This version was before captions apparently.

Scatology/Coprology is a legitimate area of scientific research. They’re the ones who tell us what dinosaurs ate.

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

Here’s a whole video about why that doesn’t work:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs&list=PLrttDbiWQ1XO1iHAszAsPobYSoR0uQg_1&pp=iAQB

Basically all governments are required to keep certain groups happy to even consider getting into power, and some of that involves… Certain kinds of payoffs and deals being made.

You can only vote for people who have already acquised to the system in order to get on the ballot.

You can vote for people who promise some slightly more progressive version of the status quo, but that’s as radical as the system is allowed to get by design.

… and Gold is 10% heavier than steel!

I disagree that the premise is about “discouraging debate”… But I have no personal desire to debate the issue, so I’m walking away. Others are free to, I’m not discouraging it just because I don’t personally feel the need to debate the topic/perspective.

Imagine a society where those setting the regulations are wealthy in such a way that they face no money related consequences. If they stuff up, or get into a tight spot with money, they’ll be a subsidy, or bailout, or sweet deal with a bank loan, or a wealthy relative, or they sell a property or a stock holding, or a mega yatch, or they’ll just declare that shell company bankrupt. They’ll never have a monetary problem that can’t be immediately resolved.

…this class of people - those with essentially no financial consequences in life, are expected to make empathetic and caring laws, systems, and regulations for the rest of us, for whom money is behind literally everything consequential. For whom a small or temporary lack of money drastically changes us and our quality of life immediately and often with no real resolution.

We have all the consequences they do not, they have all the power we do not. Nothing about this system makes sense, and it’s enough to say we live in a kind of Capitalist Monarchy, posing as a democracy of, by, and for the people.

Seems this guy actually needed a mental health professional.

RFK and wife Cheryl.

Which perhaps might also speak to another division, reformists vs revolutionaries. Eg those who want to bargin to make gradual improvements in conduct/practices or believe such is possible vs those who think something more drastic or conclusive is necessary as far as changing everything.

Hace we considered that perhaps certain socially normative messages such as these also reinforce a Capitalist agenda: eg. Keeping leftists from becoming interesting in, and owning/running their own businesses?

I feel plenty of leftists have probably stayed out of business in order to avoid being exploiters… But I’m not entirely sure that’s how things work, or the best outcome possible.

What I’m saying is; culture under Capitalism gets us to recreate messages that reinforce the status quo of base superstructure relations… We do so without knowing, and often without questioning it.

So not to be that guy (but in this case I’m totally being that guy); I’m just asking questions bro!

70,000 BC Soyjacks.

I’m the one saying Libertarianism has been sold to Americans under the brand of Conservatism.

… and it’s important to point out (particularly to young people) that these two philosophies don’t mesh.

You’re free to say “No! All you conservative voters are actually fascists and you’re evil and stupid and need to stay away from everyone!” - and continue to see whether that shaming moralism of young men starts winning them over. You’re free to persist with declaring everything right wing fascist.

After the last election some might suggest it’s not winning any votes.

Wait is Dobbi the real hero of Harry Potter?

El void.

I didn’t say anything about fascism, that’s a whole different topic entirely. So weird that’s you’ve brought a third term in whilst claiming I was playing on the no true scottsman fallacy (which I don’t believe is the case).

Conservativism is about the family unit, the church/traditional culture, and serving your community and nation. Conserving tradition in the name and style of your ancestors (so Confusionism is fairly conservative for instance, as it focuses on ancestors worship and supporting your parents).

Libertarianism is about reducing government, avoiding taxes, and maximizing individual “freedoms”.

They’re simply two different ideologies. Has nothing to do with a not true scottsman fallacy. Has to do with the fact they’re obviously not overlapping sets of values, and in fact oppose each other greatly and often.

However American have been tricked into thinking they’re compatible.

Your comments and those supporting it are proof of this. You’ve been had by billionaire think tanks and mega churches. Brainwashed into seeing them as the same ideology when they’re actually in opposition.

Foolish American. Brainwashed people are bound to vote against their own interests. Lambs to the slaughter.

Those are actually Libertarian views posing as Conservative views because Conservatism has been taken over by billionaire libertarian think tanks, looking to lower their taxes.

i think the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition might be too principled and honourable for these guys.

He doesn’t have the lobes.

The modern recorder was popularized by the Nazis, as the German folk instrument of choice (which isn’t true, but made for good propaganda).

The Ten Commandments are part of the Woke agenda.