Russia and Iran are taking complementary decisions on foreign policy pretty frequently. They all bet on Assad in Syria. They all support Maduro’s claim to power. We’ll see to what extent they’ll back Iran with the sabre-rattling going on.

But to tell you the truth, I think China is the big story and the real picture of what the US needs to contend with. Because isolationism can work, until somebody else with ambition starts their own interventionism

. I think China is ambitious- a modern civilization grown both in opposition AND simultaneously in the image of the American Empire. In opposition through the Chinese party’s Communist roots and heavily Soviet style; in communion through the economic explosion of global free trade deals with US-NATO that have turned them into a global economic force that rivals the US in scope- and so much of it achieved through the ability to undercut capitalism by wide scale corporate espionage and intellectual property theft and the will to mercilessly depress labor wages that are still upward mobility for their hundreds of millions of peasants, kept in line by a truly totalitarian government.

Nonsense. You can't have it both ways here.
>"muh capitalists exploit the workers"
>"muh capitalists masterminded feminism which undermined their control over the workers"

Yes, doube income households are garbage but the argument doesn't make sense. Capitalists didn't voluntarily cede control of their industries and workers. No one in 1930 was playing a 90 year long-game where they assumed that eventually women being taxed would somehow help them. Feminism is specifically socialist/marxist/memegalitarian in nature.

>undermine their control over workers
how? making workers weaker increases their control, and increasing the labor pool makes workers weaker.

Socialist feminism is 'females can wear pants'. It would also have females in the labor force, but in a socialist society set up where EVERYONE is in the labor force.

Socialists dont go around saying 'this thing is bad because capitalists do it'. Historical materialists dont dislike capitalism, capitalism did, and even still can, be a positive force. The system of production changes the society, and then the society changes the system of production. The two are interconnected.

Females in the work force, under capitalism, can have bad consequences. It can also have good consequences. One of the good consequences of it is that it enhances the overall socialization of production which will aid in the sentiment of socialized ownership of production. However it can also undermine the workers power if capitalists have too much of a hold (as they do in the first world currently). If anything first world socialists should push for as many people to not work as possible, to give labor more power.

Actual historical materialist socialists do not say an idea or a principal is good or bad, thats idealist thinking. According to historical materialism even slavery was a good thing, in its time and place, as it was an upgrade over what came before, and had good and bad qualities. One of its good qualities was creating the material conditions for its own abolishment :^)

>that poses an existential challenge to us.
How? The USA is large enough and geographically diverse enough to be self sufficient.

The possibility of disaster is constant. The Chinese famine is one of the most interesting case studies in wide-scale disaster.

The crux of it was just bad farming practice. It’s the civilization scale version of Steve Jobs dying of curable cancer because he took retarded pseudoscience alternative medicine instead of going to a real doctor.

If you implement a really bad policy, you can very easily create a really big disaster. So in practice, if you deviate highly from what works consistently- yeah, you could get something that works better or you could also die.

Profit based society does of course produce extortion practices. But so does ideological society.

If it was not outsourcing everything for profits.
Self sufficiency is something socialists think about, capitalist states just want to make their ruling class (capitalists) as rich as possible.

I'm not stupid or lonely. Stop trying to push your ideology on me.

Here we see the idealist resort to anger and confusion when their reality is challenged by the mere implication that some small section of their thoughts about it are inaccurate.

This makes sense of course, for the idealist reality itself is a projection of the mind, and so being wrong is quite literally world shattering.

I don't think you've read my posts.

Attached: 1555174378305.jpg (959x840, 72K)

I honestly just take every single chance i can to post posts similar to that one i posted. I came up with the idea a few weeks ago and think its very clever.

What is hard to gauge is China’s level of ambition, and that’s where US-NATO risk assessment needs to look and consider possibilities.

There was just the other day a hearing on Huawei, 5G networks, and the Chinese Communist Party’s use of these intermediaries as potential infrastructure and espionage backdoors into western nations.

