"A general reluctance to forcefully spend other people's money with reckless abandon is probably racist and homophobic somehow." ~mainstream society in the current year
"A general reluctance to forcefully spend other people's money with reckless abandon is probably rac
Yea, scary enough that they don't want to hear me saying anything about it. The usual rhetoric I receive from such discussion is; "You and your conspiracy theory", or something like that. Even though it's all facts which are laying in plain sight right in front of their eyes. So with those people there is not even the begging of a discussion. And by "those people" I also include part of my family. It seems that most people love to reveal in their ignorance, and complaisance, and live their life hocked to the mama-states and not wanting to hear anything that would suggest that there is the possibility of a big storm brewing on the horizon. PS (Please note that I live outside of the USA in a particularly socialistic country that just loves to borrow money on the head of future generations. This comment may or may not apply to you. I'm including this because the people in the USA have a great tendency to ignore the fact that the WWW is worldwide, and NOT USA centric. The USA would in great probability NOT qualify as a "mama-states" quite the opposite.)
Yea, scary enough that they don't want to hear me saying anything about it. The usual rhetoric I re
Strange, then, that the entirely unscientific gender rhetoric, the belief that the demonstrable failure that is Socialism is actually great, the spread of postmodernism in universities that denies facts can even exist (where the left outnumbers the right at least 12-1), is all coming from the left, eh? The propensity to embrace bullshit is a human universal, it isn't restricted to a side of a broad political aisle. There is far more absolute bollocks coming from the left today, it has replaced the position conservatives once held in previous decades at its seat on the throne of unmitigated horseshit.
Strange, then, that the entirely unscientific gender rhetoric, the belief that the demonstrable fail
The gender rhetoric is literally scientific 💀 science doesn't have to agree with your opinions. There are more leftists in unis because its been scientifically proven over and over again that the more educated someone is, the further left they tend to be-- not opinion, true, proven fact that you claim to support. The rest of your statement has nothing to do with fact so I'm not gonna address it. But higher education shows an advance in critical thinking, leading someone to be left on the compass.
Once again i cite sources, bc I'm actually dedicated to fact and knowledge. Feel free to read.
It literally isn't scientific. It comes from postmodern academia, an ideology that denies the existence of facts. Your links aren't science, they are people defining language. Gender rhetoric, that is. As for the more educated being more liberal, it would be astounding to NOT find such a result, given that faculty in universities are vastly left-leaning. If you've got a ton of commies in powerful and teaching positions in the institutions, you get commie students being belched out of them.
It literally isn't scientific. It comes from postmodern academia, an ideology that denies the existe
Read Gad Saad's latest book, The Parasitic Mind, if you're so keen on sources. That's one book that's full of them. Or The Madness of Crowds by Douglas Murray. The "scientific" work on gender being fluid and non-binary comes from postmodern works like Judith Butler's Gender Trouble, which is the most cited work in the pseudo-field. It has zero statistics or evidence in it. Literally none. You've no business telling me what's not real, considering you deny basic observable reality.
Read Gad Saad's latest book, The Parasitic Mind, if you're so keen on sources. That's one book that'
Do you have a scientific or sociological background? I confess I do not, and perhaps that is the case with Roarey. But I am rather old school and prefer reading printed books to fly-by-night internet pages. Also I read several books on a topic, and if something is true or false several books usually agree.
There are Bigfoot societies, but there has been no evidence of any real life hominid Bigfoot. There have been Elvis sightings, but no evidence that Elvis faked his death in 1977. There were rumors that power lines or cell phones caused cancer, and that was discredited. So why should we NOT wonder if the latest hysteria is really just another con job?
Do you have a scientific or sociological background? I confess I do not, and perhaps that is the ca
The reason people don't believe in global warming is because it isn't happening? Where is the evidence? Why haven't the ice caps disappeared? Where is the ocean rising? We've heard all this hysteria-mongering horseshit before, and who is it coming from? Nonscientists like Greta Thunberg and Al Gore. I guess they couldn't find real scientists to provide evidence.
