420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Trickle-down my leg economics by Asshole rimwalker - Mon, 15 May 2017 23:52:29 EST ID:y+jv0J4x No.392174 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1494906749644.jpg -(86525B / 84.50KB, 600x535) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 86525
National Treasure: Ronald Reagan's Wicker Chest

|the story of how Hollywood star and Alzheimer victim Ronald 'the Gipper' Reagan buried the United States' National debt in the form of dubiously-appraised Morgan silver-dollars, in a suitcase he touted as his 'Atomic Football' on the White House lawn, in an attempt to obliterate the Federal Reserve's far-fetched idea of a currency based on |"NOTHING?"| but the 'Audacity of Hope' (exemplified in the military-industrial complex's black-budget, discordant with any payroll immemorially published, and unmonied by any ethical council worthy of determing immorality despite their absent proclination to identify as nihilistic - but to be lifeless, fun-objectors of emotive-experience; as detraction to more solidified, counter-culture ideas of not being the subject physiological harms when protesting Fascist rhetoric and the eventual judicial precedence of corporations as people,... Etc...

Starring Jon Voight in his |Midnight Cowboy| costume, cast as Ronald 'the Gipper' Reagan - (voiced by Jello Biafra), and James Franco as younger Reagan, Vince Vaughn cast as vice-president George H. W. Bush in the spirit of Steve Buscemi's |Boardwalk Empire| Nucky Thompson persona, (voiced by H. Jon Benjamin), Sigourney Weaver as Nancy Reagan - (but sarcastic), flatulent Jack Black as Mikhail Gorbachev, Joseph Gordon-Levitt as John Hinckley, Jr (voiced by Danny Devito) but instead of Jodie Foster as motivation it was 'Sunny,' the prostitute, from J.D. Salinger's |The Catcher in the Rye|, as well as, Philip Seymour Hoffman as Ronald Reagan's savant immersion therapist and alzhiemers psychiatrist, chief advisor and soviet sleeper-agent, and best friend; Tommy Chong as an ostensibly depressed Jimmy Carter, Ben Stiller as a mean Alan Greenspan, Ben Stein as Walter Cronkite, and method-actor Jake Gyllenhall as a repressed homosexual Bill Clinton

Premiering at the Catalina Wine-Mixer next Fall!
Molly Claycocke - Fri, 19 May 2017 09:28:24 EST ID:8Jh2i/ky No.392390 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Secret subtitle:
Why do you hate freedom?
Fanny Fuzzleforth - Fri, 19 May 2017 11:39:52 EST ID:sMjBd+5i No.392392 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Bullshit. Jon Voight is a hardline right wing Republican, huge Trumpsucker. There's no way he'd be involved in such a film.

Commie negro of satanism by James Worthingworth - Sat, 13 May 2017 04:44:59 EST ID:oIu42t+z No.392007 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1494665099698.jpg -(81523B / 79.61KB, 960x959) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 81523
Can the commie negro of Satanism survive the Boston free speech rally?
4 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Sidney Shittingville - Sat, 13 May 2017 11:59:00 EST ID:U19RSd5a No.392030 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1494691140520.jpg -(76404B / 74.61KB, 960x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Nah. Satanism is basically, as far as I understand it, the ideology of debauchery and material excess. Theistic Satanism is one of the most retarded things I've ever heard of but that's an entirely different kettle of fish.
Nell Haffinggold - Sat, 13 May 2017 16:00:11 EST ID:wCbmVqz0 No.392041 Ignore Report Quick Reply
LaVeyan Satanism, which you're referring to, is atheistic. Theistic Satanists believe in the existence of Satan in the same way Christians believe in the existence of God, but see him as being the true 'good guy' and Jehovah as being some kind of deceiver, or perhaps an illusion outright.

However, all kinds of Satanism stress empowerment of the individual and are intrinsically iconoclastic...so they're likely to be socially progressive (to the point of anarchy) and economically conservative (to the point of libertarianism.) LaVeyan Satanists are usually edgy atheists who are really into sex and drugs, while Theistic Satanists are usually bookish metalheads who're trying convince Satan to get them laid. Neither group is likely to be very political though (although let's not forget Sol Invictus' rise-and-fall: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus_Sol_Invictus (Thelemites are a variety of Satanist, although with a strong taboo about being open about that aspect))
Ebenezer Nemmlehall - Sat, 13 May 2017 23:25:38 EST ID:Yh0dEBHV No.392055 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I can see them clashing in that communism focuses on the group, while Satanism, in all it's forms, is very centered on the individual.
Thomas Secklemet - Wed, 17 May 2017 03:23:01 EST ID:NGFmh1BL No.392247 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I don't think Thelema is satanic. I think the way the law is written "do what thou wilt, love under will' essentially consolidates both individualism and collectivism in that if you are operating of your true will, which is achieved through meditative rituals, you will do the right thing by the world you want to create. At least that's my interpretation of Book 4 and the book of the law.

