Why is the LEFT howling about Brexit and racist/xenophia....

[RandallFan]

http://www.mofopolitics.com/2016/06/12/nigel-farage-pwns-brexit-forum/

Racebaiting feminazis

By far, Farage’s shakiest moments were vs. racebaiting feminazis (including the deranged moderator)…

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36643891
"The African migrant who voted to leave was as fearful of the new arrivals, of his or her chances in a crowded job and housing market, as was his indigenous British neighbour"

 

[osan]

Because they believe more government is the answer. The EU was more government....

That's only the "means" part of it.

The "ends" part is the masturbatory fantasy of Unicorn World where cats poo out yummy sweet, nutritious, and environmentally friendly candies, everything is free, and white people live at the bottom of the "equality" pyramid, eternal generations paying for the sins of slavery, racism, and so forth... because we all know white people invented slavery, are the only ones to have ever practiced it, who practice it by the simple fact that they live, are the only racists in the world whose very existences are racist, that racism is the single greatest criminal sin possible whereas abortion asa the standard birth control method is the greatest act of love, and so on down the endless litany of reasons why white people should be extinguished from the earth but will not be let off so easily because eternal torment is preferable in their minds to the release of a clean death for the white devils.

How's THAT for a sentence?

Besides, the non-white lefties know that were the krakerz to just up and disappear, there would be nobody left to subsidize their worthless existences. They would themselves face extinction. Therefore, those people need the ones they so deeply hate. Nice corner, and that paint never dries.

The phenomenon of which the OP speaks is the product of the most severe mental disturbance imaginable. I once again bring up the possibility that the existential threat that the "left" poses to decent and worthwhile people all over the world might require a truly genocidal solution if anything of freedom that is worth the mention is to survive. That is the price we as a species pay for our shameful corruption in believing one can be free without cost or responsibility and that it is OK to trust our freedoms to the hands of others. We deserve what we are reaping.

But who knows, maybe someone will invent a pill to make all the booboos better.

 

[tod evans]

But who knows, maybe someone will invent a pill to make all the booboos better.

 

[osan]

My generation...

 

[nobody's_hero]

Sorry, I couldn't help but notice... is that supposed to be a response to erowe1's post? He's questioning the validity of a statistic and you say, "We need to stop it now before it gets bigger!" Yeah, ok, but what about the actual numbers? Were you aware of what the post meant or are you trying to change the subject?

Or, in your old age, did you accidentally assume that questioning these statistics is somehow affiliated with a certain viewpoint and the connection does not need to be forthright stated in order for you to exploit it? I honestly don't understand how you got from "Source, please" to "we should let it get out of hand", which seems to be the viewpoint you are replying to without it ever being stated in the previous post.

Are specific numbers really as important as the trends? I ask honestly. If the citizens of Calais, France are run out of their birthplace by a number of refugees that may have started as merely 1% of the residents of the city and later grows to 15%, to argue over exact figures at any given time is pointless, yes? The trend is the problem, not exact figures. Sure, we can all sit here and play "gotcha! where's your source?", but I don't need to write a 10 page thesis paper with footnotes and a 20 page bibliography in the back, to look over at Europe and see what impact outside cultures have had, and are having, on the native people. Are people no longer allowed or capable of making their own observations?

Facts are great. They help support arguments. And yet, if I see two cars collide in the street in front of my house, I don't need to find a source telling me what I just saw.

The problem is some people are so blind to ignore what is happening in Europe, and perhaps too naïve in their beliefs that it cannot happen here. (That is a running theme among open borders libertarians and I suppose it's why I will never be considered 'pure', because I don't subscribe to that line of thinking)

That is the point I was trying to make.

And I don't know how you assumed my age from my post. I'll be 30 this year. I personally don't think that's very old, but push me out to the pasture if I'm holding up 'progress'.

 

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

It's culture and "race" but race only to the extent of it being tied to the Christian history and culture. .

Christianity is kinda cool and all, but a lot of Western white culture and sweat equity comes from elsewhere.

The Greeks. The Romans. Hell, even the English common law predates English Christianity.

Domination by the Church of the 1000 years after Rome fell wasn't all that great. But that the whites had ideas and wrote them down and sh1t and that helped.

Especially when the idea of rationality and logic and philosophy took off again with the Renaissance and Enlightenment, which led to the US and our Constitution.

 

[susano]

Are specific numbers really as important as the trends? I ask honestly. If the citizens of Calais, France are run out of their birthplace by a number of refugees that may have started as merely 1% of the residents of the city and later grows to 15%, to argue over exact figures at any given time is pointless, yes? The trend is the problem, not exact figures. Sure, we can all sit here and play "gotcha! where's your source?", but I don't need to write a 10 page thesis paper with footnotes and a 20 page bibliography in the back, to look over at Europe and see what impact outside cultures have had, and are having, on the native people. Are people no longer allowed or capable of making their own observations?