The reason people don't believe in global warming is because it isn't happening? Where is the evide
The Piltdown Man fooled 'em for thirty years, and it was a hoax staged for political reasons. There is no evidence that global warming is happening, and everyone would have seen it by now. I certainly would have. The ice caps did not disappear, there is no evidence oceans are rising, there is no indication that severe weather events are more numerous. There was talk that global warming caused the New Orleans flood of 2007, and if that were the case why haven't there been repeats? Plenty of things happen supposedly by one cause then it turns out that another cause in the case. A century ago scientists though earthquakes were caused by gasses in the Earth's crust, then later on it's caused by plate tectonics. And if global warming is real, why are we not hearing this from real scientists instead of celebrities like Greta Thunberg?
If you knew real science, you would know a lot of scientific theories have proven false. Ever heard of phlogiston?
The Piltdown Man fooled 'em for thirty years, and it was a hoax staged for political reasons. There
Can you guys give some sources to back Your "facts," if possible? I'm happy to engage in discussion, but it needs to be discussion and not all the "bollocks" and "horseshit." Facts and reason
Can you guys give some sources to back Your "facts," if possible? I'm happy to engage in discussion,
It makes sense, though, because conservatives are, by and large, hateful and shitty people who deserve being treated like shit in return. Certainly you, personally, repeatedly the make the case that you’re an attention-seeking, drama-loving piece of entitled shit who loves to tell other people that they’re wrongheaded and bad because they don’t adhere to your personal head-up-your-own-ass reality, and who responds to any and all challenge with “no you’re wrong and your point is wrong because it doesn’t line up with my own bullshit.”
So yeah, I’m happy to treat you like shit when that’s how I’ve seen you treat anyone who doesn’t loudly proclaim agreement with you because they’re hoping you’ll draw them free art down the line or some shit.
It makes sense, though, because conservatives are, by and large, hateful and shitty people who deser
Aww, come back have you with your pathetic nonsense? Last I checked I'm not the one who goes to peoples' profiles to verbally abuse them, nor do I try to destroy anyone's reputation. All the cancelling bullshit, the abuse in the fandom, the rapists, the pedos, the fucking animal abusers, the lot of you are lefties who virtue signal about how wonderful you are while you treat everyone else like garbage, including your own friends when they say something "wrong". You're all terrified of eachother because you can't be trusted. I'm hateful and shitty because I bite back? Nah, you're just weak as piss. I am eternally thankful I'm not one of you awful sacks of shit.
Aww, come back have you with your pathetic nonsense? Last I checked I'm not the one who goes to peop
All I'm seeing is that you REFUSE to accept sources, cite sources, or engage in actual factual debate, instead resorting to name-calling. That's literally proving why conservatives get "treated worse" and why they've been proven to be less effective critical thinkers. Science is impartial. Science cares about facts and logic, not if it hurts your feelings or your world view.
All I'm seeing is that you REFUSE to accept sources, cite sources, or engage in actual factual debat
It isn't a refusal to accept sources, it is pointing out that your links prove nothing, which is a fact. Whether you link to some story on a website or not isn't an argument. As for actual studies, there are hardly any when it comes to the mistreatment of conservatives, there's only one I know of and it is an extremely left-wing one that concludes social media treats conservatives fairly, which is absolute shite. If you don't want to make the effort to learn what's been going on for the past several years for yourself then that's fine, but don't put that burden on my shoulders. I'm not obligated to engage you and you're not entitled to demand anything from me. And what fucking name have I called you, exactly?
It isn't a refusal to accept sources, it is pointing out that your links prove nothing, which is a f
Who needs sources when you’re Roarey Raccoon, Big-Brain Conservative who speaks nothing but The Truth on all aspects of life and society? Obviously posting links is just proof that this “evidence” nonsense is a liberal conspiracy.
Also he did that thing where he called his opponents a bunch of childish names and then had the balls to deny doing it when all the text is still on this same page! Classic Roarey!
