/cow/ - Lolcows

>>197165

> She caused a bit of a stir recently when she tried to keep student journalists from covering a protest of what they perceived to be the school's racism.

Doesn't this amount to admitting that the protest couldn't possibly hold up to public scrutiny?

>>197169

I heard something about the protest being a shit swastika smeared on the walls or something.

Meanwhile the fascists in the video are talking about their "friend needing space" or something.

So confusing. But I know that I'm praying to GodJesus and the Bear for every one of these smug faggots to get ass cancer and die.

The comments below the video also state that Professor Problem Glasses has submitted a fake resignation. She's still employed there.

>>197173

>>197222

Oh look, the person who doesn't work doesn't understand the importance of a candidate concentrating more on the working class than identity politics, what a surprise.

>>197244

He doesn't works because his parents are millionaires and he got a quarter of a million to burn into a shitty project so he could pretend he was an animator

>>197173

>Professor Problem Glasses has submitted a fake resignation. She's still employed there

How about suing her and her employers (the university) for damages?

>>197374

That may indeed come later. Those who could do so are most likely waiting for the results of the criminal charges.

(Remember, OJ was deemed "not guilty" in the criminal case, but then had to pay out the ass for civil damages.)

Can we throw the two sides together?

>>197398

I honestly thought this was a parody from South Park the first time I saw this. Not because it looks like South Park or anything, but just because it was so over the top I can't believe anyone made this to be taken seriously and not as a joke.

>>197408

But is it really that far off the mark? This country was founded by a bunch of rich slave owners who didn't want to pay their taxes, and they did so through force. Unlike Canada. America has an obsession with guns and using them to enforce our liberties, but when has that ever worked out? It was the south that shot first and started the civil war, so it's hard to just say that guns freed the slaves. The black slaves outnumbered the white populations in some places and it was guns that kept them slaves. If not for firepower what was keeping them from going full Haiti on our asses? The fact that you don't use a machete to pick cotton is the only reason why the south remains part of the USA as opposed to a separate nation of Africans. American gun history is pretty grim and we are absolutely obsessed with the things.

>>197413

If it wasn't for guns, y'all would still be British, have ridiculous taxes and no right for self governance.

>>197427

Actually Washington raised the taxes, which caused the whiskey rebellion. The first time the federal government had to smack down a militia. I suppose we wouldn't have the infrastructure we have today and we wouldn't be as rich because the British would have cut off slavery sooner. On the other hand universal health care, a membership in the EU, and eventually representation with taxation. It all would have worked out. Only difference is we have a greater freedom of speech and a right to privacy from the government, both of which we have to keep fighting to uphold. The English just sort of rolled over on those two. Perhaps if Thomas Paine had been more involved in English politics than American and French…

>>197413

America was founded by those wanting to get out of Europe and do things for themselves in a new land.

>If not for firepower what was keeping them from going full Haiti on our asses?

The same reason that employees didn't go full Haiti on their employers asses throughout the country where they were being put in horrific conditions, such as in New York where children were abducted from the streets and forced to work in factories. Though slaves probably had even less reason to want to be violent with their owners than the employees for many companies did, since the slave owners had less incentive to abuse their slaves. Which is actually something slave owners routinely were criticizing the North about in the arguments concerning slavery, some people point to their arguments as having been the source of the phrase "wage slave".

Still, only 1% of the population even had slaves, so it's ridiculous to even pretend this was something people made that much use of. As well it's worth remembering that not every black person in the south was a slave when it was legal, there were even black slave owners.

>>197434

>a membership in the EU

Most governments are bad enough about executing the will of the people, why would someone fantasize about their country being part of an even worse organization?

>>197413

>But is it really that far off the mark?

Fuck off, Tex. You're retarded if you think history is that childishly simplistic.

>>197413

>If not for firepower what was keeping them from going full Haiti on our asses?

You just self-owned yourself with that, would you rather be the kind of total shithole haiti is?

As pro-equality as I am (I'm not white) its cases like haiti that shows that even when whitey isn't around anymore shit is going to stay the same or even worse, because much like haitians the problem with ghetto niggas is that they are a bunch of uneducated assholes, not unlike rednecks which are white.

