Your condescending, contradictory bullshit isn't attractive to anyone except your frothing, basement-dwelling, virgin army.

Snapshots:

1. This Post - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, snew.github.io, archive.is

^{I am a bot. (Info / Contact)}

If you want to swim in the sewer you should swim in ours.

We have chicks with dicks and homemade liquor.

Negative Ghost Rider.

I've never been clear on whether bussy is (1) a man's butthole (2) any butthole (3) Bangkok frankengash or (4) some combination of the three.

It's the first one. "Boy pussy".

you can always find out at /r/dickgirls ..

The only thing I discovered there is the meaning of love.

Now see, I would have thought you to be an /r/ProlapseVille guy...

Ain't misconceptions a bitch?

Sapient, you washed up grammar nazi.

You're a Nazi.

tfw frothing

"shut up! Get out!"

Make me? So much for fighting words, right?

Facts? In MY feminist circlejerk? Shut up, get out, and never come back!

/u/horizontalmotions has a man ever said something to you that you disagreed with and wasn't mansplaining?

You're a Nazi.

Are you real

Are you a Nazi???

I know that /r/drama is a cryptohate sub. This board came from /r/MensRights and /r/KotakuInAction to spread alt-right hate messages, like Pepe the Frog. Please stop tagging me.

Woah. Hey want to go out and get lunch sometime? We can talk about gardening. Did you know that weeds are actually good for your lawn?

Ok, wait. What? They are?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoculture

Monoculture

Monoculture is the agricultural practice of producing or growing a single crop, plant, or livestock species, variety, or breed in a field or farming system at a time. Polyculture, where more than one crop is grown in the same space at the same time, is the alternative to monoculture. Monoculture is widely used in both industrial farming and organic farming and has allowed increased efficiency in planting and harvest.

Continuous monoculture, or monocropping, where the same species is grown year after year, can lead to the quicker buildup of pests and diseases, and then rapid spread where a uniform crop is susceptible to a pathogen.

^{[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.24}

Good bot.

Cryptohate implies we hide it. We don't.

Fuck you I hope you die. You deserve to be alone and cold when you go.

This but with a carrot up my butt

Both of those subs suck and so do you.

Definitely satire/troll.

Yeah, not subtle enough

Retards still bite though, somehow

What else am I supposed to do with these teeth

Definite troll. Still made me guffaw, though.

Why? trollx legit believes this.

Are you real? You can't be real. No one is dumb enough to think this

goddamn it hillbilly i swear to god if this is you. the troll game in toomanychromosomes is too high.

[I wonder...](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrollXChromosomes/comments/6uenln/i_literally_stood_up_and_applauded_at_this_tweet/

Haha yeah, 100% that's our deep-dicked pal

Who's alt are you?

/u/HorizontalMotions Post your bussy

/u/HorizontalMotions or gussy

Eww that is disgusting, you freak

If you u-ping more than 3 times, it doesn't u-ping at all.

I can't believe you're calling us a cryptohate sub when all we talk about is the mayocide. If anything this is just a regular hate sub. Show some respect.

We fucking rag on trumpards and T_D all the time too.

Good troll.

Ok what are you talking about I love crypto. Best pet superman had

ｃｒｙｐｔｏ - ｈａｔｅ / / クソマヨネーズ

A E S T H E T I C

How can we be Nazis when we literally want to gas whitey?

Bravo I can't tell if this is satire or if you are actually retarded

Wrong. You can't be a hate sub if you're against whitey

MayocideNow

Jesus Christ I hope this is satire, are you literally retarded?

2/10

You tried.

Hey, what's a cryptohate sub, as opposed to just a standard hate sub? What's the difference here?

Which /r/drama user are you?

I know that /r/drama is a cryptohate sub.

WHAT DOES THIS MEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAN

Are you retarded?

It was reaffirmed recently, too.

The supreme Court is half Nazi so of course they would!

Let me mansplain the word Nazi to you.

"a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party, which controlled Germany from 1933 to 1945 under Adolf Hitler and advocated totalitarian government, territorial expansion, anti-Semitism, and Aryan supremacy, all these leading directly to World War II and the Holocaust."

However, there are looser uses like femi-nazi, which you seem to be claiming ownership of.