This is a very real threat, and it’s vectors are multi-directional. It’s easy enough for the US simply ban Huawei hardware for importation where they feel it’s a threat. But that’s not addressing the real scope. Because if our close allies like the UK or France import this hardware, use Chinese infrastructure- now we have to assume that all of our communications with the UK and France are subject to theft on their end of infrastructure.

So, we have to try and convince our pals not to buy the low upfront cost of Chinese 5g because it’s in conflict with our national interests.

This is just one example. There are plenty of others. I agree with developing the US into being as self-sustainable as possible 100%. But we are inarguably bound to world events. The size of our structure is global, and thus American events are global events. And if China exerts as much influence as we do, then the same will be said of Chinese events.

I have plenty of misgivings about this country. I think Iraq was an incredible missstep, though one I understand more than I used to. But I think the Chinese System has a lot of ambition and a lot of tolerance for authoritarianism. A best case scenario is a normalization where the world comes to a consensus we don’t want dictatorships, the worst case scenario is total global war and collapse.

It's an indoctrination tactic and if you had any shame you would kill yourself.

>But we are inarguably bound to world events.
How? The USA is large enough and geographically diverse enough to be self sufficient.

>The size of our structure is global

nice strawmanning, brainlet. thats real jew-tier thinking there
competitive markets drive down prices, yes? thats kind of the entire utilitarian argument for capitalism. this is done by firms constantly innovating ways to increase revenue and decrease costs. Labor makes up the largest cost for the great majority of businesses. Thus firms in a competitve market are constantly trying to minimize labor costs, just as with any other production cost.
Problem: workers are also the bulk of consumers. As wages fall, aggregate demand falls as well as consumers have less purchasing power. This reduces revenue to firms, and hence adds more downward pressure on wages. its the inherent contradiction in free market capitalism because due to the separation of workers from profits derived from capital ownership they only see downward pressure and not corresponding increase from increased profits.
The history of capitalism has been one of expanding labor markets as much as possible in order to increase labor supply and lower labor costs. This is why feminism was pushed, not for some cultural marxist bullshit that didn't exist 100 years ago. Its also why immigration is pushed, and for similar reason why globalization too (to find new labor markets and new purchasers of products).
It wasn't some illuminati conspiracy like you suggest, just simple market forces doing what market forces do.

>indoctrination tactic
what is wrong with trying to indoctrinate people?
the propogandist is the most noble creature, he must do battle with the invisible wills of people, shaping them and molding them. Everyones different, and so he must be careful, and pick wisely the most effective technique. Only the censor has as much an insight on human psychology as the propagandist. Of all people you can trust them the most. After all, how can someone be a successful propagandist if they do not truly understand people? And how could a person, who truly understands, be anything but a helpful friend?

This is why for example, you can simply listen to varshavyanka or sacred war, and know that communism is correct.

>what is wrong with trying to indoctrinate people?
Indoctrination inherently targets the vulnerable, the lonely, the stupid. What you're doing is taking people who need help and offering them help as long as they become your dogs.

There's nothing inherently wrong with this but people with scruples would feel bad about doing it. Do you feel bad about it?

I am helping them by ensuring they are thinking properly. Their weaknesses and vulnerabilities are caused by their material conditions. They should be angry about this, and understand who has harmed them.

You see, they have already been indoctrinated, i am simply counterindoctrinating

Counterindoctrinating is the right word, you're taking them from Cause A to Cause B without improving their lives but giving them an illusory enemy to blame all their problems on.

Would you like to learn how to unindoctrinate people?

You can only be left alone if the world will leave you alone. What, you think we are going to go from global trade with everyone and then just fuck off to farms and factories at the flick of a switch? You think we are free of dependence on all of our partners and all of their channels of leverage? Do you know concretely how much of our reality is economic and how much of it is social, through our global relationships you seem to think we should sever?

Yes, we should bring a lot more labor back into the country. Unquestionably correct. But there are competitive advantages to interacting with others. And if we don’t engage them, somebody else will. And if they then, think we look weak, they may well try to impose their will on us.

