Manbaby removes all people from his Facebook friends that voted to leave a political union. Ghazi falls for the "the EU is the left-wing choice" meme even though the union supports neoliberalism and austerity and that brown people don't come from Europe. They engage in a jerk. This is an agenda post
38 2017-01-12 by aonome
91 comments
n/a SnapshillBot 2017-01-12
No wonder you have an army of pretentious neckbeard losers following you around
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
n/a OiBoiFloyd 2017-01-12
Brexit happened u just gotta accept that.
n/a Yung_Don 2017-01-12
I felt like shit about it for months then Trump got elected and the threat of a pumpkin man starting a global nuclear war really bumped sluggish growth down my list of priorities.
n/a Tyaust 2017-01-12
Don't forget, you also lost to Iceland in soccer somehow so it got worse before Trump.
n/a Yung_Don 2017-01-12
I'm Scottish so that was actually a highlight.
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-12
Ah, a nationalist and a Hitler.
n/a zahlman 2017-01-12
Right, because the first thing that a nuclear war-monger does is play buddy-buddy with the largest other nuclear power.
n/a Yung_Don 2017-01-12
I was obviously exaggerating. You need to start taking me seriously, not literally.
n/a zahlman 2017-01-12
taking /r/drama commenters seriously
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-12
Please don't gaslight me.
n/a uniqueguy263 2017-01-12
Trump is Putin's puppet and he wants to start a nuclear war with him. It's totally in Putin's interest to destroy the world for no reason, as Putin's a comic book villain
n/a numb3rb0y 2017-01-12
It hasn't actually happened though, I don't think dragging it out so much is helping with this sort of shit.
n/a clintonbro 2017-01-12
u/dudebromarxist you're in ghazi! do you have any self-awareness?
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-01-12
/u/dudebromarxist, just because your father is a retard, that doesn't mean every Brexiteer is. I think retardation just runs in your family.
n/a dudebromarxist 2017-01-12
Well I am happy to have a chat here if there's anything you want me to clarify. :)
n/a clintonbro 2017-01-12
Can't, too angry, but ty for offering
n/a Hammer_of_truthiness 2017-01-12
Where did this idea that true leftists somehow supported staying in an economic union designed to enable corporations to weaken workers rights and limit public spending start?
n/a glmox 2017-01-12
radical leftism is demanding non-binary representation on lockheed martin's board of directors
n/a aonome 2017-01-12
Link pls
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-01-12
I demand that corporate boardrooms be as diverse as the homeless people sleeping rough outside the head office!
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-01-12
So mostly men and mostly white?
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-01-12
51.3% are single males.
24.7% are single females.
23% are families with children—the fastest growing segment.
5% are minors unaccompanied by adults.
1.37 million (or 39%) of the total homeless population are children under the age of 18.
42% are African American (over-represented 3.23x compared to 13% of general population).
38% are Caucasian (under-represented 0.53x compared to 72% of general population).
20% are Hispanic (over-represented 1.25x compared to 16% of general population).
4% are Native American (over-represented 4x compared to 1% of general population).
2% are Asian-American (under-represented 0.4x compared to 5% of general population).
(you are barely correct on the first and dead wrong on the second)
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-01-12
Oh right, we were talking about American statistics.
n/a zahlman 2017-01-12
Ahahahaha what.
Are you sure, first off, that you aren't conflating overall homeless people with the ones literally out on the streets? Because there are a lot of other options out there. Women have a much higher conditional probability of finding shelter. And I mean, I know the demographics are different between Canada and the US, but I live in the most multicultural city around (Toronto) and the people you see camped over heating vents downtown are overwhelmingly white. Sure, indigenous people are over-represented (and a lot of them are white-passing anyway). Asians and black people are definitely under-represented (even with the latter at only 8% of city population). I'm talking to the point where I'd offer a bounty for you finding one if you came to visit here, just to make the point.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-01-12
I don't know what Toronto has to do with American homeless stats. But I just found them on Wikipedia, sourced from some US government report, so maybe they're not entirely accurate or need more context.
n/a zahlman 2017-01-12
They're what I have to go on. It's hard for me to fathom that things work that differently in the US. I think your primary source of error is treating the overall homeless as representative of who's sleeping on the streets.
n/a glmox 2017-01-12
we've had alt-right death squads smashing down doors and purging ethnic impurities since november 9th, remember? why wouldn't our homeless be disproportionately non-white at this point?