>as opposed to a separate nation of Africans

Odds are mexico or even spain would've retaken that territory, slaves might have been able to fight a few southern dandies but they had no fucking chance against an invading army, specially one that had pretty much destroyed entire populations not long ago.

>>197434

>the British would have cut off slavery sooner

Based one what? they cut slavery because they couldn't get in a market that was already cornered by the dutch and the portuguese so britcucks locked them out of their colonies.

>On the other hand universal health care, a membership in the EU, and eventually representation with taxation

Jesus kid do you even read history? the UE was a direct consequence of the devastation of WWII, the end of the colonial and thus the inability of european countries to compete against commieland and burgertown. The social policies were just a way from keeping yuros from going full-commie since their quality of life was markedly inferior than murricans at the time

In a world where the US didn't exist the brits would have probably been defeated by the imperial germans in WWI and ruskies would've never gone commie.

Who knows how the world would look like now.

https://archive.is/Gx6PJ - Can SJW university students now be pigs?

I thought I locked it after I replied.

https://archive.is/I53El - Weaponized Codes of Conduct

https://archive.is/tAChz - MTV

>>197533

>an FtM SJW

That's like a black Nazi or an Israeli Jihadist.

>>197538

There are Israeli jihadists. Jewish right wing "holy warriors". One stabbed a bunch of gay people at a gay pride parade and went to jail for 10 years for it and then after being released he did it again at the same annual gay pride parade. http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/30/middleeast/jerusalem-gay-pride-parade-stabbings/

A group of them went around attacking woman for wearing clothes that are too revealing in the wrong neighborhood. They also have "settlers" that go into Palestinian territory, drive the locals out and take over. The entire region is packed with "holy warriors" of all stripes. Even India, which is full of Hindu extremist. Eventually they are just going to nuke each other.

>>197554

I was using jihadist in the narrow sense. We don't use it in the broad sense of "holy warrior" in English; for that we say crusader.

>>197559

Oh. Sorry. I went right to the literal. I have trouble thinking in one language these days, but isn't crusader usually used as a positive descriptor? Like "he's a crusader for gay rights".

Also what language do deaf people think in? Is it the same as non verbal autists?

>>197564

Crusader can be either positive or negative depending on context. A "crusader for justice" is something positive but a "moral crusader" is something negative; the first is someone who fights for justice while the other is someone who imposes their morality on others. In the context of religious extremism it's going to be negative.

>Also what language do deaf people think in?

Most likely their first language, whatever that might be. A lot of people don't realize it but sign languages are full languages, distinct from spoken languages but capable of expressing anything a spoken language can. There are even cases of deaf street urchins in Central America devising their own sign language in the same way that isolated hearing children will develop their own spoken language.

>Is it the same as non verbal autists?

I expect they can think in whatever language they understand, even if they can't speak.

>>197564

Jihad can also be used to describe ones internal struggle to be a better person. Imagine the confusion that the Russian narrow definition causes. A couple bad eggs and the definition of a word is forever changed. Inquisition for example.

>>197566

Did I just run into a word filter? Western.

>>197565

Moral crusader is only a negative to some liberals and libertarians. The people who fought against Jim Crow were moral crusaders as was Martin Luther King Jr. No, we need a better word for it. I'm sure one exists in English. I'm just really high right now and it's making it harder to focus into American colloquial English.

>>197565

How do deaf people think and drive then? If you think in all visual wouldn't that affect your ability to multitask like that? Maybe it's more base than that.

>>197569

It's definitely more base than that. Haven't you ever found your internal monologue falling behind itself? When I'm thinking absentmindedly I often fumble over the same internal half-sentence even though the thought is already complete.

>>197565

In the context of religious extremism is not always negative.

>>197222

>doesn't know about Hillary's mountains of suspicious corpses

>doesn't know about Hillary's intentional Benghazi situation

>doesn't know about Hillary's connections with Russia through the Clinton foundation for selling Oregon land to Russian interests

>doesn't know Hillary's literal treason-tier breeching of all protocols of classified document handling with her private server

>IT'S JUST MYSOGGGYGGYGGOIWERJPNMFNIGGERS ON TWITTER REEEEEEEEE

Jesus christ.