You have it backwards. Sure, we may promote genocide on the regular, but it's the mass murder of mayos that we advocate, not that of actual human beings such as Jews or black people.

No you're the puppet

Well that was a bit of a jump.

This

So disagreeing with you and calling you out on your own bigotry = Nazi. And Nazis should be beaten/killed right?

Gee, could this attitude ever backfire and get out of hand? /s

Imagine getting downvoted for playing the "mansplaining" trump card in TrollX..

That's how you know you dun goofed.

God that's embarrassing. That person was 100% right. Holding a nazi flag is 100% protected speech and anybody who didn't have their fingers in their ears going "lalala" would understand that. And that's coming from a radical centrist who hates brumpf

DINGLE GRUMPF NEEDS TO GET OUT RIGHT NOW

I think I might hate Jon Oliver more than I hate Phlumph if that's any consolation

Grinkle Rumpf is kind of a centrist though, he pisses off republicans and democrats, hates nazis and commies, and shit talks both sides 24/7.

hates nazis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Gorka

Sebastian Gorka

Sebastian Lukács Gorka (Hungarian: Gorka Sebestyén Lukács; born October 22, 1970) is an American military and intelligence analyst. He serves as a deputy assistant to President of the United States Donald Trump. Gorka was born in the United Kingdom to Hungarian parents, lived in Hungary from 1992 to 2008, and in 2012 became a naturalized American citizen.

Gorka has written for a variety of publications, is generally considered politically conservative and has ties to the alt-right.

^{[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.24}

'Very fine people'

Sebastian Gorka is correct about Islamic immigration, though.

❄️

dude no, Gorka is a bad guy to take advice from even if you are a massive right-wing national security hawk. guy is completely unqualified and an obvious moron

He knows how to deal with the Islams.

intimidate them into compliance with his attempt at RP?

Just. Say. No.

i hope that's his defense in two years. "the left made me do it"

GORKAAAAAAAAAA!

Some Historian is gonna look back on all the interesting combinations of letters this president has been named and conclude his name base was "um" with pre and post modifiers to indicate the aspect of his rule that was being discussed...

What's a radical centrist look like ideologically? That sounds to me like "radically neutral".

Capitalist/free markets but not nearly ancap, understand the importance of regulation and role of government but not so much that it stifles innovation or investment, trust in the Fed and central banks, etc

Doesn't sound too much unlike me, actually. This may be a silly question, but are there any subs/readings for that kind of thing?

/r/neoliberal tbh but it kind of got invaded by the masses when it hit /r/all a couple times. But I think they still extol the closest opinions to me and have good discussions.

But if you go there you'll have /u/prince_kropotkin up your asshole following you around

What'll the prince be following me around for?

He is obsessed with /r/neoliberal and constantly links to it to try to argue with it. He'll eventually end up in a padded room muttering about the sub

Looked at his profile analysis: anarchist leftist. Nothing I haven't gotten yelled at by before. I think I'll be fine. Thanks for the recommendation though!

Hes been posting his agendaposts with his alts lately. Its really pathetic and obvious Lemon_score or something is one of then.

Neoliberals are responsible for the Great Recession, and for the fact that bankers were made whole at the expense of normal people. It's a widely discredited label amongst anyone who was actually an adult in 2007.

I don't know what PK has against the label. He is, by all accounts, a total cunt. But neoliberals are the scum of this earth. The most corrupt ideology currently functioning.

The minor renaissance in calling yourself a "neoliberal" and the popularity of /r/neoliberal is specifically in response to this kind of overheated rhetoric. It's ridiculous to pretend people just aren't aware of it and would just stop calling themselves "neoliberals" if only you spouted it at them.

/r/neoliberal has always been pretty shit, especially their attempts to stich together a coherent decades-long narrative of how "neoliberalism" has always meant a particular thing. they should just be honest and say they're repurposing a left-wing snarl world that took off from about the 1980s-2000s and has basically nothing to do with the various other uses of "neoliberalism" over the years

You know that President Trump was not always a Republican, yes?

Cool. Can you do that without opening the floodgates to illegal immigration and Islamic influence and generally imposing San Francisco idiocy on the whole country? Because that would be nice.

you really want to know our solution to preventing illegal immigration?