Sorry this part is a stretch I'm not an expert.
Example: A christian won't steal because it is against their collectivist commandments. A satanist will steal if they feel so inclined to because they are here to make the world serve them. A thelemite might steal if they want to be part of a world where people are stolen from.

So people who practice thelema make their own rules, and they sharpen their will to abide by these rules to achieve their "great work", rather than following someone elses rules or denying rules altogether. Not that this philosophy isn't precluded by satanism, but the satanic ideology doesn't support this kind of thing.
Jarvis Tillingway - Wed, 17 May 2017 16:42:23 EST ID:wCbmVqz0 No.392281 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You're not wrong in that that is the exoteric interpretation of Thelema which is intended to be promulgated publicly. If asked, say, by a Christian, I carefully say 'Thelema is not the same as Satan-worship' What you may have overlooked is that the unleashing of the individual egoic Genius is the awakening of the *Promethean* Augoeides; Satan is one symbol or interpretation of Hadit, the 'heart of every star.' Crowley expanded on the relationship between Hadit and Satan a number of times, however, since he was frequently brought to trial over charges of blasphemy, he always couched his statements deeply in metaphor. Also Thelema is distinct from other Satan-inspired religions in that it is not monotheistic (Satan is the only real god, YHVH is an illusion) or dyadic (YHVH is a corrupt demiurge, Satan is a liberator) but triadic (Nu, Hadit, and RHK.) Still, one of those elements is the destructive/egoic force, like the trinity of Hinduism, and unlike the Christian trinity. Also, unlike Theistic Satanism, Satan isn't seen as a superior or external force; Satan/Hadit is the self-most-Selfness of every self.

All modern day Satanic lineages pay some degree of homage to the MT's work, although I would agree that some strains are specifically overly iconoclastic, or anti-cosmic, while Thelema is definitely pro-cosmic, but they all are still under the umbrella of individualist religions drawing inspiration from the idea of Satan.
Also some Satanists who aren't Thelemites would have equally great qualms with stealing as might some Christians. It's been said that there are as many Satanic ideologies as there are Satanists, which makes sense if you think about it.

Shutting up now because it's woefully off topic, as interesting as it is to me.

Fat antifa tranny by Nicholas Gibblesure - Sat, 13 May 2017 21:12:39 EST ID:oIu42t+z No.392048 Locked Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1494724359400.jpg -(117060B / 114.32KB, 1200x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 117060
Antifa are faggots
Thread has been locked
Thread was locked by: Spunky
Reason: 10/10 thread would lock again.
12 posts and 5 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Soviet Psychonaut - Sun, 14 May 2017 23:43:51 EST ID:2TfYxlWB No.392094 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There is literally nothing wrong with being a tranny.
Caroline Parrylire - Mon, 15 May 2017 00:52:34 EST ID:LoF4eMRz No.392096 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yes they are. And postmodernism is cancer. And?...
Cornelius Serrymudge - Mon, 15 May 2017 01:01:10 EST ID:PWnPx6Gb No.392097 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1494824470287.png -(8816B / 8.61KB, 225x225) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Trannys are brave.
Cedric Crendleteg - Mon, 15 May 2017 01:30:33 EST ID:iYYYad4Q No.392099 Ignore Report Quick Reply
No more than any other mental illness anyway.
Cornelius Serrymudge - Mon, 15 May 2017 01:43:19 EST ID:PWnPx6Gb No.392100 Ignore Report Quick Reply
you are on a forum that glorifies drug addiction and senselless violence (WOOO)
it's all to a matter of degree, it's only an illness when it begins to affect one's quality of life
like I could say that your haircut is a dis-ease because it's fuckin' ugly

Anarchism by Hedda Nommleput - Thu, 04 May 2017 11:58:41 EST ID:0HKLpJX/ No.391603 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1493913521824.png -(821891B / 802.63KB, 1081x1036) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 821891
61 posts and 20 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Nicholas Smallwill - Sat, 13 May 2017 16:25:57 EST ID:FqtcG9EC No.392043 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>1) These are not decentralized militias they still have classic command structure. Rojavan libertarian municipalism does not extend to their armed forces.
The command structure still answers to the decentralized system. Maybe I misuderstood the post I was responding to. I don't think there have been a decentralized armed force in history. Also it isn't "libertarian municipalism", I see you have read wikipedia. Serok Apo himself doesn't call it as such, he calls it Democratic Confederalism aka Apoism.

