[Jimmy]

You're confusing anarchy and chaos, dude.

[Phredreeke]

NO GODS OR KINGS ONLY MAN

[Radar]

The Overman, on 16 August 2020 - 03:10 PM, said:

True anarchy does not exist.
True communism does not exist.

The Overman, on 16 August 2020 - 03:10 PM, said:

Being an enemy of the united states is also pretty horrible if you're not a u.s. citizen.

81000 people were tortured under the phoenix program in Vietnam

You can look up US torture and find a reviling amount of info on the subject.

In essence I'm trying to say that a country that does not support such evils on their own land should not
practice such evils elsewhere and should not encourage such practices by financially supporting such countries that do such things.

its gud wen utter cuntries d0 it but bad wen merica do it!!!11!!

Hendricks266, on 16 August 2020 - 08:53 PM, said:

Do you have a single fact to back that up?

Number one: Ballot harvesting is a well-documented act of electoral corruption. Number two: Democrats have attempted to pass bills that legalize ballot harvesting nationwide.

Targeting blue homes and knocking on their doors so that they hurry up and finish their ballots is not my idea of "land of the free".

Danukem, on 16 August 2020 - 11:00 PM, said:

Whether you believe in a conspiracy or not, the fact that we are even having this discussion is proof of the precipitous decline of America. In the latter part of the 20th century we were the world's preeminent superpower who could send men to the moon, now we are a nation of sore losers and crybabies who can't even deliver mail.

Never-Trumpers as yourself are certainly chummy about this year's anticipated left-wing voter fraud.

Jimmy, on 17 August 2020 - 01:18 AM, said:

People who constantly harp on about fascism and "new holocausts" and other insane liberal paranoias (there are insane conservative paranoias as well) are very suspiciously quiet on the Uyghur issue, at least here in America. To me that is just proof of how corporations court the left so that they ignore things that make the corporations a lot of money, anti-corporate ideals have seriously waned since the 90s.

I've been sounding off on Chinese Uyghur camps for years at this point. One of the most astounding things about this is that Western Muslim leaders are completely silent about this. But why? Could it be that Muslims treat Muslims so crappy in their own countries that they wouldn't dare cross a progressive ally even when Muslims lives are at stake? Why do Sharia-law supporting Muslims end up supporting progressive socialist policies anyway? Is Islam actually progressive? Not even Christianity is progressive. Are people dumb enough to actually believe that? Of course Islam isn't progressive. The entire goal of radical Islam is to bleed the West dry, and utilizing Marxist ideas is just one way to do that.

I'm not saying all Muslims are radical. Check out based Muslims like Imam Tawhidi. But guys like him are few and far in between.

[Kyanos]

Phredreeke, on 17 August 2020 - 02:41 PM, said:

NO GODS OR KINGS ONLY MAN

No Gods or Kings, only man

[Jimmy]

Phredreeke, on 17 August 2020 - 02:41 PM, said:

NO GODS OR KINGS ONLY MAN

Almost every serious anarchist I've ever met believes in God or in some sort of a cosmic hierarchy. Spirituality is pretty key to anarchy functioning. Aspiration to the higher order of the universe renders government management of affairs unnecessary as man is aligned with natural law.

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 03:00 PM, said:

Conversely pretty much every serious socialist/communist I've ever met is a Satanist.

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 03:00 PM, said:

its gud wen utter cuntries d0 it but bad wen merica do it!!!11!!

America has done it's evils but you'd be remiss to think that we haven't limited untold evils from being unleashed the world over. Watch some gore/execution videos from South America or the Middle East or China. This isn't even war stuff, this is just what people to do each other for whatever reason. The world is a sick fucking place. Westerners are naive to the true horrors that plague this planet on a nearly daily basis. Not enough of the pedophiles, murderers, and other savages are being put to sleep out there.

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 03:00 PM, said:

I've been sounding off on Chinese Uyghur camps for years at this point. One of the most astounding things about this is that Western Muslim leaders are completely silent about this. But why? Could it be that Muslims treat Muslims so crappy in their own countries that they wouldn't dare cross a progressive ally even when Muslims lives are at stake? Why do Sharia-law supporting Muslims end up supporting progressive socialist policies anyway? Is Islam actually progressive? Not even Christianity is progressive. Are people dumb enough to actually believe that? Of course Islam isn't progressive. The entire goal of radical Islam is to bleed the West dry, and utilizing Marxist ideas is just one way to do that.