First I want to know that you want to prevent it at all. You haven't even convinced anyone of that yet.

open

the

borders

Yes, we know you are traitors.

I spit on liberals.

It's true, you will be left even more unemployable than you already are. But you don't need to worry because there will be a robust and sustainable social security net in place, and the children you bear with your sister-wife will have access to high quality free education and a single-payer healthcare option.

The liberal attacks on the unemployed are really helping them at the polls.

One might say it is making liberal politicians... unemployed.

imagine being promised a liveable income regardless of employment status, free education, and single-payer healthcare and feeling attacked

This is the part where you are confused. You haven't promised me anything, because I already have those things.

so you admit being unemployed?

I already have a career, an education and healthcare. I probably pay for yours. You aren't offering me anything. You are begging.

But, please, go on pretending some sort of superiority over working people. Do it loudly. Do it publicly.

lol acting like supporting the orange man is a product of anything other than being born a fuckin spastic cunt

Wow, that was incredibly insensitive toward the disabled. Check your privilege.

me me big disappointment

r u hurting :> i joos watch ur ass get rekt n it was hot

Sorry, I was too busy paying for your free education in Gender Oppression to care.

Everyone should be paying for everyone's education :> now whine for me like a little girl

Post bussy.

I support the legalization of incest

~ A Neoliberal

which one?

U

This would work only if they were paying taxes.

So I’m Costa Rican and the reason why some people here have similar complaints with illegal immigration is that they are a huge burden to a social security system that for all we know it’s already bankrupt.

How do you feel about a system of immigration that prioritizes education and skill?

They do pay taxes. Immigrants are a net benefit.

Your social security system is almost bankrupt, other countries aren't.

Bb Stop with your serious posting. It's not a good look.

But there was a bad man.

SF is pretty sweet. Expensive as fuck... but that's partly because it's a pretty nice place to live.

SF is gay and retarded. Which, to be fair, is fine for gay retards. But SF gay retardism should not be imposed on the rest of the nation.

There are only a handful of places in US that aren't retarded, and SF is one of them. Quite gay though, yes.

SF was alright when it was just gay. Now it is full of autists, self-righteous pricks, and 4s that think they are cool because they moved out of Iowa.

Are you one of those?

Sometimes.

Well get the fuck out, too many trannies as is.

I just visit for business now. Fuck paying to live in that frozen rat-trap.

What’s a 4S?

Redneckistan is such a better place to live. Lemme hit up Nebraska or some other piece of shit

This but unironically

Ew

Or Maine with its shitty backwards top-5 standard of living.

Yes because Maine is smack dab in the middle of redneckistan lololol

You don't actually live in SF. You will never afford a home there. You are just a transient, and you will move out to the next hipster haven when you can no longer stand living in 900 sq ft

So my point stands :>

If you can't bear "redneckistan", Los Angeles is a better bet. At least the women are good-looking there.

http://mochimachine.org/wasteland/

It's just a map of where humans like to shit directly onto sidewalks and roads in SF.

The one for Omaha is coming soon, I'm sure.

For the record, San Francisco is a place whose citizens are actually in favor of zoning reform to increase the supply of housing and bring down rents, and many realize that rent controls are stupid, so they're ahead of the curve on that one. Which opinions that San Franciscans in general hold do you specifically disagree with?

With regards to illegal immigrants, I'm in favor of relaxed borders but with residency requirements for receiving benefits. I don't think islamic-militant influence with regard to illegal immigrants is nearly as much of a threat here as it is in Europe.

Typically? In real life, it tends to mean 'massively corrupt'. Technocrat and neoliberal, too.

Actual politicians using these labels usually just sell all public goods off to the politically well-connected, leading to pricier, but inferior services. They collude with banking and real-estate to prevent normal people from being able to recoup losses due to fraud. They typically refuse to invest in the public well being, instead preferring to fund private projects (like sports stadiums and bridges-to-nowhere). And they often coincide with massive levels of police brutality to keep normal people too frightened and worried to effectively mount a counter to said policies.

It's a label that appeals mostly to children, because by the time you get to be 30+, you realize that everyone who uses it is a fraud.