>2) The PKK is not affiliated with the YPG or YPJ beyond simply being Kurdish and is still fully Marxist-Leninist.
You are talking out of your ass. The command of the YPG/J consists mostly of seasoned cadres of the PKK. A notable amount of Kurds in the YPG/J were born in Bakur aswell and crossed the border to help their people. You are tripping. It was the PKK/KCK that actually gave birth to the PYD/YPG/J. Why do do you think Rojava is Apoist in the first place and not just a puppet of the KNC and KDP? This is not just the case in Rojava they are also helping the Ezidis of Sinjar mountains by establishing the YBS, and the PJAK i Rojhilat. Furthermore, the PKK hasn't been Marxist-leninist since Serok Apo's capture. They have literally been apoist for 18 years. There are still old adherents to Marxism Leninism in the party but they do not reflect official party ideology nor the views of the vast majority of party members.

>3) Rojava exist in a tenuous power vacuum between ISIS, the US, and Turkey
They established self-administration after Assad forces left in 2011. There hasn't been a power vacuum there since then. Their armed forces are more than capable of defending their lands especially since major defensive constructions have been created against Turkey.

>keeping Turkey from squashing it with US purchased armaments
Mehmet detected. The HPG has waged a guerilla war since the late 70's in Bakur. What makes you think Turkey can "squash" the revolution when it took their proxy-forces several months to take Al-bab alone? What a joke.
Lydia Pittspear - Sat, 13 May 2017 18:44:25 EST ID:h19uLDR2 No.392045 Ignore Report Quick Reply

IDK, the YPG is a hardened fighting force for sure, and I don't doubt for a second that Turkey will have a lot of trouble subduing them if they choose to launch a full-scale invasion of Rojava. As you say, 'weak' militaries have often been able to best stronger ones in history.

But that's not the point.

If you have to spend almost all of your resources on conducting guerilla war against an invader or occupying force for X amount of years, what's going to happen with the utopian society you envisioned? Deterrence is the first objective for any military force, because wars are devastating to a society, but militias aren't very deterring when you have the most powerful military force of the Middle East, which Turkey does. Turkey can shell and bomb Kurdish communities with impunity, but the YPG is, AFAIK, currently completely unable to return the favor.
Nicholas Smallwill - Sat, 13 May 2017 19:13:11 EST ID:FqtcG9EC No.392046 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>what's going to happen with the utopian society you envisioned?
Social development will happen during wartime aswell but it can only fully be realised once peace is achieved. The PKK and PYD are seeking peaceful alternatives to a long conflict. It is a people who's generations have been born into oppression and war, that spirit cannot be defeated by military or opposing ideological means.

>Turkey can shell and bomb Kurdish communities with impunity, but the YPG is, AFAIK, currently completely unable to return the favor.
Turkey is already leading airstrikes and barrages against kurdish cities and Bakur killing civilians, which only serves to encourage the kurdish freedom struggle. When Turkey launched airstrikes against the YPG/J they responded with counterattacks on the border. Not to mention, Trump decided to arm the SDF with heavy weapons very recently aswell. One of the shipments contained 6 or more howitzers. Turkey is afraid that if Rojava is established the PKK and its HPG will become much more able to launch campaigns in the summers. That's why there is relentless turkish aggression. I'd also like to highlight that Turkey and its troops cannot invade Rojava itself directly because of the Apoist system seeks autonomy within the nation and not direct independence. Should Turkey invade Rojava directly they would be violating international law because they would invade what is internationally recognized as sovreign Syria. Instead they rely on islamist FSA who have shown themselves to be incompetent. If there's atgms and tows in the recent american shipments to Rojava then Turkey's support of the FSA rebels would be effectively negated.
Wesley Gonningfoot - Sat, 13 May 2017 20:20:46 EST ID:0qTYhI0C No.392047 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1494721246909.jpg -(20524B / 20.04KB, 248x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Sidney Brookford - Sat, 13 May 2017 22:21:27 EST ID:h5TaIGNn No.392053 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1494728487364.png -(1293058B / 1.23MB, 511x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>I don't think there have been a decentralized armed force in history.
There have been in the sense of a confederation of different tribes amassing their forces against a common foe. In most cases, even in a stateless society, the military isn't decentralized, but it is non-hierarchical. That quote above from Worshiping Power highlights successful guerilla warfare involving the maroon resistances in Suriname, Jaimaica, and Haiti, against the Dutch, British, Spanish, and French forces.