I'm not saying all Muslims are radical. Check out based Muslims like Imam Tawhidi. But guys like him are few and far in between.

They want the whole world to be like Gaddafi's ass with a sword inserted into it.

[Phredreeke]

What's the difference between Nazism and Communism?

Spoiler

You never hear a Nazi say real Nazism has never been tried

[Balls of Steel Forever]

Jimmy, on 17 August 2020 - 02:25 PM, said:

You're confusing anarchy and chaos, dude.

Anarchy and political turmoil are very different things I agree.
But they both give rise to the same thing.

Anarchy can give rise to democracy or any form of government for that matter,
but usually someone or a group of people take advantage of the situation before that's even considered.

Anarchy is a lack of government,
and so long as there is more then one person on this planet,
there will be one person who attempts to exploit it.

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 03:00 PM, said:

its gud wen utter cuntries d0 it but bad wen merica do it!!!11!!

It's bad when anyone does it.

America is not holier than thou and should not act like it until policies significantly change.

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 03:00 PM, said:

Number one: Ballot harvesting is a well-documented act of electoral corruption. Number two: Democrats have attempted to pass bills that legalize ballot harvesting nationwide.

Ballot harvesting is not mail in voting.

Phredreeke, on 17 August 2020 - 03:44 PM, said:

What's the difference between Nazism and Communism?

Spoiler

You never hear a Nazi say real Nazism has never been tried

I did Nazi that coming

[Jimmy]

Phredreeke, on 17 August 2020 - 03:44 PM, said:

What's the difference between Nazism and Communism?

Spoiler

You never hear a Nazi say real Nazism has never been tried

You've obviously never been to /pol/.

[Radar]

Mail-in voting means everyone receives a ballot in the mail preemptively without request. Otherwise that would just be an absentee ballot. Funny how on this forum and even in real life, none of my "centrist" "neutral" friends are concerned with this. Is it only the pro-Trump crowd who cares about a fair election this year? Now pair that with ballot harvesting, where every American is guaranteed to have a ballot in their home... or not. Surely some of them will "disappear" before they reach their destination. Hm, where did they go? Is it counter-intuitive? Is it every rational explanation in the world? Nah bruh, you're just trying to sUpPrEsS tHe VoTe. I'll go out and harvest ballots myself if that's how things are going down. Oh wait no I can't do that because it's only bad if the Right does it.

[Jimmy]

I know how to defeat voter fraud, and no one will ever let this happen because it cuts out 99% of cheating on all sides.

1: If you want to vote, you have to register up to a month ahead of every vote, every time. There's a limited and known pool of eligible voters for each process.
2: If you end up not voting, you have to sign a notarized document that you did not vote. Failure to follow up on this should be a minor criminal offense.
3: You need a government issued voter identification card to prove you are who you say you are.
4: All voters are accounted for and their names/votes are public record.
5: You can only vote in-person with a pen on paper.
6: Voting sheets are carbonless copy paper. You receive an exact replica of your vote on the spot.
7: All votes, original and copies, are notarized on the spot.
8: All votes are counted by hand as they are received and reported upward.
9: Everything is filmed at all times.
10: Any interruption of this process with intent or malice is charged as treason. All portions of the process are reviewed before finalization of the results.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 05:42 PM, said:

Mail-in voting means everyone receives a ballot in the mail preemptively without request. Otherwise that would just be an absentee ballot. Funny how on this forum and even in real life, none of my "centrist" "neutral" friends are concerned with this. Is it only the pro-Trump crowd who cares about a fair election this year? Now pair that with ballot harvesting, where every American is guaranteed to have a ballot in their home... or not. Surely some of them will "disappear" before they reach their destination. Hm, where did they go? Is it counter-intuitive? Is it every rational explanation in the world? Nah bruh, you're just trying to sUpPrEsS tHe VoTe. I'll go out and harvest ballots myself if that's how things are going down. Oh wait no I can't do that because it's only bad if the Right does it.

If mail in voting was mandatory I could see your opinion being valid.
But it's not mandatory, it's an option.

and absentee ballots are part of mail in voting,
you yourself said if you're unable to go out and vote you shouldn't vote,
so I'm confused are you for or against absentee ballots.