Privatization schemes you can argue, but "sports stadiums are generally expensive boondoggles favored for political reasons" and "infrastructure funding is allocated terribly, leading to new projects of marginal usefulness in politically favored districts while sorely needed renewal projects go undone" are staple neoliberal critiques. You really don't know what you're talking about here and need to stop taking Naomi Klein as a political mentor.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/6u9yv3/slug/dlr2f6c

You're a Nazi.

You're a Nazi, you're a Nazi, you're a Nazi, EVERYONE IS A NAZI!

Everyone's a Nazi! It's cool when call you people you hate Nazis Everyone's a Nazi! Expect me!

What's so silly about this all is that people have been arguing that the one of the many reasons the whole punch a nazi thing is a bad idea, is because maybe the person you are punching isn't actually a nazi. Seeing how these fuckers have been labelling pretty much everyone who doesn't think we should literally delete the first amendment, a nazi, it seems like a very valid concern.

Indeed, and as much as I dislike the alt-right and white nationalist dweebs, that's why I can't actually advocate for people punching them with impunity. Now, if I were to see a white nationalist say to a black person "Go back to your country you nigger!" and the black person threw a punch, let's just say I wouldn't bend over backwards to bear witness against the assailant. But we can't just let people pick and choose who to hit and who not to hit based on their opinions; it's why vigilante justice just can't be officially defended.

It's extremely annoying that so many people seem to think America has hate-speech laws, lese-majeste laws, aggressive interpretations of what counts as a threat, etc.

Out of curiouslity, do you think that there is or should be any difference between someone carrying a Nazi flag and someone carrying a Nazi flag while holding an assault rifle? I wonder if that could be seen as an imminent threat, because you're holding a symbol that essentially says "I want you dead" and also holding the tool that would allow you to make it happen immediately.

Brandishing an assault rifle in a menacing way is already illegal.

what about doing it in a polite way?

"Excuse me good sir, please pardon my impertinence, but may I introduce you to my diminutive comrade?"

Tbf the comic actually was very careful to make correct statements while sounding like it's saying something else.

The comic said "you think waving a flag is incitement? If it is it's not protected by the 1st amendment!", but read carelessly it would be "waving a flag is not protected by the 1st amendment".

I saw people try to argue this in the comments of the linked thread but I don't agree. He's saying that the mere act of waving the flag is tantamount to advocating for ethnic cleansing, and is ipso facto incitement of violence, which is not protected by the 1st amendment. That's patently untrue, whether we hate nazis (as I do) or not.

I'm genuinely trying to read the comic in a way that it can be interpreted otherwise, but I can't.

Oh no I agree with that. But it sounds like he's claiming the Supreme Court agrees with him, when actually he's not.

At this point I'm completely convinced that left-reddit is suffering from a shared mass delusion/crowd hysteria.

Trump will get 4 more years if this keeps up.

2 SCOOPS 2 TERMS 2 SIDES

2 GENDERS 2 LEGIT 2 QUIT

Most Presidents get two terms. They all look like shit until the other party nominates someone even shittier.

Trump looks terrible, but he's going to look like a shining diamond compared to Cory Booker or Andrew Cuomo, who won't even be able to hold their own bases, because the Democratic party insists on nominating corrupt banker pawns from the northeast.

Neither of those people stand a chance in Pennsylvania. The Democrats really need someone who can appeal to workers in Pennsylvania and Ohio, not bankers in NYC.

Trump looks terrible

He looks terrible to people who would never vote for him in the first place. His base - the people who got him elected - think he's doing just fine.

The Democrats really need someone who can appeal to workers in Pennsylvania and Ohio, not bankers in NYC.

Good luck with that. If you haven't figured it out already, Democrats are the wall street cronies that they accuse Republicans of being. They just get away with it because their liberal base overlooks it.

doing just fine has accomplished close to nothing

Does daddy give you a spanking if you talk bad about him?

So your response is a couple of broken links and an insult?

So far President Trump has followed through on almost every campaign promise he made. The one big set back of the administration has been healthcare and that failure rest solely on the backs of the GOP Congress/Senate, not President Trump.

Beyond that, the economy is in great shape and getting better every day. If that trend continues he'll have no problem getting re-elected.

Learn to CSS mother fucker, jesus fucking Christ why are you even here?