The author did point out that historically a non-hierarchical military was only more effective when it came to defense, on the attack a hierarchy was better. With the maroon resistances their defeats came from cooptation and gradual transformation into structures they'd originally opposed through economic and political means rather than from military defeat.

Le Pen vs. Macron: The French Decision by Albert Himmerdane - Mon, 24 Apr 2017 23:08:52 EST ID:zm6+bc30 No.391271 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1493089732461.jpg -(30638B / 29.92KB, 460x259) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 30638

Well we are down to "far right" (read: right-of-center) Le Pen and centrist (read: liberal) Macron for the next French president. Personally I'd vote Le Pen if I were a Gaul. What do you guys think? Based on Trump's surprise win I wouldn't bat an eyelid if the "silent majority" votes to the right and Le Pen pulls a surprise win. Think of her what you may, but it cannot be denied she is a captivating orator. I have no beef with Macron either, his policies more or less sound reasonable.
43 posts and 10 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Frederick Missledale - Wed, 10 May 2017 22:19:02 EST ID:Vwoc9qnJ No.391895 Ignore Report Quick Reply
lol, literally the definition of democracy.

what does that say about the US' system...
James Chindledale - Thu, 11 May 2017 22:19:27 EST ID:6POwg5Ik No.391939 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Americans dont like democracy unless, it someway has their self interest, or even if the interest is there, but because they want a while male on power that would take their liberties, they are willing to sacrfice that.
James Chindledale - Thu, 11 May 2017 22:20:46 EST ID:6POwg5Ik No.391940 Ignore Report Quick Reply
meant to say" or even if the interest is not there". nb.
Thomas Mundlecocke - Thu, 11 May 2017 22:56:17 EST ID:Yh0dEBHV No.391942 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Pretty much.
Henry Hipperwack - Sun, 14 May 2017 20:34:34 EST ID:qM9Zeovx No.392085 Ignore Report Quick Reply
yeah, keep the brown man and women down at all costs, even at the cost of your own freedom and financial well being.

Well doesn't this seem familiar? by Oliver Bonderhedge - Fri, 05 May 2017 21:35:15 EST ID:FZwyp5B6 No.391633 Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1494034515227.gif -(1024658B / 1000.64KB, 230x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 1024658

Leading French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron's campaign said on Friday it had been the target of a "massive" computer hack that dumped its campaign emails online 1-1/2 days before voters choose between the centrist and his far-right rival Marine Le Pen.

Macron, who extended his lead in the polls over Le Pen on Friday, is seen as the frontrunner in an election billed as the most important in France in decades.

Some nine gigabytes of data were posted by a user called EMLEAKS to Pastebin, a document-sharing site that allows anonymous posting. It was not immediately clear who was responsible for posting the data or if any of it was genuine.

>Le Pen had met with Putin not long before this.
31 posts and 6 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Charles Dongersetch - Tue, 09 May 2017 01:09:13 EST ID:ar/MUnpO No.391802 Ignore Report Quick Reply
They criticize America! Therefore they're not state run propaganda, they're underground indie journalists that cover the REAL stories!
Archie Fanwill - Tue, 09 May 2017 04:17:27 EST ID:9k6SLa8o No.391804 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Literally, all of those articles present evidence that Russian intervened in French elections. Nice links.
>these articles present information that runs counter to my worldview

So you idiots didn't actually read them, huh.
Hamilton Gebblenet - Tue, 09 May 2017 04:45:03 EST ID:UKSawaYV No.391805 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I Googled that quote, and the only website that I found where it was referenced was a white nationalist website. lol. Go fuck yourself.
Archie Fanwill - Tue, 09 May 2017 18:00:11 EST ID:9k6SLa8o No.391838 Ignore Report Quick Reply
care to show the evidence?
Cyril Creblingfuck - Tue, 09 May 2017 18:07:28 EST ID:T43ZgZvA No.391840 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1494367648244.jpg -(34747B / 33.93KB, 600x450) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Putin Did It by Cornelius Blythewater - Sun, 16 Apr 2017 09:03:21 EST ID:MyuDzBUL No.390898 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1492347801213.png -(241536B / 235.88KB, 704x949) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 241536
What are you guys' thoughts on this new phenomena of blaming everything on Putin/Russia? It seems to me that Trump's victory has caused the Democrats to absolutely lose their minds. All rationality and logic has been thrown out the window, and the party line has become "Blame Russia." British conspiracy theorist Louise Mensch has been catapulted into stardom because of this, being dubbed a "Russian Expert" by the New York Times, and Liberal media clamoring over her every word.