Jimmy, on 17 August 2020 - 06:00 PM, said:

I know how to defeat voter fraud, and no one will ever let this happen because it cuts out 99% of cheating on all sides.

Omnicide also eliminates voter fraud and I think one day we might consider it.

[Danukem]

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 06:03 PM, said:

If mail in voting was mandatory I could see your opinion being valid.
But it's not mandatory, it's an option.

and absentee ballots are part of mail in voting,
you yourself said if you're unable to go out and vote you shouldn't vote,
so I'm confused are you for or against absentee ballots.

He's fine with absentee ballots because people have to specifically request them. There's a lot of issues with mass-mail ballots that don't exist for absentee. For example, a dead person is unlikely to request an absentee because they are, you know, dead. Someone could request an absentee ballot on behalf of a dead person, but that takes more forethought, planning and knowledge of the situation. If ballots of mass-mailed then presumably they will be mailed to a lot of dead people because records aren't up to date. Then when the harvesters come to the door, they fill out all the ballots mailed to the household whether mailed to the dead or living.

Another issue is that presumably in-person voting will still be going on (it would be insane not to, the much reverred Dr Fauci himself said it would be fine as long as we adhere to the same rules we follow every time we are at the grocery store). That being the case, if they have mailed a ballot to everyone, how do they know whether you are showing up to vote a second time? With absentee ballots, you are either supposed to bring the unused absentee with you to the poll to show you didn't use it, or you get a "provisional" ballot which is only supposed to be counted if you didn't mail in the absentee. Think of the chaos of applying this on a mass-scale with people who have never voted. A lot of them may have forgotten to mail in the one sent to them, and now they are under obligation to turn in the envelope they may have lost, or their vote is only "provisional".

[Radar]

I can be opposed to remote voting while recognizing that some forms are worse than others. I have no problem with absentee ballots for the disabled. But it should be a very strict list. "Vacation" or "single mom" or "I don't have a car" is complete BS.

[Danukem]

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 06:20 PM, said:

I can be opposed to remote voting while recognizing that some forms are worse than others. I have no problem with absentee ballots for the disabled. But it should be a very strict list. "Vacation" or "single mom" or "I don't have a car" is complete BS.

I don't see why it needs to be strict. What's wrong with requesting one because you know you will be on a planned vacation? What about members of the armed services who are posted far from home? The strictness should be in avoiding fraud, not in vetting the reasons people give for wanting an absentee ballot.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

Danukem, on 17 August 2020 - 06:19 PM, said:

if they have mailed a ballot to everyone, how do they know whether you are showing up to vote a second time?

Assign every voter a unique id number (license id)
off the grid server
any votes with the same license id get automatically deleted.
Bipartisan effort to ensure that there is no fiddling with the server.

The very same way there's a bipartisan effort to eliminate fraudulent voting.

[Danukem]

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 06:34 PM, said:

Assign every voter a unique id number (license id)
off the grid server
any votes with the same license id get automatically deleted.
Bipartisan effort to ensure that there is no fiddling with the server.

The very same way there's a bipartisan effort to eliminate fraudulent voting.

There's actually a lot of ways it could be done, if people actually wanted to. But how likely is it that something like that will be put into place in the next two months?

By the way, why do you think that Democrats are so emphatically against voter ID laws? (requiring voters to present an ID to verify identity). Do you accept the explanation of the ACLU at face value? Here it is:

https://www.aclu.org...tion-fact-sheet

Quote

Voter identification laws are a part of an ongoing strategy to roll back decades of progress on voting rights. Thirty-four states have identification requirements at the polls. Seven states have strict photo ID laws, under which voters must present one of a limited set of forms of government-issued photo ID in order to cast a regular ballot – no exceptions.

Voter ID laws deprive many voters of their right to vote, reduce participation, and stand in direct opposition to our country’s trend of including more Americans in the democratic process. Many Americans do not have one of the forms of identification states acceptable for voting. These voters are disproportionately low-income, racial and ethnic minorities, the elderly, and people with disabilities. Such voters more frequently have difficulty obtaining ID, because they cannot afford or cannot obtain the underlying documents that are a prerequisite to obtaining government-issued photo ID card.