And do you have sources on him following trough on almost every campaign promise. Most of what I've read has been less than 1/3rd, especially the things that the was hard-line about getting done in the first year.

plz stoop hurding me feewings n cawwing me tarted for being reatrted it gon make me vote for drumpf agen

makmurikgreddagin eee

It's not hurt feelings. It's the retardation of anti-Trumpers like you.

droompf is vewy smat n u doom libbeez n moozlims goona keeeeeeeeeel oos. daty we gon ween :)))

There are Trump supporters that are smarter than you, harder working than you, less neurotic than you, and who give more to charity than you.

Let that sink in.

Most trumpets are stupider and less educated than me, work much less harder than me, much more neurotic than me, and give much less to charity than me.

Let that sink in

Is your comment history a deliberate pamphlet for government-sponsored retardation care services? Pretty smart, I'd say.

Ugh god.

honestly what do you expect. reddit is literally designed from the ground up to let users harass and get rid of anyone who breaks the circlejerk. add that to the fact that they have been cleansing the herds of non-retarded people for many years, and the results aren't suprising.

Poe's slaw tastes good with some manaise.

so that's why t_d sucks so much

The problem for neutrals is that sure t_d is shit, but every sub that doesn't even have to do with politics is shit too right now.

Yeah t_d can really metastasize can't it

reddit is literally designed from the ground up to let users harass and get rid of anyone who breaks the circlejerk.

To be fair, this is literally the only way to design social media that has been shown to work on any scale whatsoever.

reddit is literally designed from the ground up to let users harass and get rid of anyone who breaks the circlejerk.

To be fair, this is literally the only way to design social media that has been shown to work on any scale whatsoever.

Hopefully people on the left can push them back to their bubbles. We're lumped in with them and it's a pain in the backside to be compared to hysterical people that can't hear a fact that challenges their idea of a just world without having an emotional breakdown.

Maybe stop being on a side and, instead, do what is best for your family and your country.

The caveat here, of course, is that "leftism" is inherently about being self-destructive and destructive of your family and your country. So, if you accuse me of picking a "side", then, well, guilty!

If you stand for things you think are best for your country, you'll inevitably get pushed into a box. I'm liberal. I think that gay marriage is fair, that women should be able to choose, and that religion should stay out of policy. These values will inevitably put me at odds with people that don't hold them, and they call themselves conservatives. So in all things there are sides. This doesn't mean that I can't respect a conservative or that we don't have similar wants for the strength of the nation, but it does mean that our world views for how to get there are incompatible. So there's sides.

If you stand for things you think are best for your country, you'll inevitably get pushed into a box. I'm liberal. I think that gay marriage is fair, that women should be able to choose, and that religion should stay out of policy. These values will inevitably put me at odds with people that don't hold them, and they call themselves conservatives.

Stop being at odds with the people of your country.

No.

Good luck.

Just out of curiosity, why do you claim I'm at odds with the people of my own country, and why should that matter to me even if it's true? I take positions based on what I think is the right thing, so why would I bend or think it's wrong to stand for those things?

Well, let's take an example. In the United States, "free speech" and "armed citizenry" are foundational national concepts. The United States is unique in adhering to those concepts more than almost any other nation, and they are the first two guarantees mentioned to be unshakable in our foundational charter. Separation of church and state is probably good to mention here, too, since many European countries still have state-supported churches and specific religious backgrounds. Thus, campaigning for speech bans, gun bans and theocratic government in the United States would put you directly at odds with your own nation, and should be considered a quixotic endeavor.

Abortion rights, in contrast, are not culturally or historically unique to the United States, and are at best only hinted at in Constitutional scholarship. Thus, while I personally favor abortion rights, it would not be out of the national character to campaign for the opposing view.

I'm totally confused by where you got the idea that I'm against firearms, free speech, or that I'm for theocratic government.

I didn't say you were. I don't know you personally. I provided examples of matters where your disagreement would put you clearly at odds with your own nation in an unproductive manner. How you apply what you have learned to your own circumstances is your responsibility.

Again I'm confused. Earlier you claimed I was at odds with the nation. Do you have any specific examples of this?