Is this the death of the Democrats? As a Leftist, this has made it really difficult for me to reconcile with them. Pic related, Louise accusing Antifa of being Russian shills.
140 posts and 46 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Samuel Chenderstock - Mon, 08 May 2017 08:25:58 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.391765 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I enjoy how visibly upset you become when you see my speak. I enjoy looking down on people like you, because you can't appreciate others having a deep discussion and coming to an agreement. I'm here to speak with other intelligent people like Phyllis, yet here you are drawing my attention just so I can look down on you for 2 minutes and then continue about my day.
Charles Pumbletare - Mon, 08 May 2017 08:41:54 EST ID:9k6SLa8o No.391768 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>visibly upset


I enjoy how you think anyone here sees you as anything but a joke. If your posts upset me, I'd put you on ignore, jackass.

Phyllis Lightbanks - Mon, 08 May 2017 15:12:57 EST ID:wCbmVqz0 No.391786 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>I'm so blatantly and egregiously egotistical that I think I can say 'look down on people like you' like twelve times in a two line post and not think I am an insane egomaniacal piece of shit
Doris Soffingtut - Thu, 11 May 2017 23:08:17 EST ID:TR4Xg3rk No.391943 Ignore Report Quick Reply
just fyi you're responding to X8.
Betsy Burrywud - Mon, 15 May 2017 09:47:37 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.392107 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I mean I love it, so they can keep it coming. I'm quite used to people telling me I'm an egomaniac, yet I'm one of the most humble people I've ever met. Humility and strong self-confidence really aren't contradictory. But, people neither appreciate humility, nor confidence, and shit on people who enjoy either/both, so fuck people and their small-minded opinions. I mean, I can just tell who's opinion is based in facts and reason and who's is based on the feelings of their fragile ego, and of course all my vehement opponents got the ego because anybody who enjoys facts and rationality can enjoy conversing with me. I mean, look at what happened here; I shared an opinion, somebody shared a mountain of evidence with me trying to alter my opinion, I happily accepted it and thanked them, a true show of humility, and then a bunch of people jumped in and started personally insulting me. Fragile egos, man.

Played like a damn Fiddle: War with Syria by Thomas Fonnercheg - Thu, 06 Apr 2017 22:54:09 EST ID:MBZ+rwoO No.390493 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1491533649128.jpg -(26523B / 25.90KB, 480x360) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 26523

>The U.S. military launched 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian military airfield late on Thursday, in the first direct American assault on the government of President Bashar al-Assad since that country’s civil war began six years ago.

Thank God we voted for Trump, who will make sure we never come close to war with Russia!
95 posts and 25 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
lumpen !rGOAfuB3jA - Tue, 02 May 2017 16:29:52 EST ID:4p8RVaYR No.391557 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What? Gaddafi was fucking batshit in his later years dude.
Nathaniel Smallbanks - Wed, 03 May 2017 11:45:00 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.391583 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>I didn't/won't watch the video. I just don't care enough about world politics.
That's all you had to say.
William Pupperchutch - Fri, 05 May 2017 00:04:40 EST ID:1JRPvO1Q No.391615 Ignore Report Quick Reply
what? i did, and that video made absolutely no relevant points regarding...

ah! got me again!!
Samuel Chenderstock - Mon, 08 May 2017 08:27:47 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.391766 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>I didn't/won't watch the video, please stop bringing attention to that point.
That's all you had to say, dude. Idk why you keep trying to dance around.
Charles Pumbletare - Mon, 08 May 2017 08:38:08 EST ID:9k6SLa8o No.391767 Ignore Report Quick Reply
He said he watched the video, and that it wasn't even relevant to your point. Having some experience of your posting habits, I'm inclined to believe him. I'll take his word that it's not worth watching the video before I'll take your word that it's worth watching, since you have successfully managed to become a notorious bullshit artist on an anonymous imageboard and a complete stranger's word is worth infinitely more than yours.

Brexit means Brexit by Shit Dartham - Fri, 05 May 2017 11:37:20 EST ID:T43ZgZvA No.391622 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1493998640664.png -(238681B / 233.09KB, 800x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 238681

Basically the Brits have been told that scrapping much of the UK's legal relationship with the rest of the world would be easy. It seems about half of them believed it. Shit is getting real though now that actual trade-offs need to be made.
4 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Fuck Collyhall - Fri, 05 May 2017 22:55:50 EST ID:rimhuf1n No.391637 Ignore Report Quick Reply

EU members acting in their own interest is kinda the exact opposite of the meaning of European Union
Charles Goddlegold - Fri, 05 May 2017 23:32:24 EST ID:0B9qh6RW No.391640 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Personal and collective interests often coincide in the short term and almost always coincide in the long term.
Nathaniel Sebbletadge - Sat, 06 May 2017 07:48:15 EST ID:IaepfqX2 No.391666 Ignore Report Quick Reply