Doesn't it seem odd to you that at a time when the left claims that Russians and the right generally are trying to rig elections, the left also wants to deprive states of the ability to check the identity of who shows up to vote?

[Radar]

Danukem, on 17 August 2020 - 06:32 PM, said:

I don't see why it needs to be strict. What's wrong with requesting one because you know you will be on a planned vacation? What about members of the armed services who are posted far from home? The strictness should be in avoiding fraud, not in vetting the reasons people give for wanting an absentee ballot.

Because voter fraud is prevented by strict voting rules. Also, I think it's absolutely insane that photo identification and Voter ID card is not a national requirement.

I don't have a problem with military members voting overseas btw.

[Danukem]

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 07:25 PM, said:

Because voter fraud is prevented by strict voting rules. Also, I think it's absolutely insane that photo identification and Voter ID card is not a national requirement.

Completely agree. I have a Canadian friend who bought into the standard narrative about Republicans making it hard for minorities to vote and they were surprised when I pointed out that the left in the US actually opposes voter ID (it's a requirement in Canada, as in most places): https://www.election...nt=index&lang=e

So what is considered racist anti-minority obstacles to voting in the US is just standard practice in more leftist Canada.

That's not to say that my Canadian friend is any better disposed to Republicans now than before, but the point is that many people don't realize how radical and hypocritical the Democrats are on this issue.

[Morpheus Kitami]

I've never understood the argument against voter ID laws. If the problem is they don't have a license or an ID, they have bigger problems than whether or not they can vote. If it must be done, just give these legendary poor people who can't afford that a temporary ID for voting, free of charge. After, of course, checking that they're legal residents.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

Danukem, on 17 August 2020 - 07:05 PM, said:

There's actually a lot of ways it could be done, if people actually wanted to. But how likely is it that something like that will be put into place in the next two months?

By the way, why do you think that Democrats are so emphatically against voter ID laws? (requiring voters to present an ID to verify identity). Do you accept the explanation of the ACLU at face value? Here it is:

https://www.aclu.org...tion-fact-sheet



Doesn't it seem odd to you that at a time when the left claims that Russians and the right generally are trying to rig elections, the left also wants to deprive states of the ability to check the identity of who shows up to vote?

As I said before I don't align myself with the left or right
even though I'm heavily left leaning.

I'm strictly more of an issue based voter

And that's fucked.

R A D A Я, on 17 August 2020 - 03:00 PM, said:

I would like to be educated on how anarchy is possible,

Other then a quirky one person government that no country cares about, and has no real power.

because on a micro level such as a 2 person household a sane two people would most likely invent a form of direct democracy,
the two tenants make up rules, agree on said upon rules, and enforce said upon rules themselves.

On a macro level,
If our government just up and left right now,
The groups with the most power,
whether it be through money, weapons, or populous,
would make up the rules, and enforce the rules.

Mainly for the protection of their assets,
and those who aid in creation of such assets.

This would become an oligarchy, and this is fascism.

Communism is impossible as all it takes is one person to take advantage of the situation.

Democracy today should be changed simply because when the first apportionment bill was created
1 person in the house represented 37,081 people
(including 1 full vote not 3/5 for slaves at the time)
Today 1 person in the house represents 747,000 people

How it's ok for 1 person to represent 747,000 people when it wasn't when our government was first situated makes no sense to me.
Saying that 1 person in the house can accurately represent 747,000 people better than 1 person can represent 37,081 people makes no sense to me.
If not make it semi direct, at least allow for more accurate representation.

And yes the president is there for expediency,
but the president shouldn't be anywhere near having the powers of a dictator.

[Jimmy]

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 06:03 PM, said:

Omnicide also eliminates voter fraud and I think one day we might consider it.

This is literally Satanism.

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 08:40 PM, said:

As I said before I don't align myself with the left or right
even though I'm heavily left leaning.

You're a leftist even if you've completed enough mental gymnastics to convince yourself that you are not. And that's fine.

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 08:40 PM, said:

I would like to be educated on how anarchy is possible

Read Hans Hermann Hoppe.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

Jimmy, on 17 August 2020 - 09:02 PM, said:

You're a leftist even if you've completed enough mental gymnastics to convince yourself that you are not. And that's fine.