These values will inevitably put me at odds with people that don't hold them

My point here is to stop considering yourself "at odds with" people of your own nation with whom you have reasonable disagreements over matters of policy. Policy choices have good sides and bad sides, the matters involved are ephemeral, and your own views towards those policies will change over the course of your life. What remains is your people, your nation and your responsibility to participate in the civic life of that nation. One of those responsibilities is to not go to war over ephemeral policy choices.

Policy choices have good sides and bad sides, the matters involved are ephemeral, and your own views towards those policies will change over the course of your life.

Some of these matters are not ephemeral and have a lasting impact on those they affect. Some policies cause unnecessary harm, and on a few of them I doubt I'll change my position.

One of those responsibilities is to not go to war over ephemeral policy choices.

I'm not going to war. I'm stating discontent. Claiming to be "at odds" with others doesn't mean I want to beat them physically, just politically, and the only reason I want that much is because many policies have two sides and there is one side I can't stand ethically. In the example of gay marriage, my view is that there is the side of equality and the side of religious repression. So I'm at odds with the repressive side.

There are non-religious reasons to hold the view that gay marriage or abortion are poor policy choices.

You're acting like I want some kind of foundational change here. I just oppose other Americans on topics I find important.

I just oppose other Americans on topics

I am suggesting that you consider that every policy has good and bad points, and simply consider yourself as favoring a particular policy rather than "opposing other Americans".

It may be simply a shift in interior monologue I am suggesting.

Unfortunately other Americans are the ones pushing those policies, often for religious purposes. Other Americans aren't "enemies", but they are obstacles towards equality for some. I have no problem calling out the ideas of other Americans because while we're all on the same team, some of us aren't very good team players.

Equality is a virtue. But, it is not the only virtue, and it is not applicable to every question.

To illustrate: I am neutral on the issue of abortion. Which of my fellow citizens should I deem the "bad" team players?

Abortion is a more complex issue than "should we treat gays equally?". For that issue, the religious folk blocking others are the "bad" team players. They're pushing their religious values onto others over something that ultimately they'll never have to deal with. They just want to keep gays without equal rights, because they think they are the gatekeepers to everyone else's lives.

Every issue has more than one side.

they think they are the gatekeepers to everyone else's lives

That is a good descriptor for all sorts of people who are certain that they are in the right about everything.

Every issue has more than one side.

And some sides are stupid. Like in the case of gay marriage. Any reason people come up with to oppose it is one of three things: religious dogma and therefor inadmissible, bad reasoning/lies, or outright bigotry.

That is a good descriptor for all sorts of people who are certain that they are in the right about everything.

Even people who think they're right about everything might not want to legislate other people's rights away. A person can think they're right all day long and if they don't use their ideas to disenfranchise others I won't care nearly as much. But if a person makes a march on the rights of others using shitty reasoning I'm going to consider them on a "side" that I don't want to be on. Therefore, I'll oppose those ideas.

rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights rights

Believe it or not, some find those important.

It is a very one-note song you sing.

It's a potent example. Another example is keeping religious dogma out of the public sphere.

Agreed, death to Islam.

did u feel id in ur boody wen i downvoted u trumpet :]

If you stand for things you think are best for your country, you'll inevitably get pushed into a box. I'm liberal. I think that gay marriage is fair, that women should be able to choose, and that religion should stay out of policy. These values will inevitably put me at odds with people that don't hold them, and they call themselves conservatives.

Stop being at odds with the people of your country.

If those people don't like those things so much, why don't they move to some Muslim theocracy? Sharia law seems much more aligned with their values than liberal democracy.

If those people don't like those things so much, why don't they move to some Muslim theocracy

Because our country has traditionally not been entirely in favor of those things, obviously.

liberal democracy

means we vote on things, as a nation. It does not mean that we must implement the atomistic individualist response to everything even when it is against our best interest.

I have always been 'liberal' and, like you, in favor of gay abortions. Like you, I have never been in favor of religious influence over policy. But, I am also willing to admit that there are destructive side-effects from our policies of license, and that a backlash is warranted.

In any case, it is hilarious to hear a "lol sharia" joke from a group of idiots who literally want to allow foreign groups to import sharia out of a misguided sense of thoughtlessly permitting everything.

I doubt you'll hear that argument from them though.

What is your stance on bussy though?

