Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
I love how you always say “they” as if you’re in a thread where most people agree with your constant race-baiting…look around, dickhead, there is enough empirical evidence by now that you should know the majority of us do not think you’ve got anything useful to say 
And for the record, I used they specifically as those in the video, They've shown time and time again That what they say doesn't mean a damn thing. It's always Rules for thee but not for me, for them. But if you consider yourself among them, Then you are apart of the problem.
Other than that, you are a dog barking at nothing for me.
@Ravagerblade What is the last thing you said that you now disagree on from simple recall ?
Back to anime villain speech?
A.i. that can kill us≠a.i. that is sentient 
It's the same with a.i. expressing emotions. It'll be more akin to a psychopath performing emotions than anywhere close to real emotions.
The a.i. copies human behavior. It doesn't feel anything because it's not alive. Imagine a.i. as a very sophisticated mechanical computer whose movements are determined by a very well thought out algorithm.
You or others not being able to imagine these processes taking place in the background doesn't mean they are not happening. Calling a.i. potentially sentient is like a medieval person seeing electric light and thinking it's magic purely because they have no idea how it works.
Lmao.
Don't underestimate our capacity to be dumb enough to create stuff that can kill us
Don't underestimate our capacity to be dumb enough to create stuff that can kill us
It's the same with a.i. expressing emotions. It'll be more akin to a psychopath performing emotions than anywhere close to real emotions.
The a.i. copies human behavior. It doesn't feel anything because it's not alive. Imagine a.i. as a very sophisticated mechanical computer whose movements are determined by a very well thought out algorithm.
You or others not being able to imagine these processes taking place in the background doesn't mean they are not happening. Calling a.i. potentially sentient is like a medieval person seeing electric light and thinking it's magic purely because they have no idea how it works.
This is why nobody takes you seriously - we have a conservative president and a Republican majority in Congress who consistently ignore the Constitution and all established legal failsafes, can you at least have the presence of mind to realize that anything you don’t like is happening because of decisions made by YOUR elected officials?? Democrats have basically no power or influence because of their nemeses across the aisle, but you’ve let your leaders convince you that these ineffectual pussies are in fact dangerous bogeymen…there’s nothing your crowd loves more than getting duped by these con men over and over again, it’s starting to get really pathetic 
A.i. that can kill us≠a.i. that is sentient
Also Mate , it's not you with you that will taught me how AI works or how humans work sorry. You need to understand that sentience is not some magic shit happening out of nowhere, it's the result of a biological and physical process. It's therefore reproductible if we manage to understand it. You are the one being medieval about it and missing the process here, I'm being very mechanical about this.
So Trump imposed semi-conductor export restrictions on China and black listed Chinese firms.
China then imposed restrictions on export of Rare Earth Elements.
Trump - how dare China put restrictions on "World captive" (world captive here means rare Earth minerals resources which China has) and imposed additional 100% Tariffs on China, taking total to 130%.
Such a bat shit crazy man child.
This guy doesn't care about US economy or World economy. Heck, he doesn't even understand economy.
Rumours are that he's signing personal business deals (including crypto deals) with nations on the backend to give them some leeway in Tariffs imposition. That's some next level corruption at the cost of his own citizens.
If any award he deserves then it's "Nobel Clown Prize"
China then imposed restrictions on export of Rare Earth Elements.
Trump - how dare China put restrictions on "World captive" (world captive here means rare Earth minerals resources which China has) and imposed additional 100% Tariffs on China, taking total to 130%.
Such a bat shit crazy man child.
This guy doesn't care about US economy or World economy. Heck, he doesn't even understand economy.
Rumours are that he's signing personal business deals (including crypto deals) with nations on the backend to give them some leeway in Tariffs imposition. That's some next level corruption at the cost of his own citizens.
If any award he deserves then it's "Nobel Clown Prize"
@Logiko I don't know if you called christianity idealism, but I don't know why some people call it that, I was listening to preaching today and it was debunking the idea that it's all in your mind and "mind over matter"
I'm reading a book about the revolutions of 1848 and this part is pretty interesting to share here:
"Socialist ideals and workers movement
As in Britain, the rise of industry also saw the rise of socialist ideas and a labour movement. This saw the transformed working class increasingly called the “proletariat” by most socialists at the time, but it must be stressed that this was in a pre-Marxist way as industry was not widespread (even if its impact – particularly via competition with Britain – was).