I mean, I'm not going to vote between two corporate hedgehogs
most likely going to write in Rand Paul

because fuck Saudi Arabia

Jimmy, on 17 August 2020 - 09:02 PM, said:

Read Hans Hermann Hoppe.

His "anarchy" isn't anarchy.
it's not even semi anarchy whatever the hell that would mean.

Hoppe compares monarchy favorably to democracy, but criticizes both as ethically and economically inefficient,


and advocates a natural order with competitive security and insurance suppliers.

The natural order of things is not anarchy

The natural order of things on a macro level are oligarchies and fascists.

Man created religion in the same way man created government.
Man needed to be lead and needed an infallible leader that would best represent him

This is why kings, dictators, and warlords were our first forms of government,
that is what society lead to naturally.

I want the government and corporations out of my shit more then anybody,
I would never let that solution fall to "natural order"
as natural order would end in sacrificing most of my freedoms to a whim.

I advocate for a smaller divided government and more representation
which is what the confederacy was about.

Which I'm pretty sure last I checked is right wing.

Yes socialist programs I vie for heavily as the homeless, very poor, and disabled need to be taken care of,
and need to be given the same opportunities as everyone else at financial freedom.

[PokeThePower]

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 09:50 PM, said:

The natural order of things is not anarchy

Yes it is. Just because you and almost everyone you know has chosen to self limit themselves by various ideas doesn't mean anarchy ever stopped being the ultimate order and law. The people who know this best are the kings, emperors, oligarchs, and especially the communist fascists. They know that there is only one rule on earth...

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 09:50 PM, said:

The natural order of things on a macro level are oligarchies and fascists.

This is nonsense. Both of those, and every other variation, are self chosen ideas. You might die if you choose to not follow the same narrative as those around you, but you'll have properly respected that Anarchy is the ultimate rule on earth just like the kings and emperors of old knew, and the globalists of today know. You're gonna make me dig up my old posts on this aren't you?

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 09:50 PM, said:

This is why kings, dictators, and warlords were our first forms of government,
that is what society lead to naturally.

Because in a world ruled by anarchy, it is an option to self limit for any reason you like. Including choosing to not declare yourself king or choosing to follow the rule of the paper god called secular government because anarchy permits them to hurt you for doing so. At any moment you are free to treat them as fictions and the natural rule of anarchy won't stop you... just people self choosing something else might.

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 09:50 PM, said:

Yes socialist programs I vie for heavily as the homeless, very poor, and disabled need to be taken care of,
and need to be given the same opportunities as everyone else at financial freedom.

Those are personal preferences (wants) from the individual all the way up to the macro organization, not needs. Your confusion of need vs want concepts is a symptom of the underlying problem with almost everything else you're analyzing and coming to conclusions about.

This is similar to the problem of most modern people don't understand the difference between a right and a privilege. At no time do you not have the right to speech, self defense with whatever tool you can acquire, etc. Rights CANNOT be taken away, they can only be reacted to their usage and it was this *reaction* that the US form of government was intended to limit.

You always have the right to travel down a road, you might have the privilege to travel unimpeded down a road. You always have the right to remain silent, you might have the privilege of remaining silent not being held against you.

[PokeThePower]

Danukem, on 17 August 2020 - 07:33 PM, said:

Completely agree. I have a Canadian friend who bought into the standard narrative about Republicans making it hard for minorities to vote and they were surprised when I pointed out that the left in the US actually opposes voter ID (it's a requirement in Canada, as in most places): https://www.election...nt=index&lang=e

So what is considered racist anti-minority obstacles to voting in the US is just standard practice in more leftist Canada.

That's not to say that my Canadian friend is any better disposed to Republicans now than before, but the point is that many people don't realize how radical and hypocritical the Democrats are on this issue.

If you are against voter ID, you are racist.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

DriveDinaDrive, on 17 August 2020 - 10:17 PM, said:

Because in a world ruled by anarchy, it is an option to self limit for any reason you like. Including choosing to not declare yourself king or choosing to follow the rule of the paper god called secular government because anarchy permits them to hurt you for doing so. At any moment you are free to treat them as fictions and the natural rule of anarchy won't stop you... just people self choosing something else might.

The world is not ruled by anarchy,
Anarchy maybe what inspired government
Anarchy maybe what lead to the creation of government
Anarchy maybe the push that the world needed to get it's shit together
but again, the world is not ruled by anarchy

it is fueled by it.