Orwell wrote on how Pacificism will always give the world to the Nazis. A country has only so much say if they will be involved with a fight, the fight can always come to you. We got involved in WW2 when it was clear there was no possible escape from its consequences. We can become more isolationist gradually, and with a basic maintainable d health and strength and a preparedness to recognize if the situation is developing into a threat beyond our capabilities. But it’s a lot easier to just prevent the growth of that situation by maintaining top dog status IF we can do so and retain our soul.

Thank you based Canadian. I'm still old enough that I still ask people questions like that in order to try and start a conversation instead of just sitting home alone Googling things by myself. Have an Audrey as a reward.

Attached: 1534293901447.jpg (602x796, 73K)

Humans are self indoctrinating. Its part of being social. They will naturally absorb whatever societies ideas are passively.

>Do you know concretely how much of our reality is economic and how much of it is social, through our global relationships you seem to think we should sever?
No, I'm just laughing at you for giving up isolationism and defending your new stance which is inherently unAmerican because it's non-isolationist. To clarify I don't dislike you, I would love you to be isolationist again, it was cool, but don't spout this bollocks about Global GDP growth and 3% capital non-profit QUANGO bollocks gains by outsourcing 1,000,000 jobs to China you fucking traitor.

>Orwell wrote on how Pacificism will always give the world to the Nazis.
Isolationism isn't pacifism.

>We got involved in WW2 when it was clear there was no possible escape from its consequences.
Yes, Hitler had the avowed intention of conquering the world and then Japan blew up American sailors. Good for you for fucking them. Why did you go on the death spiral of destroying isolationism after that?

>But it’s a lot easier to just prevent the growth of that situation by maintaining top dog status IF we can do so and retain our soul.
Police the world if you want, just stop toppling anti-jewish world leaders because the jews told you to. Do the police serve the people or the masters? If you have a soul do you think the jews care about it? Do you think the oligarchs are aware of it? Do you think anyone anywhere in the chain has the ability and interest to save your soul or do you think everyone wants to use you for their own agenda outside of America?

You know how everyone says "just be yourself" and we all laugh at them for it? America needs to unironically just be itself.

I'm going to assume you're comfortable with who you are and what you do. Good for you. I dislike you for it.

Whoa whoa whoa kike menace. I thought the evil capitalists were there own aristocracy. Why would they care about driving down costs if they're already monopoly owning rich fat cats? This logic isn't consistent.

I'm not suggesting a grand conspiracy either, you are suggesting "muh capitalists did this" while somehow trying to tell me feminists (who often lobby and lobbied against capitalists) were actually devised by the capitalists of old to cheapen labour. Labour costs didn't actually go down, though, the value of money did due to inflation. The cost of labour now is still comparable to cost of labour on the past. Feminism has it's roots in marxism and socialism. The first " women's day" was soviet for fucks sake. What you are suggesting makes no sense for "the capitalist pigs" to have engineered.

>feminism is when females do something

The real disaster is the one they won't talk about. All else is theatre. The reason Iran, China and Russia are threats is because of the Petro dollar. It is the same reason we are after Venezuela, the reason we have sanctioned them into the so-called crisis they are in now. The have the world's largest reserve of oil, and they want to keep it under government control, trade with Russia, and use the money to help the people. The US does not want the citizens to ever realize that the national resources of a country don't belong to the Rockefellers, but instead could belong to the people.

If the Petro dollar goes, then yes, there will be a real economic disaster in the US, and likely most of the Western world will fall with it. But is that such a baby thing? I don't think so. This is are going to need to get very uncomfortable before there is great change in the right direction. It is necessary for the house of cards to fall, and is akin to goin into heroin withdrawals; you have to bite the bullet and suffer it out.

>implying "the people" decided there should be " women's day" from inside the Gulags.
Feminism is a stupid, egalitarian bullshit movement. It pre-existed these regimes but it was weaponized to help destabilize the west.

>Trump was a tremendous failure
Thats a weird way of saying democrqcy is a failure