>>197398

>there are retards out there that will believe this is actually true

Oh look, here's one of them: >>197413

>>197452

Actually worker revolts did happen. To combat one a company called in a favor and got the national guard to work with them and mounted a machine gun on a train. Then they set all the tents on fire and shot anyone who tried to escape. Man woman and child. Some say this was a turning point as the massacre shocked voters across the United States. Worker revolts happen. What kept the slaves in line was guns. If they could escape to the north they could be declared free men. A lot of people got shot trying to escape. The whole arguement for guns is that an armed populace can defend itself, well the slaves weren't armed and the white people were. So either the entire premise of the second amendment is faulty or your argument is invalid.

>>197466

You give America entirely too much credit. The EU was founded to compete with Russia as a superpower first and to lift the economy second. America is in massive debt, as is every country that liveds like it, except a few outliers with more socialistic leanings or a chunk of the fossil fuel market. There will always be a country which benefits more from a given war than others, but take America out of that equation and another just fills it's place. The only thing you got right was the bit about appeasing the populace in part due to pressure by communist and the rise of communism in general, but that had started before world war 2. The encroaching threat of communism is one of the factors that played into the rise of fascism. So even subtracting world war 2 you would probably get a European union. Only with Turkey and Morocco thrown in, and Japan would probably be communist.

>>197576

I sometimes think in visual flashes and sensations but I've never found myself thinking in a loop of half sentences.

>>197413

Good lord, you never had a civics class, nor read tje writings of the founding fathers.

>>197622

>an unarmed populace was oppressed by an armed ruling class

>therefore it's bad to arm the populace

>>197636

My civics class tries to teach this now. The guy may have been indoctrinated or something.

The lesson boiled down to:

>the original idea was only property-owning men could vote

>the 3/5th compromise was to retard the south's ability to stack the house of representatives by counting their slaves as citizens

>the bill of rights was established because anti-federalists were scared of a strong central government abusing its authority

The rest of it wasn't there. Fore example, the class explains the revolution was because the Americans were mad about having their rights stripped and a complete lack of representation in the Parliament.

>>197678

>The guy may have been indoctrinated or something.

Yep, that's Tex alright. He's been coming around here for quite awhile now. He's a rich jew who made his shekels when his grandfather kicked the bucket and he inherited the money, which he then used to go to college and receive said indoctrination.

>>197665

No. I just said that it's never worked. It should in theory work, but when has it? It's basically like mutually assured destruction, with more armed madmen willing to die for their causes. The Warsaw rebellion almost worked, but in the end failed. When you get right down to it it's hard to compete with the military industrial complex as civilians. They have the training, the technology and the infrastructure on their side. You can fight the good fight, but in the end unless another government helps you, you're fucked. There was a time when this wasn't the case, but they've gotten really good at suppressing descent and manipulating the masses. I'm not one of them militia folks, but I do worry about what a future government might do to us and what our chances actually are. Iraq had a very armed populace, this didn't prevent a repressive regime from taking out anyone who opposed them. Call me a pessimist. I don't think an armed populace cuts it anymore. We need transparency in government and free speech more than we do weapons. We are way to obsessed with guns and not focused enough on preventing the erosions of our liberties. Like we can just turn back the clock with a blood bath or two. Seems that at this point they're doing more damage than good. That's been our history with guns all along though. Guns have enslaved more than they have freed and by their nature they have killed more than they have saved. So maybe backround checks aren't a terrible idea. So long as the reasons behind a gun being denied to you are transparent and agreed on by the populace. For example ex felons. Are we not all in agreement that violent offenders in particular shouldn't be allowed to possess guns for a given time even after parole ends? In several states they can regain their right after a period of none offending through petition. Problem is they can just go around the law and buy one at a gun show. Or how about for mental health reasons. Should schizophrenics who are suffering from more than daylight hallucinations be allowed to own guns? We don't let just anyone drive. Why do we let them own guns?

>>197686

> We are way to obsessed with guns and not focused enough on preventing the erosions of our liberties.

>We don't let just anyone drive. Why do we let them own guns?

>No. I just said that it's never worked. It should in theory work, but when has it?

There's never been an armed revolution? Shit, I never knew that.

So what do you actually care about, erosion of liberty, or gun control?

Please explain how one goes around the law at a gunshow in detail.