As social conditions changed, so did ideas. Associationism started to grow within the working class alongside strikes and unions, both were illegal and so many “mutual aid” groupings were also “resistance societies.” Yet workers did more than just survive or resist, they hoped for a better future. Faced with the rise of wage-labour, the idea of Associationism – co-operation – was raised by the workers themselves in 1830 as alternative (first by printers, then by other groups of workers). This was reflected in many works, including early feminist Flora Tristan’s The Workers’ Union (1843) as well as in practice, such as the “mutualist” societies of the militant artisans of Lyons.
As in Britain, what was latter termed Utopian Socialism arose during the 1820s and 1830s. This was focused around a few critics of current society (notably Fourier and Saint-Simon) who urged the creation of ideal communities to present an example the rest of society would follow. These thinkers were influential but fundamentally authoritarian in both tactics and aims. The followers of Fourier and Saint-Simon participated in the revolution, along with Cabet and his Icarians – named after his famous utopian novel Voyage to Icaria (1840).
Then there were the Insurrectionists (Blanqui and Barbès) who aimed at the seizure of power by coup de main, followed by the “dictatorship of proletariat” as rule of insurrectionists.
The most influential at the time were the Jacobin-Socialists, which combined French Republicanism with a programme of state-aid to workers associations. As expounded by Louis Blanc in his Organisation of Labour (1839), competition from these workers association – social workshops (ateliers sociaux) – would drive private industry out of business, eventually replacing competition with state planning. However, as a reformist he saw this as benefiting all classes and so all classes – as citizens of the republic – would be involved in the organisation of labour.
Finally, there was Mutualist-Anarchism as advocated by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (he picked up the term mutualist while staying in Lyons in the early 1840s). Unlike the other socialist thinkers, he was working class (forced to leave school to become a printer by trade). Proudhon is essentially a critic of the current system, with alternatives sketched in passing in such works as What is Property? (Three memoirs – 1840, 1841 and 1842) and System of Economic Contradictions (1848). He opposed both capitalism and what he termed “Community,” namely the visions of the utopian socialists. Instead, he advocated “universal association” – a form of market socialism based on workers control of production. Likewise, he opposed Blanc’s ideas as well as what passed at the time for “communism” (rightly so, as Kropotkin later said). In spite of invoking the term “revolution” all the time, he was fundamentally a reformist and saw the organisation of credit as the means to the organisation of labour (i.e., a federated system of workers’ producer, credit and consumer co-operatives)
So by 1848 there were both a workers’ movement and socialist ideas: authoritarian and libertarian, revolutionary and reformist. This meant that any revolution would inevitably bring these aspirations into conflict with existing system. This was expressed during 1848 between the Republic and what radicals called the “Social and Democratic Republic” (la République démocratique et sociale), between a political (bourgeois) revolution and a social revolution. "
@RyoQ what I mentioned about authoritarian and libertarian socialists ^
Also @Logiko Blanqui namedrop in the middle, who Anark and Rosa Luxembourg said inspired Lenin, if you remember his name from a meme I shared before
And seeing what Blanqui wanted, it makes sense Lenin would refuse to be associated with him, if he didn't it would confirm his fraud and the fraud of authoritarian socialists, who want their party to take the role of the capitalists, and rule, not to actually give people ownership of the means of production
Post automatically merged:
I'm reading a book about the revolutions of 1848 and this part is pretty interesting to share here:
"Socialist ideals and workers movement
As in Britain, the rise of industry also saw the rise of socialist ideas and a labour movement. This saw the transformed working class increasingly called the “proletariat” by most socialists at the time, but it must be stressed that this was in a pre-Marxist way as industry was not widespread (even if its impact – particularly via competition with Britain – was).
As social conditions changed, so did ideas. Associationism started to grow within the working class alongside strikes and unions, both were illegal and so many “mutual aid” groupings were also “resistance societies.” Yet workers did more than just survive or resist, they hoped for a better future. Faced with the rise of wage-labour, the idea of Associationism – co-operation – was raised by the workers themselves in 1830 as alternative (first by printers, then by other groups of workers). This was reflected in many works, including early feminist Flora Tristan’s The Workers’ Union (1843) as well as in practice, such as the “mutualist” societies of the militant artisans of Lyons.