Pro

incompatible

It's impossible for everyone to be compatible. You have to pick your battles

I didn't say everyone was incompatible. Jus the opposite, actually. But some people are.

I think you're over-emphasizing sides here. I consider myself a liberal, and agree with all the positions you outlined above, but I also think there are only two genders, that the US is not a rape culture, and that making college free to students will backfire horribly, putting me at odds with established left-wing opinions on those issues.

The vast majority of people have a mix of opinions from either side of the aisle depending on the issue at hand, and, honestly, if someone 100% falls into one side or the other I question how much effort they've actually made in forming their political outlook.

I think you're reading too much into my comment. I'm making a point about standing up for what you believe in, and how doing so will inevitably put you at odds with people that don't want those things. I don't fall in line 100% with left-wing opinions. In fact, since what's "in vogue" in political opinions changes from year to year, being 100% in line with one side would mean I'm a value-less sheep.

I don't think that's a good way to be. Hopefully that comes across in my comment.

That makes sense, and I probably was reading too much into it. I've been seeing a lot of demands for ideological conformity and polarization these days and it's made me leery of labels. The "inevitably get pushed into a box" resonated a little too close to home for me.

I understand. I'm not advocating for ideological conformity at all. I'm just saying that some people will oppose your opinions, and that inevitably creates "sides". Take gay marriage. I'm for it. Someone that's against it may be a nice person overall, but since I see their position as harmful (eapecially if they're politically active about it), that naturally puts me at odds with them. How can you not take a side against something you see as unjust and unfair?

Hello bizarro /r/circlebroke2!

There is a lot of high-octane faggotry going on in /r/drama right now

Stop being on a side, as long as you are on my side.

Well, the side of everything good and everyone who is not self-destructive and full of self-loathing. :-D

It does not stop at 22. I'm 29 and all I see on Facebook is this shit.

It does not stop at 22. I'm 29 and all I see on Facebook is this shit. The cutoff is more like around 35

I have chicks in their 40's pulling this shit in my Facebook feed. I think it's more tied to stupidity than age.

Age is just a number after all.

You would say that you fucking nazi.

Do you mean there's no way Bernie can still win?

RENT FREE

You're a Nazi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic

Moral panic

A moral panic is a feeling of fear spread among a large number of people that some evil threatens the well-being of society. A Dictionary of Sociology defines a moral panic as "the process of arousing social concern over an issue – usually the work of moral entrepreneurs and the mass media".

The media are key players in the dissemination of moral indignation, even when they do not appear to be consciously engaged in crusading or muckraking. Simply reporting the facts can be enough to generate concern, anxiety, or panic.

^{[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.24}

At this point I'm completely convinced that left-reddit is suffering from a shared mass delusion/crowd hysteria.

It's taken you this long to figure that out?

They have been suffering from a shared mass delusion/hysteria since election night.

Lawlessness is a poison. The morally indignant vigilantism that these left-faggots are promoting is going to bite them on the ass.

Maybe I'm just biased because I am a lawyer, but the opposite of the Rule of Law isn't going to be social justice paradise; it's going to be Donald Trump ruling like Caligula, having people arbitrarily beheaded, ordering Mattis to drop a MOAB on the failing New York Times, claiming the right of prima nocta on all lesbian marriages, etc. all with no appeals.

I mean, I imagine this is his second-term platform anyhow, but there's no need to rush into the Caligula/Nero phase of empire.

I know people tend to ignore Yuri, but it's amazing to me that they do. He laid out everything that was being worked on by the Communists 30 years ago and we can actually verify how much of it has happened.

I feel Trump will settle for plundering the funds of the government and other businesses to line his own pockets rather than bothering with mass beheadings. It's true, though, that the best timing to encourage practicing might makes right politics over respecting the rule of law isn't exactly when your sworn hated enemies' mascot is currently holding presidential office.

That sounds fucking amazing. Let's do it.

Where did you get your degree? Clown college?

The rule of law is the opposite of tyranny - whether at the hands of a despot, or a wailing mob.

The rule of law is the opposite of tyranny

I believe that's essentially what I just said.

Though if you'd like to play "who's law penis pedigree is bigger?" I guess we could do that as well.