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-01-12
Zero chance those stats are about actual homeless on the streets.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-01-12
I didn't look too closely. Maybe they were homeless people using shelters or something.
n/a uniqueguy263 2017-01-12
If it's 53% single men, 23% single women, and 26% families consisting mostly of 1 adult man and 1 adult woman, isn't it like 70% men out of adults?
n/a nanonan 2017-01-12
42+20=A majority on the days of the week where hispanics are white.
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-12
Look at this post. It's beautiful.
n/a aonome 2017-01-12
Some idiots dislike brown people and mistakenly thought that immigration from the EU had something to do with this; they think "immigration" means Muslims or Arabs for example, no matter what the context is. Socialists then ignored the facts about what the EU does so that they could be reactionary (lol) against racists that won't even get what they wanted if we control European migration.
n/a Gunryk 2017-01-12
When people talk about immigration in europe, they are almost always talking about the polish.
n/a aonome 2017-01-12
I hear "mooslims" and "Poles" in equal amounts from racist leavers tbh. Then again I'm usually around non-racist leavers
n/a Gunryk 2017-01-12
Well, I admit I would not know as I am norwegian and not english. You might want to work a bit on your public education if thats true tbh.
n/a aonome 2017-01-12
Scandinavia is basically the only place in the world where most of the population isn't incredibly ignorant about simple things so I see why it'd be surprising to you.
n/a The_Reason_Trump_Won 2017-01-12
Wait are polaks flooding into Norway too?
n/a Gunryk 2017-01-12
They are/were(2008) our largest group of immigrants.
n/a The_Reason_Trump_Won 2017-01-12
Interesting. I thought they were all jusy going to Germany and the UK
n/a zahlman 2017-01-12
What are the major arguments you hear from non-racist leavers?
n/a aonome 2017-01-12
The way the European Union is structured and operates is fundamentally unethical, immigration is occuring in too high numbers to allow for integration and that immigration is increasing demand for housing, pushing rent up.
That last point about rent is something that even remainers should agree is a valid consideration because it's not normative.
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-12
Islam delenda est.
n/a merqury26 2017-01-12
Mostly because far right considers it evil.
n/a zahlman 2017-01-12
https://www.google.ca/trends/explore?date=all&q=%2Fm%2F0pvv2
Note that the pre-2011 cyclical pattern, with two peaks per year, is basically the same one you see for topics like "feminism", "social justice" etc.
If you search for it as a search term instead of as an overall topic:
https://www.google.ca/trends/explore?date=all&q=sweatshop
You can see there was a pretty sharp general drop in interest somewhere around late 2006.
My current theory implies a roughly 24-year cycle: we're currently at the pro-globalist peak for the left, having seen the anti-globalist peak in the early 2000s.
n/a Ylajali_2002 2017-01-12
hahahaha
n/a fucked_my_shit_up 2017-01-12
Yep, communist and far-right militias larger than the country's entire armed forces like the RFB and Freikorps battling in the streets is the pinnacle of peace, tolerance, and democracy.
n/a grungebot5000 2017-01-12
the RFB didn't exist until Mein Kampf ya dingus
n/a PhysicsIsMyMistress 2017-01-12
Remember how tolerant the Kaiser's Germany was?
n/a hlary 2017-01-12
Well they were imperialists so still pretty raceist by today's standards
n/a Yung_Don 2017-01-12
Maybe not "tolerant" but it's pretty well established that the Weimar institutions were ahead of their time. If anything it was too democratic which allowed the Nazis to seize power with just plurality support.
n/a Alexlincoln2 2017-01-12
If by ahead of their time you mean lived beyond their means, yes. They forced Germany into multiple recessions with their social and fiscal policies, and their extreme economic stupidity caused the nazis to obtain power
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-01-12
It's impossible to consider Weimar Germany without the effects of the Versailles Treaty. There wasn't much anyone could do with that hanging over their heads.
n/a Alexlincoln2 2017-01-12
they could start by not trying to double up the expenses with a fucking welfare state, or go all mugabe on everyone's ass and start printing money. Neither of those things were required by the treaty.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-01-12
Look at the expert over here, I'm sure things were just that simple in 1922 with piles of radically opposing parties fighting each other and brand new democratic institutions to try and build.
n/a SirShrimp 2017-01-12
But they did, most of Germany's economic woes were created by the Weimar Republic itself to ensure it could avoid paying those reparations(which it never payed until well after World War II at all).
