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
So John Kerry(democrat presidential nominee in 2004 if you don't know), believes the 1st Amendment, which gives you the right of free speech, is a major road block to controlling information.
Interesting. So many politicians want to overturn the constitution. Wonder why
Interesting. So many politicians want to overturn the constitution. Wonder why
That's what happens when you think leftists are too radical and you reject them from the debate.
Ah the largest asset manager in the world.
They've all(including Bill Gates) have been open that the world is overpopulated and that it needs to be reduced by at least 40% to remain sustainable(if they want to continue getting more power).
There's also the fact that a healthy and educated nation are more unionized and easily reject Govenrment nonsense, as seen back in the 60s. Solution? Fabricate a ton of social issues to divide the people, and then introduce a big event that will unite them and sneakily remove some of their rights.
They've all(including Bill Gates) have been open that the world is overpopulated and that it needs to be reduced by at least 40% to remain sustainable(if they want to continue getting more power).
There's also the fact that a healthy and educated nation are more unionized and easily reject Govenrment nonsense, as seen back in the 60s. Solution? Fabricate a ton of social issues to divide the people, and then introduce a big event that will unite them and sneakily remove some of their rights.
Usually, one belief is linked to others.
You don't support a genocide of muslim on monday and demonstrate in the street to stop systemic islamophobia in your country on tuesday
You confuse having a pertinent political knowledge and having a pertinent political opinion mate.
Because I asked people not say things that can be harmfull to people in difficulties ?
Say the one not understanding the definitions in the first place or repeating false ones...
I'm a moderator now ?
Well, that's an actual good thing about me
"I showed you my stance"
Yup. And you are confirming them lmao
You don't support a genocide of muslim on monday and demonstrate in the street to stop systemic islamophobia in your country on tuesday
Since you obviously don't read/remember any of my posts that showed by stance(that you agreed with btw), it's "crazy" how irrelevant your posts are
Because I asked people not say things that can be harmfull to people in difficulties ?
Say the one not understanding the definitions in the first place or repeating false ones...
I'm a moderator now ?
Well, that's an actual good thing about me
"I showed you my stance"
Yup. And you are confirming them lmao
In an healthy society and educated nation. There is no need for the people to reject the "nonsense" of the gov since the gov will most likely be more positive than it is negative.
And thus, saying that they force social discourse in this context is like saying that healthy government will simply do bad reforms to divide when it's actually the opposite.
Under an healthy governement, you get social rights, your get working rights, you gets better education and health systems, better scientific fundings, less securitary fundings, an healthy acceptance of immigration, better international projects, less tension, better wages, better wealth distribution etc.
Under an healthy society, gov do not seek to divide, they strive toward peace. It's only when rightists or authoritarian take the power that things start to go wrong.
You are once again trying to confuse people with a false reality here.
It's liberals and conservative who want those divisions or strive to attack people's rights. And when they are in power, there is no such thing as an healthy society, even when they are progressive.
And thus, saying that they force social discourse in this context is like saying that healthy government will simply do bad reforms to divide when it's actually the opposite.
Under an healthy governement, you get social rights, your get working rights, you gets better education and health systems, better scientific fundings, less securitary fundings, an healthy acceptance of immigration, better international projects, less tension, better wages, better wealth distribution etc.
Under an healthy society, gov do not seek to divide, they strive toward peace. It's only when rightists or authoritarian take the power that things start to go wrong.
You are once again trying to confuse people with a false reality here.
It's liberals and conservative who want those divisions or strive to attack people's rights. And when they are in power, there is no such thing as an healthy society, even when they are progressive.