They say the right can’t meme, but their stale and overdone jokes sure do seem to make leftoids seethe every time with out fail

"Conservatives have one joke" so what bitch it is one joke that makes you clutch your pearls everytime lmao

They also seem to have several “one jokes”

Perhaps that in itself is the left's own "one joke."

Trans rice lol!

Trans rice lol!

Trans rice lol!

Trans rice lol!

Trans rice lol!

this tbh

The right doesn’t even need new jokes 1350 is enough to make them shit their pants and cry

Righty memes are stale but they get to the fucking point at least.

And rightiods seethe every time I say Trans women are women, which is true btw.

🤨

Cope incel

Post trussy

Dilate.

farts

Penis.

Fetish

STOP DOWNVOTING

the 50% does not refer to the amount of crimes committed, but the amount of criminal convictions. This supports leftist narratives about systemic injustice and I have no idea why the right keeps using stats that support leftist arguments.

"ummm akshually 13-do-50 is woke and leftist, sweaty"

LOL

Stick all the cops in white neighborhoods and all of a sudden white people will commit 100% of the crime. Funny how that happens

checkmate alt-rightoids 😎

Even then they'd arrest a bunch of black burglars lmao

Its not even close to correct, either. The neighbourhoods you police corresponds to the victims of crimes, not so much the perpetrators. Criminals can travel to commit their crimes, victims dont intentionally choose a neighborhood in order to become a victim. The police would still arrest a shitton of negroes raping, robbing, and burglering mayo streets. They'd just (ironically enough) not know about black victims. so if they only police mayo neighborhoods, 100% of victims will be white.

Appropriating right wing culture again? Smh my head.

getting mad at a normal joke and calling it unfunny

They have ONE joke and it was never funny to begin with.

Oh, sorry, two, I forgot the attack helicopter meme.

seething lmao

What about trans suicide stats

Gravel acceleration proven right again

wtf based

They respond with the always extremely hilarious leftoid words words words words

It's also straight up retarded because the FBI does in fact track commission and arrests. The stat doesn't even refer to convictions like they claim. On top of that, 13/52 refers to violent crime, so it has nothing to do with some black college kid getting booked for having a jar of weed. I don't think increased police patrolling in their neighborhoods is what's directly causing a disproportionate amount of black men to commit violent crimes.

I don't know why people go out their way to be so willfully ignorant of reality.

The weird thing is that they aren't even that willfully ignorant of reality. The wokesters I know all live in gentrified white neighborhoods, and when it's time to send the kids to school, they move to even whiter suburbs. They are BLM on Facebook, but really antsy about going to a black neighborhood IRL.

You see the same thing on a massive scale in cities like Seattle and Portland, which have a tiny portion of non-asian minorities. They'll circlejerk themselves endlessly about their tolerance and shit on the crakkkas that live in places like Mississippi where 4 out of every 10 people are black

In all honesty if I had to deal with Male and Female Mayo's (hard to tell the difference these days) wanting me to fuck them, I would be getting violent too.

God literally “Yikes sweaty: the thread”

also better public education

where the teachers don't care and no amount of money increases iq

Okay

no amount of money increases iq

Haha they finally got it

Haha, those sure are some kooky crime statistics you got there, dad! Where are those from, the FBI? Well, did you know that FBI crime statistics only track those that are successfully convicted of a crime, even though the vast majority of crimes committed aren't even reported, let alone lead to a successful arrest, prosecution, and conviction? Sounds like a big hole in the data if you ask me! And when you combine that with the fact that black neighbourhoods are more heavily policed black people are more likely to get stopped by the police, and more likely to be convicted by a jury for the same crimes as a white person, it makes you think that maybe those FBI stats have a lot more to do with systemic racial profiling than some sort of innate behaviour in black people! How's that for a brain blast?

No, he's a white bootlicker with a slave mentality who blames black people for "being lazy good for nothings" and not white people for causing this shit in the first place

So AKA wants to desperately be white

I already have one of my replies on people who blame black people for "gangsta culture" so I'll just post those:

TLDR: Words

So I think there are a lot of places where this argument can be disproven (or at least disputed), but I'll start with history, since it's my specialty. There's a little here about slavery, but then we'll get to housing, which I think clarifies the economic condition of black families today.

You can't interpret the economic and social situation of the African American community in a vacuum without considering the broader history of racism in America. We know from centuries of research that the most important type of wealth is generational wealth, assets that can pass from one generation to another. You wouldn't have the opportunities that you have today if your parents didn't have the opportunities they had, and they in turn wouldn't have had their success in life without the success of your grandparents, etc.

Considering that we know this, consider the economic plight of the average African American family in America. When slavery was abolished, there were no reparations. There was no forty acres and a mule. There was no education system that was both willing and able to accommodate African American children, to say nothing of illiterate adults. With the exception of a brief moment of Reconstruction, there was no significant force dedicated to upholding the safety and political rights of African Americans. Is it any wonder that sharecropping became such a ubiquitous system of labor? For many freed slaves, they quickly wound up working for their masters once again, with very little changes in their day to day lives. And through all of this, white America was profiting off of the work of black America, plundering their property and labor. When slavery was abolished, it was a more lucrative field than all of American manufacturing combined, including the new railroad. The American industrial revolution/rise of big business was already booming, but it was overshadowed by the obscene wealth of plantation slavery. By 1860, one in four Southern Americans owned a slave. Many southern states were majority black, up to 70% black in certain counties of my home state Virginia, the vast majority of them unfree laborers. Mississippi and South Carolina were both majority black. There's a reason that the South was able to pay off its debts after the Revolution so quickly. When you consider just how essential black uncompensated labor was to this country, it's no exaggeration to say that slaves built America.