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-01-12
The Versailles Treaty was mostly overstated. In reality most of the debts didn't actually exist and the remaining ones were largely written off later.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-01-12
They were written off far, far too late in the game. Most weren't actually paid but it was still a big problem for Weimar Germany: what you're implying is like gambling that the bank might forgive your mortgage in a few years so you don't need to bother making the payments today.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-01-12
This comment is just so much surplus autism, kys
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-01-12
They were degenerate filth and it's good that Hitler cleaned it up.
n/a jPaolo 2017-01-12
I'm also glad Hitler made those 5,7 million of filthy Germans disappear.
n/a YourGayOpinion 2017-01-12
That's 5.7 million fewer white people, comrade.
n/a jPaolo 2017-01-12
Don't tell me you're one of these libruls who think whites are people.
n/a Ylajali_2002 2017-01-12
It's also well established that antisemitism was no small force in German culture prior to the Nazis taking power.
n/a shitlordcaligula 2017-01-12
The society at large still largely blamed the Jews and the Communists for losing WWI though. The Weimar was trying to hold the seams together, to their credit, but it was a losing battle.
n/a MRB2012 2017-01-12
Except the Nazis didn't use "tolerance" to get into office, they used violence.
n/a The_Reason_Trump_Won 2017-01-12
The Weimar republic was a mess with militias fighting in the streets.
n/a shitlordcaligula 2017-01-12
Throw a usertag on that badboy. Whoever has that poor of a grasp of history needs to be publicly shamed.
n/a BannedFromImzy 2017-01-12
/r/badhistory
n/a Taipers_4_days 2017-01-12
Yes, Prussian Germany was the epitome of tolerance.
n/a The_Reason_Trump_Won 2017-01-12
n/a PhysicsIsMyMistress 2017-01-12
Yes, Brexiteers are angry. Ghazelles aren't the angry ones, nosiree!
n/a its_never_lupus 2017-01-12
I always imagine them crying a lot.
n/a nanonan 2017-01-12
Tears of impotent rage are still anger.
n/a skeetsurfing1984 2017-01-12
In their defense, it's hard to get your "Stay" ballot in the slot in the ballot box when you're <<<literally shaking>>>.
n/a bjt23 2017-01-12
This is literally the argument people use against Muslims. Guess Ghazi is Islamophobic now?
n/a Gunryk 2017-01-12
That comment bothers me a bit. Maybe I am just not reading it the right way, but it seems like the person that wrote it is angry that leavers don't concede to them on this issue, and is hidding it behind a vague comment about respect.
What do you say /u/AbortusLuciferum? Am I right? Or am I missing some context here?
n/a bjt23 2017-01-12
It seems like they view the Brexit/Trump side as lacking empathy, so when they are called on to try and understand Brexit/Trump voters they view it as hypocritical.
Even if they're "right," being confrontational is only going to feed into the radicalism of Trump/Brexiters. By failing to understand Trump/Brexiters, they're actually helping the very causes they oppose. I think more low skill immigration would help, not hinder the economy and yet you didn't see me crying uncontrollably when Trump won.
n/a CATS_in_a_car 2017-01-12
Did you send your :tenbux: to /u/Velvet_Llama?
n/a jPaolo 2017-01-12
What is GamerGhazi about anyway? What's "game-y" in Brexit aside from the fact Brits played themselves?
n/a zahlman 2017-01-12
ethics.txt
n/a jubbergun 2017-01-12
You know how in the comics there's Superman and Bizarro? Well, here on Reddit Superman is /r/KotakuInAction and Bizarro is Ghazi. Ghazi basically exists to take up any position that opposes any KiA position even if the position they have to adopt to do that is 100% retarded.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-01-12
They will gladly find things to be mad about on their own just in case KiA doesn't give them ammo.