>>197691

Well the law is set up to prevent someone who isn't legally allowed to own a gun from buying one, but it relies on the authorized gun dealer submitting a backround check and in the case of handguns a waiting period. This isn't yet the case for people who make deals at gun shows. They don't have to be authorized gun dealers so they don't have to submit shit and deal in cash. Obama is trying to change that, but it's going to end up in the courts as states fight the change. It's not just gun shows either. Even steam shows have gun sellers. Cash only. They don't even ask for your ID. I was really tempted by this one, but I didn't want a gun that might have a history. Talk about an easy way to dispose of evidence.

>>197692

>Steam shows with gun sellers

Protip: They were probably a sting operation. Wouldn't be the first time.

Good luck finding a gun show that doesn't require you to be a FFL to sell there. Any legislation aimed at stopping private sales between two people would be impossible to enforce.

>>197686

>I just said that it's never worked.

And as evidence you cited cases of an unarmed populace oppressed by an armed ruling class.

>but when has it?

The American, French, and Russian revolutions, just off the top of my head.

>I don't think an armed populace cuts it anymore

It's absolutely better than nothing.

>>197691

A 20th to 21st century armed revolution that wasn't either a junta or backed by a foreign government. Name one that actually worked out. They fall apart, or the government winds up being worse than the on they overthrew, and infrastructure crumbles, then warlords or foreign governments sweep in. I'm not even counting the initial transition or "reign of blood" period where the locals go all apeshit on their former oppressors. The only one I can name is south Africa, and it's fresh out of that reign of blood period. I'm not crossing my fingers on it lasting. Military will probably take over. That's an ongoing theme in Africa. Junta.

Look at what India managed to accomplish through more civil means. It's still a shit hole, but it's the largest democracy in the world and they drove the British out in good part by pacifist means. Blacks got civil rights the same way. Every time a black panther pointed a gun at the cops it set them back. Guns are a tool, but sometimes the job calls for an airstrike and we as civilians are a little behind on that technology. Hacking a civilian drone is pretty easy.

>>197698

First one off the top of my head is the Rwandan Patriotic Front.

>>197695

No. It wasn't a sting operation. Missouri law states that those transactions are legal. Especially if the weapon in question qualifies as a curio or relic. Meaning that if the piece in question either is derives it's value from being rare or is over 50 years old then you can open a shop that sells them and not have to do the paperwork, provided that you have a c&c license. The person buying it doesn't need one unless the item in question requires a stamp. Like a sawed off or a machine gun. Also they could sell new guns up to a certain volume but it's a steam show, so that would just be silly.

My girlfriends dad used to sell all sorts of weapons for a living. Mostly knives, but he wasn't above a gun deal or two. Who isn't in that neck of the woods?

They are supposed to card you to make sure you're over 16 though. It's a crazy world.

>>197704

>sawed off or a machine gun

That's a new one.

>>197700

That's so fresh you can still smell the blood. It hasn't been 20 years yet. It's impossible to say if it will lasted or a junta or foreign government will take over. Especially given the nature of the region and immediate history. But let's say that it does succeed. Then you only have an exception to the rule. It's not as if their government had a particularly effective infrastructure and it was already splintered. It was the overthrow of an interim government. That's easier than overthrowing a foreign occupation. Which is why it was such a bad idea to pull out as much as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan in recent years.

>>197706

You can sell them with a c&c in Missouri but that's a lot of paperwork. In other states it's harder to sell them. To buy one you need to pay for the stamp and that means submitting some paperwork and going through a backround check. It's not cheap, but provided the weapon was made before 1986 it's doable. That's the cut off for machine guns. Which means that every year they go up in value. To qualify as a curio there has to be something unique about it though. For example, if it was used in a war. Not simply surplus but actually fired in a battle. Then it derives some of its value from being a historical artifact, albeit of recent history. Still to buy it the other person needs a stamp. It's just paperwork and a tax.

>>197713

But you can't pick it up that day at show in the case of such a gun, because the stamp takes some time to get. You can bid on one and then submit and meet up to buy it. I've seen that. Guns sold at auction. You name it and you can get it, provided it's pre 1986. People think automatic weapons are illegal. They're not. What they are is expensive.