From this moment onewards til about the 1960s, racism was the law of the land. Sharecropping was slavery by another name and "separate but equal" was an offense against human rights, and those two institutions alone created a massive opportunity gap that has continued repercussions in the today. But what very few people consider is the extent to which the American government empowered people to create or acquire wealth during this time, and the extent to which they denied black Americans the same chances. There was no "Homestead Act" for black people, for instance. When FDR signed the Social Security Act, he specifically endorsed a provision that denied SS benefits to laborers who worked "in the house or the field," in so doing creating a social security net that the NAACP described as "a sieve with holes just big enough for the majority of Negroes to fall through.” Black families paid far more than their white counterparts trying to support past generations instead of investing in the future. During the Great Depression, elder poverty was above 50%. Consider on top of this how expensive it is to be poor, especially when you are black. If your son gets sick but you are white and can buy insurance, you will be set back the deductible and copay. If you are black and shut out of an insurance market, you may burn your life savings on care and still not find an good doctor willing to help a black patient. This idea that the poor and socially disadvantaged are more vulnerable is called exploitation theory, and it's really important to understanding race in America.

Nowhere is exploitation theory more important than in housing. It's obvious that desegregation was never a platform that this nation embraced wholeheartedly, but the extent that segregation was a manifestation of formal policy is something that often gets forgotten. The home is the most important piece of wealth in American history, and once you consider the home ownership prospects of African Americans you'll instantly understand how vital and essential the past remains in interpreting the present when it comes to race.

During the 1930s, America established the FHA, an agency dedicated to evaluating the worth of property and helping Americans afford homes. The FHA pioneered a policy called "redlining," in which the worth of a piece of property was tied to the racial diversity of its neighborhood, with more diversity driving down price. When white homeowners complained that their colored neighbors drove down prices, they were speaking literally. In addition, the FHA and other banks which used their ratings (which were all of them, more or less) resolved not to give a loan to any black family who would increase the racial diversity of a neighborhood (in practice a barrier of proof so high that virtually no black families received financial aid in purchasing a home). These practices did not end until 1968, and by then the damage had been done. In 1930, 30% of Americans owned homes. By 1960, 60% of them did, largely because of the FHA and the lending practices its presence in the market enabled.

Black families, cut out of this new American housing market and the government guarantees which made it possible, had nowhere to go. This was all taking place during the Great Migration. Black families were fleeing from old plantation estates where they still were treated like slaves, and traveling to the North in search of a better life. When they arrived, there was nowhere to live. White real estate owners quickly realized how to exploit the vulnerability of the black community. They bought up property and sold homes to African American families "on contract." These contracts were overpriced, and very few could afford to keep their homes. To make matters worse, these contracts were routinely broken. Often contracts guaranteed heating or other bills, but these amenities would never be covered. Even though black families "bought" these houses, a contract is not like a mortgage-- there was little to no expectation of future ownership. The owners of these contract houses would loan the property, wait for payments to cease, evict the family, and open the house up to the next gullible buyer fleeing from lynching in the south. None of it mattered. By 1962, 85% of black homeowners in Chicago lived in contract homes. And these numbers are comparable to cities all across the country. For every family that could keep holding onto the property til these practices were outlawed, a dozen spent their life savings on an elusive dream of home ownership that would never come to fruition.

This practice of exploiting African Americans to sell estate had real consequences. As black contract buyers streamed into a neighborhood, the FHA took notice. In addition to racist opposition to integration from white homeowners, even the well-intentioned had difficulty staying in a neighborhood as the value of their house went down. How could you take out a loan to pay for your daughter's college or finance a business with the collateral of a low-value piece of land? White flight is not something that the U.S. government can wash its hands of. It was social engineering, upheld by government policy. As white families left these neighborhoods, contract buyers bought their houses at a fraction of the cost and expanded their operation, selling more houses on contract and finally selling the real estate to the federal government when the government moved into public housing, virtually ensuring that public housing would not help black families move into neighborhoods of opportunity. And the FHA's policies also helped whites: without the sterling credit ratings that businessmen in lily-white communities could buy at, there would be no modern suburb. All of this remains today. When you map neighborhoods in which contract buyers were active against a map of modern ghettos, you get a near-perfect match. Ritzy white neighborhoods became majority-black ghettos overnight.

You are right to note certain facets of black society: the drug use, family anarchy, etc are not imaginary, though they certainly are not policed fairly or represented honestly in the white American consciousness. But these are the symptoms, not the causes of black poverty. Go to the spaces of concentrated white poverty, and you will find similar statistics. The reason that black society is the way it is is that black families have been systemically cut out of the normal avenues of upward mobility, and that has more to do with white supremacy than with saggy jeans or rap music.

Edit: you people are weird as hell lol

sir this is a fartposting sub

Wow, look at you, you made me switch to using the page down key from the scrollwheel, good job.

Good job Bobby, here’s a star ⭐️

cringe

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Scenty Int

sentinel as always 😍

Let's say you've been a bad girl. Let's say, hypothetically, you've been a naughty girl even. Ok, and if you were a naughty girl, you would be my dirty little slut right? Then hypothetically speaking, you would be my little cumslut. Now, let's say you're also daddy's girl.

Now that we have established that you are both a bad girl and daddy's girl, I believe you'd agree with me when I say that you deserve a spanking. Am I not correct? A bad girl deserves a spanking, and as I am daddy, you are my girl, so I am the one who must provide punishment.

Snapshots:

1. race-crime statistics do not indica... - archive.org, archive.today

I am just a simple bot, *not** a moderator of this subreddit* | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers

"I don't like the implications of this statistic, so therefore it must be untrue"