What? What do you base that assertion on? If anything, conflicting interests are pretty much omnipresent throughout the world, including the EU.
Phineas Bardham - Sat, 06 May 2017 11:07:53 EST ID:T43ZgZvA No.391672 Ignore Report Quick Reply
An external enemy has been the depressingly common answer to uniting disparate groups since, like, the dawn of human history.
Yeah but people, even on the macro - country - union - scale are every now and then just retarded.
Matilda Clavingtere - Sat, 06 May 2017 21:08:00 EST ID:T43ZgZvA No.391712 Ignore Report Quick Reply
just a random addition nb

Democrats Pick Perez, Set To Lose On Purpose All Over Again by Hannah Gizzlelock - Sun, 26 Feb 2017 12:40:16 EST ID:i1eo8CqX No.388457 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1488130816178.jpg -(56885B / 55.55KB, 750x663) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 56885
>Former Labor Secretary Tom Perez was elected as the chair of the Democratic National Committee, DNC, on Saturday, defeating Rep. Keith Ellison.
>The son of Dominican immigrants is seen by many as an establishment pick. Receiving support from former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, Perez supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership, TPP, and believes the 2016 Democratic Primary was not rigged against Sen. Bernie Sanders.
>Perez, who was born and raised in Buffalo, New York, was seen as the preferred choice for Obama and former Democratic Party presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
>Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the U.S. Congress, was backed by progressives within the party, including Sanders and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren.
>Prior to Perez's election, members voted to reject a measure that would have restored a ban on corporate lobbyists donating to the party. A number of speakers were present at the vote, urging the party to unify.

So after suffering the biggest and most embarrassing electoral defeat in American history - specifically because they spat all over their progressive wing to embrace the establishment in an anti-establishment election - the Democrats once again choose the corporate establishment over the rank-and-file. Just as it looked like the Sanders candidate would rise on an unexpected tide of enthusiasm, the Clinton candidate slides in at the last moment to snatch everything away, this times with the help of the Israel hasbara squad.

Make no mistake: the Clinton wing of the party would rather lose forever than let this country shift even a little bit to the right. They are losing on purpose, and it is getting obscene.
254 posts and 29 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Lydia Hamblenack - Thu, 04 May 2017 00:31:10 EST ID:sMjBd+5i No.391595 Ignore Report Quick Reply
K, so you wouldn't want someone who has no medical experience preforming surgery on you, but have no problem with someone who has no expetience of any sort in governing, governing your country?

Talking about how medicine and politics are different fields intentionally ignores the point. Which is that you generally don't want people with no idea what the hell they're doing in charge of important, life or death tasks.
Doris Sunkinshaw - Thu, 04 May 2017 11:40:48 EST ID:I3FnSNZB No.391601 Ignore Report Quick Reply

You have to go back to the original claim he made >>391398

>Perez, Clintonbots and the DNC smear the Democratic candidate for a major mayoral race in Nebraska.

>Why? Because he's backed by Bernie and Our Revolution.

He was playing the victim AGAIN. The big old bad DNC ruining the chance at the Revolution EVERY American wants but won't vote for.

When really the candidate was getting push back because he's personally pro-life. That's it, no Conspiracy against Bernie bullshit.

>you're the problem with the democratic party today. any criticism you see,

You're a fucking moron.
Esther Sucklestock - Thu, 04 May 2017 11:57:08 EST ID:kXkaFVu/ No.391602 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>You have to go back to the original claim he made >>391398
That's a different post, from a different person, making a different point.

>You're a fucking moron.
...and you're calling me a moron? lol. nicely articulated defense of your stance there.

interesting how all you've done is attack other posters and haven't contributed to the discussion about how the democratic party is alienating its voter base by pushing a platform that they don't believe in, and would instead rather attack candidates that actually have a shot of defeating incumbent repub- oh.
James Goodhall - Thu, 04 May 2017 12:41:31 EST ID:z4vzqjx9 No.391608 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>When really the candidate was getting push back because he's personally pro-life.
And yet this didn't seem to be such a dealbreaker when Clinton picked Kaine as her VP, despite him walking basically same path as Mello. The article made that clear, were you the type of person that actually reads articles. In fact, many of these same critics were perfectly happy to defend Kaine from the exact same criticisms.

All during the election cycle, whenever someone questioned Hillary's hawkishness or Wall Street ties, establishment Dems cried about "purity tests". Whenever someone pointed out one of Kaine's conservative stances, cries of "party unity". Whenever someone questions the party's steady rightward drift over the past decades, it was "strategic" or "pragmatic" to reach across the aisle, better to compromise and win then maintain purity and lose. Bernie was a monster for elevating his "single issue" above all else. "The perfect is the enemy of the good" and all that.