n/a zahlman 2017-01-12
Yes, the "we didn't get the result we wanted so we demand a do-over" crowd believes in democracy. The Leavers have "no interest" in the people whose viewpoint is the only socially acceptable one in many contexts, have made no effort to understand you because they literally cannot escape from constant condescending explanations of your viewpoint. You "oblige them", sure.
n/a Velvet_Llama 2017-01-12
Where's my money, cunt?
n/a WokeAsFuck 2017-01-12
/u/AbortusLuciferum Do you actually believe this shit or are you pissing around?
You beleieve everyone deserves a voice. Fucking Ghazi. Of ALL places. I'd have more chance in North Korea.
n/a AbortusLuciferum 2017-01-12
Yes. In our society everyone deserves a voice. Not in a subforum of a privately owned website. I'm banned from /r/The_Donald, /r/altright and /r/AskTrumpSupporters, so right wingers know this very well.
By everyone deserves a voice I mean you have the right to say whatever you want and I have the right to criticize what you say however I want, so long as no state-sanctioned censorship is made. Just because some meanies tell you to shut up doesn't suddenly render you unable to speak, therefore it is not censorship.
Also what's with this sub and tagging people? I've been tagged here like 10 times just this week.
n/a aonome 2017-01-12
Firstly it's a way to engage in dialogue without disrupting the conversation in the linked sub.
Secondly people sometimes lose their shit and turn into lolcows when they're tagged, it's good drama.
n/a WokeAsFuck 2017-01-12
You're entitled to a hugbox on Ghazi. But are you ok with strongarm tactics to silence people as long as the government isn't doing it?
Like the white noise thing at UOT.
Because that's just censorship of a different kind with a weasley "well technically the government isn't doing it so it's ok" get out of jail card.
Well we can't go chat to you in Ghazi right? Gotta expose yawl to different ideas somehow.
n/a AbortusLuciferum 2017-01-12
In short, yeah. As long as it doesn't break any laws. It's a repudiation of ideas, as we should not be dignifying certain ideas with a platform. Do we really need to engage white supremacists and rape apologists in debate? I don't think so. Do I think it's effective to make these public disruptions? Currently no, I don't. It makes bigots start feeling like they have some sort of "secret truth" that we don't want you to think about. But you wouldn't complain as much if it was done against the Westboro Baptist Church or the KKK.
n/a WokeAsFuck 2017-01-12
How does
Gel with
This is why the right is walking to power now. The rank hypocrisy from your quarter has got old with too many people.
I don't care. Nobody bar WBC takes WBC seriously because their ideas can't stand up to scrutiny. And the KKK is a shadow of its old self for the same reasons.
n/a AbortusLuciferum 2017-01-12
How did this get to this old trope of SJW censorship on campus? I already said it's not effective, I just explained why it happens and why it's not censorship.
What I meant when I said "we oblige them" is that we may try to listen to Trump voters, but all Trump voters ever do is shit all over leftist ideas. It's what we call reactionary, that means, it's simply a reaction and a resistance to the progress the left is attempting, and it doesn't seem to have any clear goals, other than that they want us to get mad.
I'll agree with you that we need to talk more openly and that out discourse needs to be more accessible and that we shouldn't use these silencing tactics, but the left will continue to behave that way because we're not a monolith. What I'm frustrated about is how reactionaries really don't want to listen to what they've just successfully reacted against. Even the President is all like "we won, shut up"
And honestly I think this frustration is mutual, so I get why you think what I said is so absurd. We're very divided as people, I bet both sides feel like they're not being listened to.
n/a jubbergun 2017-01-12
You can either choose...
...or you can choose...
...but you can't logically choose both unless you're fucking retarded.
Doing something wrong just because the idiots in /r/The_Donald, /r/altright and /r/AskTrumpSupporters are doing it doesn't make it any less wrong. Censorship is censorship no matter who the censor is. The censor doesn't have to be the government. "Only the government can censor" is just the piss-poor excuse of cretins who want to have their cake and eat it, too.
We like to make the mentally feeble feel like they're appreciated.