>>197714

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/05/21/machine-guns-legal-practical-guide-full-auto/

>>197837

As a white male, I fully support her decision to not bring her spawn into the world. Just imagine what that kid would be raised to believe…

This may be the worst thing I've ever seen in my life

>>197716

>Thefirearmblog

Alex is an elitist retard who throws around daddy's money to show off and thinks that he should get special treatment because his dad is rich.

>>197713

I said "That's a new one" because you sound like you're smashing random terms you heard together.

>>197711

>1994

>Hasn't been 20 years yet

Learn how to math.

You said 20th to 21st century, then say that an example from the 20th century doesn't count because it was too recent.

>>197856

I have no beef with any of this if the person in question would just DO it instead of whinging on about hypothetical situations. Wear whatever the fuck you want. Do you hair the way you want. But clearly it's all about your persecution complex.

>>197711

Cuck

>>197686

Yes, nowadays it's hard to compete with drones and nuclear weapons, I admit that, but with the caveat that guerrillas still can degrade a trained force (does the fuckup in middle east sound something to you?), much more if the trained force isn't local, I suppose. You either go big and nuke everything, or attempt to win by killing the rebels with not knowing who the rebel is.

Back then, guerrillas were even more effective because powers were equal.

But we can't give drones and nukes to the populace because it'd be fucking stupid.

Now, yes with mass manipulation and whoever's control of the media it's easy to win that war before it even begins.

Or that I like to think, even if the tides are turning and discocks is growing.

And I prefer to die for a cause I believe in than just let my own country take what is rightfully mine, it'd be the ultimate form of cuckery. Letting my own fatherland take my rights from me, what it should defend.

>>197811

is he down?

He looks like a retard

>>197856

is it a woman or a man? she has no tits but no masculine face. and woman's voice

>>198293

He's an interesting fellow. He first came around during the 789chan days when we had Robert terrified that we were going to come to his apartment. Tex went by "newb" back then. He came into IRC and bragged about being a rich Jew who'd inherited his money from a dead relative. One of the first things he did was call Robert's landlady because he was convinced that Robert was going to hurt somebody.

He became butthurt when we pointed out the colossal faggotry of doing so, and it was then we learned something important about him: just about everything "trolling" wise he's tried to do has boiled down to moralfaggotry. Dude legit believed that Robert was going to rape somebody, so he tried to stop it.

He disappeared for about six months or so, then came back using the alias "Tex", taken from the old Tex Murphy computer games. Everyone knew who he was right off the bat, of course, as his posts give him away every time.

He also accused Zyklon, one of Robert's old trolls, of having "bad manners"…in an IRC dedicated to laughing at retards. He seems to believe that he's intellectually superior to the rest of us, though as you can see from his understanding of geopolitics, this is far from the truth. He strikes me as the sort who ate up everything his profs told him and actually thinks "A People's History of the United States" is a well-written, factual account.

>>198293

We could win the wars in the middle east, it would have been easier if we hadn't started two at once, and then got our hands tied behind our backs by the politics of it. Thing is in order to win we'd have to actually take it over long term. Like Rome and Greece did to Jerusalem at various points in history. It means eternal occupation and eventually having them be part of the nation you control outright. which means giving them some measure of citizenship. That's a very messy proposition. So instead we hand it over to locals who aren't ready and set up interim governments during the transition. This is almost always a colossal mistake. You destabilize a region, then withdraw from it leaving a relative power vacuum that eventually comes back to bite you in the ass. If we want to win we have to really dedicate to it, and massively occupy it for a long time. There would be casualties, as happened with all those revolts and riots in places Rome controlled and we would have to smash those. What we are talking about is taking out a modern established government with modern infrastructure. It's the reason why Palestine can't beat Israel. No matter how gorilla they go on them. They don't have the weapons, infrastructure, and simply cannot seem to get their shit together. So it's basically a nation vs a multiple militia. The nation wins. Hands down. If it wouldn't cause world war 3 they would just take over all of Palestine like Rome did. That's occupation and it's really hard to beat.

>>198372

Tex, please.

>>198372

You know, Tex, this is why you and Autphag can't get along. You're too much like each other. Both of you type in walls of text hoping to educate the rest of us peons who are obviously too dense to comprehend your superior intellect.

>>198385

It's fucking self-indulgence. And the really horrible part is as much as we rag on Tex, tons of people on here are guilty of this shit - me included, I've fallen into it tons of times and I hate myself.