Facts are great. They help support arguments. And yet, if I see two cars collide in the street in front of my house, I don't need to find a source telling me what I just saw.

The problem is some people are so blind to ignore what is happening in Europe, and perhaps too naïve in their beliefs that it cannot happen here. (That is a running theme among open borders libertarians and I suppose it's why I will never be considered 'pure', because I don't subscribe to that line of thinking)

That is the point I was trying to make.

And I don't know how you assumed my age from my post. I'll be 30 this year. I personally don't think that's very old, but push me out to the pasture if I'm holding up 'progress'.

The most distressing of all, for me, is seeing native European women and kids sacrificed for multiculturalism. I remember when I was young (70s) and Europe was known for it's very low violent crime. Not anymore. Sadly, they've become like US inner cities (difference being the absurd sentences in Europe). I know this is a neocon run site but these are accurate, nevertheless, as I've been reading this stuff for years from European sources:

An 18-year-old asylum seeker from Afghanistan was sentenced to 20 months in prison for raping a 72-year-old woman in Traiskirchen. "First he beat the woman black and blue, then he raped her, and then he took her underwear as a trophy," local police said. In addition to a lenient sentence, the man will be allowed to remain in Austria and, after he leaves prison, collect social welfare benefits.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7995/migrants-rape-austria


That's one in a mountain of such hideous crimes, most of which are swept under the rug and excuses made for the migrants vicious behavior. One of the most insane items I came across was an open borders volunteer who was gang raped in some Calais type camp and her fellow commies convinced her to keep quiet lest she harm the open borders/pro migrant cause. It took like a week before she came forward.

 

[susano]

Christianity is kinda cool and all, but a lot of Western white culture and sweat equity comes from elsewhere.

The Greeks. The Romans. Hell, even the English common law predates English Christianity.

Domination by the Church of the 1000 years after Rome fell wasn't all that great. But that the whites had ideas and wrote them down and sh1t and that helped.

Especially when the idea of rationality and logic and philosophy took off again with the Renaissance and Enlightenment, which led to the US and our Constitution.

I'm no historian but I do know that the story of humanity is pretty damn grim. Some is just less grim. While I am not religious, I don't think you can underestimate the power and influence of Jesus Christ. Even Jefferson complied his own "bible" of the teachings of Jesus. I sure don't mean to say the Roman church was so great, either (!). I think when the printing press came along and the teachings of Christ were made widely available that it propelled the common people morally (maybe just to better daily behavior but maybe more). I also read something from the guy who wrote a book about the Cross of Hendye and the sudden building of cathedrals across Europe and that it had a huge impact on society. I'd like to read more about that but have never gotten around to it. That said, you're certainly right that those others things have to be taken into consideration.

 

[alucard13mm]

China got misguided with communism that kinda set us back a bit. Killing off and/or reeducating all the intellectuals.

India.. not sure wtf happened to india o.o..

To be fair.. the west got their shit together by exploiting other countries lol. (Mod edit)

 

[Son_of_Liberty90]

That's only the "means" part of it.

The "ends" part is the masturbatory fantasy of Unicorn World where cats poo out yummy sweet, nutritious, and environmentally friendly candies, everything is free, and white people live at the bottom of the "equality" pyramid, eternal generations paying for the sins of slavery, racism, and so forth... because we all know white people invented slavery, are the only ones to have ever practiced it, who practice it by the simple fact that they live, are the only racists in the world whose very existences are racist, that racism is the single greatest criminal sin possible whereas abortion asa the standard birth control method is the greatest act of love, and so on down the endless litany of reasons why white people should be extinguished from the earth but will not be let off so easily because eternal torment is preferable in their minds to the release of a clean death for the white devils.

How's THAT for a sentence?

Besides, the non-white lefties know that were the krakerz to just up and disappear, there would be nobody left to subsidize their worthless existences. They would themselves face extinction. Therefore, those people need the ones they so deeply hate. Nice corner, and that paint never dries.

The phenomenon of which the OP speaks is the product of the most severe mental disturbance imaginable. I once again bring up the possibility that the existential threat that the "left" poses to decent and worthwhile people all over the world might require a truly genocidal solution if anything of freedom that is worth the mention is to survive. That is the price we as a species pay for our shameful corruption in believing one can be free without cost or responsibility and that it is OK to trust our freedoms to the hands of others. We deserve what we are reaping.

But who knows, maybe someone will invent a pill to make all the booboos better.

+REP

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Are specific numbers really as important as the trends? I ask honestly. If the citizens of Calais, France are run out of their birthplace by a number of refugees that may have started as merely 1% of the residents of the city and later grows to 15%, to argue over exact figures at any given time is pointless, yes? The trend is the problem, not exact figures. Sure, we can all sit here and play "gotcha! where's your source?", but I don't need to write a 10 page thesis paper with footnotes and a 20 page bibliography in the back, to look over at Europe and see what impact outside cultures have had, and are having, on the native people. Are people no longer allowed or capable of making their own observations?