As in Britain, what was latter termed Utopian Socialism arose during the 1820s and 1830s. This was focused around a few critics of current society (notably Fourier and Saint-Simon) who urged the creation of ideal communities to present an example the rest of society would follow. These thinkers were influential but fundamentally authoritarian in both tactics and aims. The followers of Fourier and Saint-Simon participated in the revolution, along with Cabet and his Icarians – named after his famous utopian novel Voyage to Icaria (1840).
Then there were the Insurrectionists (Blanqui and Barbès) who aimed at the seizure of power by coup de main, followed by the “dictatorship of proletariat” as rule of insurrectionists.
The most influential at the time were the Jacobin-Socialists, which combined French Republicanism with a programme of state-aid to workers associations. As expounded by Louis Blanc in his Organisation of Labour (1839), competition from these workers association – social workshops (ateliers sociaux) – would drive private industry out of business, eventually replacing competition with state planning. However, as a reformist he saw this as benefiting all classes and so all classes – as citizens of the republic – would be involved in the organisation of labour.
Finally, there was Mutualist-Anarchism as advocated by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (he picked up the term mutualist while staying in Lyons in the early 1840s). Unlike the other socialist thinkers, he was working class (forced to leave school to become a printer by trade). Proudhon is essentially a critic of the current system, with alternatives sketched in passing in such works as What is Property? (Three memoirs – 1840, 1841 and 1842) and System of Economic Contradictions (1848). He opposed both capitalism and what he termed “Community,” namely the visions of the utopian socialists. Instead, he advocated “universal association” – a form of market socialism based on workers control of production. Likewise, he opposed Blanc’s ideas as well as what passed at the time for “communism” (rightly so, as Kropotkin later said). In spite of invoking the term “revolution” all the time, he was fundamentally a reformist and saw the organisation of credit as the means to the organisation of labour (i.e., a federated system of workers’ producer, credit and consumer co-operatives)
So by 1848 there were both a workers’ movement and socialist ideas: authoritarian and libertarian, revolutionary and reformist. This meant that any revolution would inevitably bring these aspirations into conflict with existing system. This was expressed during 1848 between the Republic and what radicals called the “Social and Democratic Republic” (la République démocratique et sociale), between a political (bourgeois) revolution and a social revolution. "
@RyoQ what I mentioned about authoritarian and libertarian socialists ^
Also @Logiko Blanqui namedrop in the middle, who Anark and Rosa Luxembourg said inspired Lenin, if you remember his name from a meme I shared before
Post automatically merged:
And seeing what Blanqui wanted, it makes sense Lenin would refuse to be associated with him, if he didn't it would confirm his fraud and the fraud of authoritarian socialists, who want their party to take the role of the capitalists, and rule, not to actually give people ownership of the means of production
Last edited:
pretty sure the ceasefire agreement also has 0 land swaps or guarantees from israel. This is just another step away from a palestinian state so I can see why people would be angry at this particular agreement
but tbf if you were ecstatic about the oct 7th "resistance" you have no grounds to bitch about this.
but tbf if you were ecstatic about the oct 7th "resistance" you have no grounds to bitch about this.
There's no celebration because if you look at 90% of the people "supporting" Palestine, it's people who hate the west and this is simply the issue du jour for western hatred. Look at their other stances and where they stand and you'll see who they were.
There were people who were actually concerned about Gaza and I take no issue with them. But most people on their "side" were either extreme leftists or anti-semites.
These are the same people when Muslims were being slaughtered in Yemen or Christians in Nigeria or people in Sudan they all stayed quiet or somehow made it about America.
There were people who were actually concerned about Gaza and I take no issue with them. But most people on their "side" were either extreme leftists or anti-semites.
These are the same people when Muslims were being slaughtered in Yemen or Christians in Nigeria or people in Sudan they all stayed quiet or somehow made it about America.
A lot of people will say "they weren't targeted for being Muslim" when the context is that Saudi Targeted the Houthis because they treat their own Zaidis like shit and don't want them to get ant idea
So they basically were targeted for daring to be a empowered minority in a Sunni Arab Dominated region
So they basically were targeted for daring to be a empowered minority in a Sunni Arab Dominated region