Your personal politics are an extension of who you are as a person - so when you try to shove them everywhere, it's a sign of narcissism. You can't function unless every conversation is about YOU or some part of you in some way.

Don't get me wrong - there are places you can talk about politics and not be a self-indulgent asshole, like a political board. But trying to shoehorn political discussion into a thread on a lolpig board is fucking stupid and exactly what I'm talking about.

It's like if you're on /pol/ and you like Transformers, so you start writing up textwalls about Transformers whenever you can. It's not intelligent, it's not insightful and it's not interesting. It's just ego masturbation and it's fucking killing the internet.

>>198372

so I come back to this thread, and tex has made sure it's no longer about sjws because he got #triggered by a fucking meme webm.

Get the fuck out and take your hello kitty dildo with you, fucking kike.

>>198372

>>198372

>>198372

>>198372

>you can win with a massive dedication of time and resources

What a brilliant conclusion, faggot

>>198636

Reminder that in Tex's ideal fantasy world, Europe's migrant crisis would be our migrant crisis as well, since there's plenty of room over here in 'murica. I guess the irony of getting stabbed to death by a Syrian expat for being a Jew has yet to cross Tex's mind.

Finally some good news. Dumb bitch got fired.

http://archive.is/NGvhW

>>197413

It is depressing but the brown people ARE getting restless.

>>203548

Which ones? Be a little more specific. If you look at what's going on around Russia you could say that those pasty white motherfuckers are getting restless. You wouldn't be wrong, but what a broad generalization.

>>203550

ALL OF THEM.

>>203512

Nice, anon, I was just about to post that too. I knew she was gonna be outted the moment she fucked up that evening news interview. She was asked about what she said, and, despite knowing full well that the fucking interviewer -had- that footage, she still lied about it.

>trying to explain that she didn't know the video journalist was a journalist

>clearly heard calling him a reporter on video

How's that muscle working out for you now, Click?

>>203559

Hahaha! I had not seen that interview. Not that it surprises me at all. She probably thought she'd get a free pass just like so many other SJWs have over the past few years. These delusional fucks really do live in their own little fantasy world.

>>203512

Why archive one of the stories we want to get the most clicks and searches? Are you mad that CNN thought the dildo isis flag was really an isis flag or something? All that thing was missing was a couple of the vowel dots, and it's hard to draw benwa balls and have them recognizable as sex toys in black and white. Plus odd number. Even if you can read it, it's kind of convincing at a glance. So in all fairness that wasn't entirely their fault.

>>203572

I archived it for the same reason I archive every news story I share here: So a copy of it will stick around. Time to take off the tinfoil hat, man.

>>203552

Jews as well, but for different reasons. Every attempt to strenghten the border they see as a great leap towards a new Holocaust. If this happens outside of Israel, that is. At least in Europe jews are walking pol stereotypes warning how borders = Hitler. They're intolerable.

>>203632

It's Tex. He'll never listen.

>>198372

>The nation wins

>Most of the guerrillas that happened ended with the nations losing

Sure tec

>>203594

What country exists that they are no walking stereotype?

>>203764

I actually have the New Xkit, fortunately. But it doesn't filter out untagged stuff like this. I guess I forgot to blacklist "daily reminder" along with other common buzzwords/phrases.

Speaking of which, have you (or anyone else reading this) ever lost a friend to the SJ cult?

I had a very good and intelligent friend that I still miss.

One day she got in an argument with someone who is anti-HAES (over a post in which OP was a hambeast who posted photos of herself with a haters-gonna-hate rant.) Because I defended that poster, she got pissed and wouldn't talk to me anymore because I refused to apologize for being "hateful" against fat people.

Also, when proven wrong by someone, her response was basically "Fuck off, I'm too old for this shit". I told her that she has a problem with admitting when she is wrong, and that no, I won't apologize for standing up against people who are pro-obesity. You could imagine how she reacted to that.

>>203803

Honestly, just saying to a white guilt tripper that it was muslims and other blacks who sold those slaves to americans usually cause a total mental breakdown followed by incoherent muttering. They dont know how to respond to that beside SHADDAP U RACISS

>>203922

Blacks are still recovering from Jim crow and institutionalized racism. http://info.umkc.edu/unews/troost-wall-the-product-of-kansas-citys-long-running-racial-plight/ It's not like right after the civil war they got equal rights. It's not even like the discrimination ended in the 70's. It takes a couple generations to fix something like that. We have segregated proms in the south. Still.