Facts are great. They help support arguments. And yet, if I see two cars collide in the street in front of my house, I don't need to find a source telling me what I just saw.

The problem is some people are so blind to ignore what is happening in Europe, and perhaps too naïve in their beliefs that it cannot happen here. (That is a running theme among open borders libertarians and I suppose it's why I will never be considered 'pure', because I don't subscribe to that line of thinking)

That is the point I was trying to make.

And I don't know how you assumed my age from my post. I'll be 30 this year. I personally don't think that's very old, but push me out to the pasture if I'm holding up 'progress'.

No, I mean, you seemed to be responding to a position, but erowe1's post stated no position, just asked for a source. It's very strange to respond with a reasoned position to a post that contains no reasoned position, but rather just questions a statistic provided. It doesn't make logical sense to carry on a discourse in this way unless you are just assuming a position that was not stated, in which case you should at least state the position you are assuming to make sure that is actually the position of the person you are responding to.

 

[LibertyEagle]

No, I mean, you seemed to be responding to a position, but erowe1's post stated no position, just asked for a source. It's very strange to respond with a reasoned position to a post that contains no reasoned position, but rather just questions a statistic provided. It doesn't make logical sense to carry on a discourse in this way unless you are just assuming a position that was not stated, in which case you should at least state the position you are assuming to make sure that is actually the position of the person you are responding to.

His post was great.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

His post was great.

It seems I can't question the appropriateness of a reasoned response to a post with no position without attracting some kind of opinionated input. What the fuck? I'm not stating a position on this matter. I'm pointing out a logical flaw in the procession of the discourse. The guy was refuting a post that had no position one way or the other. I didn't say the post was great or not, just showing what I perceive to be a bit of a leap in logic from nobody's hero. He just skipped the part about actually knowing erowe1's opinion and refuted it without even knowing what it was. I don't need you telling me how good it was, LE.

 

[LibertyEagle]

It seems I can't question the appropriateness of a reasoned response to a post with no position without attracting some kind of opinionated input. What the $#@!? I'm not stating a position on this matter. I'm pointing out a logical flaw in the procession of the discourse. The guy was refuting a post that had no position one way or the other. I didn't say the post was great or not, just showing what I perceive to be a bit of a leap in logic from nobody's hero. He just skipped the part about actually knowing erowe1's opinion and refuted it without even knowing what it was. I don't need you telling me how good it was, LE.

He wasn't even talking to you. Are you just trying to pick a fight, or what?

 

[PaulConventionWV]

He wasn't even talking to you. Are you just trying to pick a fight, or what?

What business is it of yours? I wasn't talking to you and here you are butting in. Are YOU trying to pick a fight?

And besides, I already said my post was neutral. I'm not even expressing an opinion. That won't stop you from acting butt hurt about God-knows-what.

 

[helmuth_hubener]

5) Do you agree that the elites use race, color, religion, etc. to try and divide the people against each other?

I do not agree. Elites are not that powerful to do something like that. You are making them out to be superhumans.

No, people actually are divided on the basis of race, ethnicity, and religion. These factors create very profound divisions. This is because the people in these groups are profoundly different from each other. Now we are all humans, and thus we are also similar in many ways. But our differences are important, too. They exist. They are not superficial. They are not meaningless. And they are not the artificial concoction of some master Elite playing chess with the world.

6) Could you agree with the logic that for every case where anyone focuses on the elite created divides that they are doing the bidding of the elite?

Premise has been debunked. Question is now defunct. Elites do not create the divides among humans. There is in actual reality a great variety humans, in the many tribes of man, and some of these varieties do not get along.

7) Could you agree with the logic that the liberty movement has a stronger message by exposing and focusing on the divide and conquer techniques of the elites? Could you agree this is a message that unifies all victims?

So let's all join hands as victims? Look at how victimized we are!

That sauce is so lame, it couldn't even make it to the front door. It can't even stand up off its couch. Lame.

You know what's even better than being victims? Having the truth. Not being afraid of the truth. And operating in accordance to and with a fearless acceptance of the truth.

Truth will win when wishy-washy wishing won't.

 

[RandallFan]

The Conservative Party of UK is really cuckservative in terms of that term.

The GOP is totally alien, there is taking quota queens like Sotomayor & Lani Guinier to the woodshed. The Conservative Party of the UK certainly doesn't exploit or call out the bigots & quota queens in the other parties or their opposition.

Michael Steele & Colin Powell happen to be scumbags and hurting the GOP; so Limbaugh took them to the woodshed.

They're meant to Lay Down & Rot when an opinionated minority enters the room.