But when it comes to anything having to do Bernie? Purity must be maintained, party unity be damned, no compromise on this single issue, who cares if we win, anything less than perfection on this issue isn't good enough. Suddenly ideological purity trumps pragmatism.

Whether this is due to conspiracy or simple idiocy, this is transparently contradictory behavior that perfectly illustrates why the Democrats have become such a failure of a party.
Lillian Creblingforth - Thu, 04 May 2017 13:36:23 EST ID:9k6SLa8o No.391610 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>"The perfect is the enemy of the good" and all that.

Man I hate that stupid fucking line. The idiots who parrot it are making "not as bad" the enemy of "better".

Trump's #1 source of info admits he's fake news. by Frederick Geshlone - Mon, 17 Apr 2017 22:20:19 EST ID:6T2FD4LE No.390972 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1492482019370.jpg -(88796B / 86.71KB, 1035x580) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 88796
57 posts and 8 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Nigel Cenningchork - Mon, 01 May 2017 16:39:39 EST ID:6POwg5Ik No.391539 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Let's be real here, you are talking out of your ass.
Martin Pobbergold - Mon, 01 May 2017 17:01:59 EST ID:WQQ+NOb5 No.391540 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>And when the fuck did I reference FAIR?
...as usual, you don't even read the sources you provide, let alone comprehend them in any intelligent way.
Polly Savingfoot - Mon, 01 May 2017 17:23:04 EST ID:I3FnSNZB No.391541 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Your sources are laughable (Washington Times? HAH!), and we all know now there will not be a wall now...so....there's your counter evidence.

Stop believing Donald Trump you ridiculous snake-oil customer.
Nathaniel Smallbanks - Wed, 03 May 2017 11:59:45 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.391585 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well, no one offered anything to counter anything I said, while I offered multiple sources about multiple statements, so, idk what to tell you, I'm awaiting substance.
Oliver Devinghetch - Wed, 03 May 2017 13:52:03 EST ID:I3FnSNZB No.391586 Ignore Report Quick Reply

You mean a counter like the budget that Trump is going to sign that says "THERE WILL BE NO WALL?"

You actually need people to post links of what is common knowledge to even the most passive news watcher?

Also, your sources are bottom of the barrel Right Wing propaganda shit, and always are. Your "multiple sources" could be a high multiple but are worthless if they're completed shit.

You want substance, go watch Republican after Republican from Graham to Krauthammer to Limbaugh crying like a baby about how the Dems got everything they wanted in the budget and Trumpkins got NOTHING.

No wall.

Political Stuckness by William Clirrybanks - Mon, 24 Apr 2017 17:25:37 EST ID:Yh0dEBHV No.391238 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1493069137803.jpg -(544297B / 531.54KB, 1200x803) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 544297
I have noted a few things that seem relevant to each other -

1 - Polls indicate that 96% of Trump voters would vote for him again. Meaning, he has a pretty impenetrable base.

2 - The most popular politician among Democrats right now is Bernie Sanders. He is not a Democrat though.

4 - The new head of the DNC was reported to think Obama was the reason the election was lost, and not Clinton generally sucking.

Welcome to the four things that will fuck our politics for the next few decades.

Trump, despite all predictions, can simply do no wrong with his supporters. Meanwhile, a man that is extremely popular with the Dems doesn't even belong to that party. And, going by the DNC's recent (in)actions, they think more Clinton is pretty much the solution to everything. Despite Bernie being a far stronger candidate among their own people.

So, we will see the GOP slaughter the Dems next year. Probably even see a few states go red. Mostly because the DNC refuses to do anything but pump the same bullshit neo-liberalism at us. This will result in such an imbalance, that we could see the GOP be the only party on some ballots in some states. Dems being 100% absent on it as they failed to run anyone. This will create a hegemony that will last decades if not more.
41 posts and 4 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Eliza Gemblebanks - Sat, 29 Apr 2017 17:00:28 EST ID:i1eo8CqX No.391460 Ignore Report Quick Reply
This is not a very good analogy. At all. You can keep banging your head against this wall if you want but all the Clinton adoration in world isn't going to make this a good analogy. nb
Phoebe Draddleshaw - Sat, 29 Apr 2017 17:08:02 EST ID:XqOr0TAj No.391462 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1493500082583.jpg -(182983B / 178.69KB, 720x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Are you trying to accuse Eliza or I of voting for Trump? If you want to blame Trump voters go ahead but it only makes the situation worse. If you're trying to blame people who didn't vote for Trump but still put some blame on Hillary for having a shit campaign then kindly pull your head out of HRCs ass and look around you.