Who needs sources when you’re Roarey Raccoon, Big-Brain Conservative who speaks nothing but The Trut
I don't recall Roarey calling anybody names. And as for links, anybody can post a link; it doesn't mean it's gospel truth. And hearing you complain about treating people like shit is like being called overweight by a Sumo wrestler. I looked you up and I don't recall Roarey posting anything on your threads.
I don't recall Roarey calling anybody names. And as for links, anybody can post a link; it doesn't
All conservatives have super big brains, it's how they reach amazing scientific views like "Academia is infiltrated by Marxists who want to destroy society." "Obama is the anti-christ" and "Trump was sent down by god to save America from the evil radical libs"
300 IQ roarey gets all his science from the right-wing trashbin. You know how raccoons are.
All conservatives have super big brains, it's how they reach amazing scientific views like "Academia
My patience and good faith wasn't reciprocated in the past so I don't see the point in expending any effort outside of mockery and contempt. Especially from someone who wants to pretend that the party that lives in a magical fairy tale world is pro science.
My patience and good faith wasn't reciprocated in the past so I don't see the point in expending any
Party? I'm a conservative, but the Conservative Party in the UK is not conservative in their actual values. I don't have a party, no fucker stands up for my values in the political world. You don't understand a damn thing so instead of acting like I've done something to you and now it's your turn to do something back, just fuck off instead of giving me your pathetic, petty, uncomprehending nonsense.
Party? I'm a conservative, but the Conservative Party in the UK is not conservative in their actual
Firstly, I never argued that anyone has to have a scientific background. Roarey doesn't represent a "sensible, fact-based out look on life" and will outright reject what's factual if it disagrees with him. This question is irrelevant.
Secondly, suppose I were to say yes. My credentials wouldn't mean a thing, because as I've already established roarey will reject facts when they disagree with them. So on top of your question being irrelevant, it becomes a question where the answer almost wouldn't matter either.
Firstly, I never argued that anyone has to have a scientific background. Roarey doesn't represent a
Nope, it was to illustrate the point that universities are dominated by the left, because you brought up the point I had made about universities churning out Marxists as if that was nonsense. It isn't nonsense. The STEM fields largely retain their integrity because they are fact-based disciplines, but the sociology, queer studies, womens' studies, black studies departments exist and all of them are Marxist. Our political and media class hail largely from universities, it is no secret that they almost all have degrees, and it is also no secret that the majority of the people in mainstream positions of power, entertainment and media are on the left. Why do we all know about critical race theory, fourth wave feminism, gender politics etc? If these people were not in positions of power and influence we would not be affected by their nonsense, yet it has permeated almost every facet of society, even fringe fandoms like furry aren't free from it. So one of the claims I made that you said was rubbish is actually true, yet you claim I'm stupid lol. Pathetic.
Nope, it was to illustrate the point that universities are dominated by the left, because you brough
Marxism is Marxism. What is the character of that ideology? It makes the claim that all of human history and our present is chiefly influenced by a conflict between a class of oppressors and a class of oppressed. The only difference between critical race theory, feminism etc and Marxism of the 19th and 20th centuries of any impact is changing the way the two opposing classes are delineated. Instead of it being purely economic, the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, it is white vs black, men vs women, cis vs trans etc etc. This is elementary and obvious. No wonder you have nothing to say besides a retarded slogan you stole from a youtuber.
Marxism is Marxism. What is the character of that ideology? It makes the claim that all of human his
Politically partisan education is always a scam, including all the modern courses that have no use to society or the student, in the humanities departments of every university in the world.
Politically partisan education is always a scam, including all the modern courses that have no use t
Okay, you don't need to be an astronomer or physicist to know that the speed of light is 186,282 miles per second. But if you speak on any topic, it does help to know what you are talking about. If you think Roarey won't accept facts, why bother posting on his thread? Echo chambers may be boring, but if you have a dissenting opinion, you'd better learn how to back up what you say. If you don't you just end up making a fool of yourself.
Okay, you don't need to be an astronomer or physicist to know that the speed of light is 186,282 mil