It causes law and order to take place.

Anarchy means absence of government,
as long as there is people there will be rules to follow,
and as long as there are rules to follow there are governments to enforce them.

Stating that anarchy is a choice
when there is nowhere in humanity without a ruleset
and without a government to enforce that ruleset

Means that it is not in fact a choice,
and anarchy besides in the form of motivation is a fairy tale

World peace and true anarchy can only occur when everyone but one is dead

DriveDinaDrive, on 17 August 2020 - 10:17 PM, said:

This is nonsense. Both of those, and every other variation, are self chosen ideas. You might die if you choose to not follow the same narrative as those around you, but you'll have properly respected that Anarchy is the ultimate rule on earth just like the kings and emperors of old knew, and the globalists of today know. You're gonna make me dig up my old posts on this aren't you?

I'm just paraphrasing from Hobbes's leviathan.

Kings are what men and women naturally want in a position of power.
It is a self chosen idea, but given that most early forms of government are monarchies, and that we leave immense power in the hands of politicians,
means that men want to be lead by someone and want government.

Again this is fueled by anarchy,
anarchy is a decision maker not a ruler,
the job of the ruler is to impose his or her will on his compatriots,

The job of anarchy is to ensure shit gets done.

DriveDinaDrive, on 17 August 2020 - 10:17 PM, said:

Those are personal preferences (wants) from the individual all the way up to the macro organization, not needs. Your confusion of need vs want concepts is a symptom of the underlying problem with almost everything else you're analyzing and coming to conclusions about.

A nation has failed when it can't take care of those who can't take care of themselves.

I agree most of the things I say are definitely wants,
direct democracy, confederacy, omnicide

But there's a point where it is morally obtuse for people to suffer,
while others aren't,
and have nothing done about it.

DriveDinaDrive, on 17 August 2020 - 10:17 PM, said:

This is similar to the problem of most modern people don't understand the difference between a right and a privilege. At no time do you not have the right to speech, self defense with whatever tool you can acquire, etc. Rights CANNOT be taken away, they can only be reacted to their usage and it was this *reaction* that the US form of government was intended to limit.

You always have the right to travel down a road, you might have the privilege to travel unimpeded down a road. You always have the right to remain silent, you might have the privilege of remaining silent not being held against you.

I think everyone deserves hell, and that's the only right they have .
Humans are parasites.
The world would be better off without us.

but right now understanding and acknowledging that we're all pieces of shit,
and don't deserve anything,
will make us better human beings.

This betterment of humanity would hopefully lead to more accurate representations in our government,
and our government would not react this way again.

The government can react to things,
the people can also react to things.

[Hank]

... meanwhile in Seattle ....



... gives the ability to vote a whole other meaning

[Jimmy]

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 11:56 PM, said:

It causes law and order to take place.

Wrong. Law and Order precede anarchy.

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 11:56 PM, said:

Anarchy means absence of government,
as long as there is people there will be rules to follow,
and as long as there are rules to follow there are governments to enforce them.

Stating that anarchy is a choice
when there is nowhere in humanity without a ruleset
and without a government to enforce that ruleset

Means that it is not in fact a choice,
and anarchy besides in the form of motivation is a fairy tale

Anarchy has rules. Again, you are confusing anarchy and chaos.

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 11:56 PM, said:

World peace and true anarchy can only occur when everyone but one is dead

This is literally Satanism.

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 11:56 PM, said:

A nation has failed when it can't take care of those who can't take care of themselves.

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 11:56 PM, said:

I agree most of the things I say are definitely wants,
direct democracy, confederacy, omnicide

Le Satanic Rule of Earth

The Overman, on 17 August 2020 - 11:56 PM, said:

I think everyone deserves hell, and that's the only right they have .
Humans are parasites.
The world would be better off without us.

but right now understanding and acknowledging that we're all pieces of shit,
and don't deserve anything,
will make us better human beings.

Citation needed for such Satanism.

[Radar]

We actually do deserve hell. We are entitled to nothing and rights don't exist.

[Aristotle Gumball]

The world isn't about right and wrong, but who can get away with what and for how long. Deserving is irrelevant.

[Radar]

Good and evil do exist and so does absolute morality. Humans are born evil and some of them learn to do good.