Despite having popular support across the nation Hillary still lost do to critical defeats in the midwest. Disenfranchised poor white old industrial union voters were the key demographic lost there. You can blame and chastise them for voting trump if you want but that doesn't solve the problem now does it? It only entrenches the right's politics of resentment and ensures future defeats in that demographic. These people used to vote democrat and key democratic policies such as Single Payer healthcare and stronger labor protections are in their material interests. But they voted against those material insterests because Clinton niether promoted nor represented those policies, nor did she make any attempt to approach these voters or even enter their states.

tl;dr Punching down on voters is counter productive in a democracy.
John Crenkinham - Mon, 01 May 2017 10:34:54 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.391503 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Trump, despite all predictions, can simply do no wrong with his supporters.
Idk where you're getting that from. When he struck Syria, Republicans everywhere were in an uproar of fury since most Republicans want us out of the ME. I have no doubt in my mind that more than 4% of his voters were upset.

>they think more Clinton is pretty much the solution to everything. Despite Bernie being a far stronger candidate among their own people.
Ah, idk where you're getting that from. As far as I've seen, and again, these are just our personal experiences here, but it appears that the Dems have given up on Hillary and Bernie on the whole. If anything, I see unanimous support for Michelle Obama these days, as hilarious as that sounds, and I see a few die-hard Bernie fans still preaching the 'Return of the Jedi' Bernie 2020 bullshit, but I mean on the whole I just see Dems crying about Trump constantly rather than talking about who their next candidate will be.
Like just the other day Trump undid Michelle Obama's nightmare of a school lunch program of which I've seen nothing but absolute disdain from parents, but that day the Dems had nothing to say except 'How dare Trump ruin Michelle's legacy! How dare Trump try to make our kids unhealthy! Michelle Obama 2020!'

>So, we will see the GOP slaughter the Dems next year. Probably even see a few states go red. Mostly because the DNC refuses to do anything but pump the same bullshit neo-liberalism at us.
I whole-heartedly agree, and honestly this worries me a lot. It's like, are the Dems just keep going to pull this same corrupt bullshit even into 2020? Are the Republicans just going to get stronger and stronger, and if they do, are they going to become more openly radical/reactionary?
Phyllis Goodman - Tue, 02 May 2017 19:00:52 EST ID:eOtIklGT No.391560 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>most Republicans want us out of the ME.
What an absurd and baseless assertion. It's like you think support for the Bush Doctrine was manufactured out of thin air on 9/11 and evaporated when he left office. Would that include the constituents of John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who never met an intervention opportunity they didn't like? Ed Royce, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, another enthusiast for bombing Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Yemen? Tom fucking Cotton, who wanted to get us into Iran on top of everything else? If Republican voters didn't agree with these guys they'd vote them out, in theory. Probably the only Republican in power at the federal level who's even vaguely anti-interventionist in the Senate is Rand Paul, and even he's not nearly as staunch as his wingnut father. It's only in the frothfest of a Presidential primary debate, with fuckers like Cruz and Rubio clamoring to say things like "let's see if sand turns to glass," that Rand looks like a peacenik.

>If anything, I see unanimous support for Michelle Obama these days,
What? You mean, the one who's specifically rejected calls to run for office?

>and I see a few die-hard Bernie fans still preaching the 'Return of the Jedi' Bernie 2020 bullshit,
My God, it's just as I feared. X8 gets all his political news from Dank Meme Stashes on Facebook.

>but I mean on the whole I just see Dems crying about Trump constantly rather than talking about who their next candidate will be.
Yes, this is how the government works. Elections happen every single year, including some special federal elections this year and then the whole House of Representatives during the midterms, and in the meantime you deal with the existing agendas in the legislatures and judiciary. We call this principle the separation of powers. As yet, partly due to Bannon's factioneering and partly due to "crying" by Democrats, the GOP have gotten none of their major priorities through either house of Congress, except for confirming Gorsuch to the SCOTUS bench. Did you think the opposition party just goes home and spends the next two and a h…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
William Chunkinlere - Wed, 03 May 2017 09:39:21 EST ID:xxKoAEbr No.391575 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>It's only in the frothfest of a Presidential primary debate, with fuckers like Cruz and Rubio clamoring to say things like "let's see if sand turns to glass,"
This in itself proves how retarded X8's statement was. If most Republicans wanted us out of the ME then their primaries wouldn't constantly devolve into contests of who can make the most over-the-top threats of violence against the ME.

<<Last Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5
Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.