Honestly a MOAB on the NYT, and a pina colada lesbian marriage sounds like paradise.

Maybe I'm just biased because I am a lawyer, but the opposite of the Rule of Law isn't going to be social justice paradise; it's going to be Donald Trump (and other people with current institutional power) ruling with utter impunity, having people arbitrarily beheaded, ordering Mattis to drop a MOAB on the failing New York Times, claiming the right of prima nocta on all lesbian marriages, etc. all with no appeals.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner. Rule of law means the biggest dickhead is not in charge.

Lawlessness is a poison. The morally indignant vigilantism that these left-faggots are promoting is going to bite them on the ass.

It already did in Charlottsville. They learned nothing even after they got a girl killed.

This is not a difficult concept to understand. It is literally the first fucking amendment of the Constitution. No amount of REEEEEEING is going to change this fact unless a couple of these freedom hating retards somehow end up sitting on the supreme court.

And you do realize that a Court in the future may reverse that decision, right?

Well, this is technically true in the sense that about anything could happen in the future. But were I a betting person, I would probably note the whole part where the Supreme Court has explicitly reaffirmed the standard for what does or does not constitute "incitement to imminent unlawful action" at least 2-3 every single year since the Skokie case in 1977.

While you absolutely have the right to own a firearm and have a trial by jury, A COURT IN THE FUTURE MAY REVERSE THAT DECISION, YA KNOW?

Checkmate atheists.

This Nazi punching meme is already so tired. We get it guys, you are all totally badass and are definitely gonna get into so many fights. Fighting is cool as hell and you're basically storming the beaches of Normandy when you pepper spray someone and run away

I wonder if there will be any escalation at the next event considering the car attack.

I'm betting on a lefty firing into a crowd.

/u/darkaceAUS

Imagine being so sexist you try and shut everything down by bringing gender into it.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, sweaty, you can't be sexist towards men, honey <3

*sips tee*

I hope you meant 'sweetie'...

/u/HorizontalMotions imagine unironically being a alt-left neo Communist.

Go away Nazi scum.

NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM

I upvoted this lolcow and you should too.

Go away Nazi scum.

NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM NAZI SCUM

Upvoted!

SCUM NAZI

SCUM NAZI

SCUM NAZI

We can start our own drama? This changes everything

Oh completely shock you were upvoted highly OP, when you said :

Defending the First Amendment is not the same as defending Nazis. Saying that somebody has the Constitutional right to spew hate speech (a factual statement) is not saying that the person's hate speech is correct.

I love nazi drama ! On the one hand, being European I can't conceive seeing people march with fucking nazi flags because FUCK NAZIS, but on the other hand I admire the length the US goes to just to protect free speech and I love the rustled jimmies that result from it.

Videos in this thread: Watch Playlist &#9654;

I'm a bot working hard to help Redditors find related videos to watch. I'll keep this updated as long as I can.

Play All | Info | Get me on Chrome / Firefox

shocked that the buzzfeed feminists of trollx don't have serious principles, truly shocked

DELETE THIS

awwww r u butthurt op

Retardation? In my Trollx?

Your reading comprehension totally sucks, OP.

The quote in question:

You're suggesting the symbols he displays [the Nazi flag] are tantamount to incitement, something the U.S. Supreme Court has said is not protected speech.

You go on to claim that what the author is saying is that SCOTUS has ruled Nazi flags to be incitement. What that sentence says is that SCOTUS ruled incitement not to be free speech. They made no claim about what SCOTUS has said regarding Nazi flags or whether they qualify as incitement. That was absolutely the comic writer's own interpretation.

Your undertanding of the law sucks even more: Incitement is protected under the law, To the the degree to which incitement is protected speech is determined by the imminent lawless action test introduced by the 1969 Supreme Court decision in the case Brandenburg v. Ohio.

That's irrelevant to the point I was making.

Your reading comprehension totally sucks too

worse than his mom?

"What that sentence says is that SCOTUS ruled incitement not to be free speech." This statement isn't true. It's only true for imminent lawlessness.

We'll have to agree to disagree about the author's intent. The line "This is why we most oppose them, immediately and unceasingly and with all resources available to us" does not refer to doing anything illegal.

... How the hell do people write things like this with a straight face.