>>197165

Wow, what fags. I'd love to see a militia to open carry at a BLM portest

>>203941

It already happened, some """"""white"""""" mexican guy opened fire on a few BLM thugs trying to break his taco

Don't remember if he killed them or not, but pablo is now in jail for not wanting to be culturally enriched

>>203763

As Eco would say "Linguistic habits are frequently important symptoms of underlying feelings"

I think that the destruction of traditional groups and customs has left a vacuum that is now being filled by bullshit like this

When you talk to the average tumblrtard you find a deep desperation to belong to something, to anything. They can't tolerate the idea of being outside "the group" and if there isn't a group anymore they make one, because they have to be IN a group

Hence all this genderfluid labels and shit

>>203764

>they're perfectly good people and they're just heavily misguided

Not really, because of tumblr (and other social shit) I've actually realized some people I knew were deep down pretty fucking horrible and I just didn't knew because they didn't have the guts to voice their opinions out in the open, but because now thats accepted then you see how deep the cancer goes

>>203797

>ever lost a friend to the SJ cult?

Not friends per se, I had a couple acquaintances tho

One was a girl that was pretty cool and after turning SJ she became a dumb late 20s idiot full of tattoos doing a job she hates and posting borderline "I'm going to kill myself" uplifting quotes all day

The other was a guy who got hitched to this really fugly bitch (don't know why, dumbass had better looks than me) who to top it off has a shit personality and bosses him around all day. Retard went full cuck after meeting her and even left a great job to move somewhere in northern europe because bitch wanted to live there, even tho now he is providing for both on account of the crazy SJW having a memedegree in being unemployable

>>203803

Gonna need sources for the whole "jews owned all slaves" part, not because I think its impossible but because I'm not going into a discussion without way to back that up

As for the hispanic part they actually do get a lot of heat, even hispanics for countries that weren't in the slave trade

That whole "white latino" is just bullshit to white guilt them as well, seeing that soon latinos will be the majority

>>203923

90% of the problems black people have right now are caused by other black people, yet every attempt by black people to solve this is silenced by screams of "oreo" and "house nigger".

>>203973

>90% of the problems black people have right now are caused by other black people, yet every attempt by black people to solve this is silenced by screams of "oreo" and "house nigger".

This. The same could also be said of feminists. Both are groups who in 2016 have things better than they ever had. Both are also their own worst enemies.

>>204069

Check black-on-black crime, nobody can even mention that anymore, if you're white they call you racist but if you're black you're a fucking pariah for life

Just look at cosby, it was funny hearing one of these bullshit peddling niggas from some z-list college being more pissed about what he said about ghetto blacks than the whole quads incident

I mean seriously nigga? how can you be so fucking salty that you brought that out when they were talking about rape?

>>203973

You should edit out the "Jews owned all slaves" part because it's not true. There are no reliable figures on that one way or the other and the claim is almost entirely based on cherry-picking arbitrary dates (usually in the 16th-17th century when the trans-Atlantic slave trade was still tiny) when Dutch records might show a slight blip in Jewish participation in the slave trade (although it's never been "most", just slightly disproportionate). Ironically, this claim was first made popular by Nation of Islam.

You should also edit out the part about "this was more brutal than working on a plantation" part because that is subjective at best (and there is plenty of evidence of horrors going on on the plantations).

The point about Africans selling the slaves is technically true, too. But it ignores the unique properties of the American slavery (and I think that Latino slavery was similar) that made it so bad. It was the breeding of an entire race of slaves, forcing their children to be slaves from the womb. Obviously slavery is pretty bad all the time, but it's especially bad when it's eternal, lasting not just a human being's lifetime, but the lifetime of their descendants and their descendants too. It also doesn't help that it was racially based. This was a fairly unique thing in the history of slavery, that's why Southerners called it "our peculiar institution".

Overall, you shouldn't use this picture. It's got some good facts, but it's too full of lies and half-truths. But feel free to use some of the facts like 1, 3, 4 (but don't include that bullshit about Barbary slavery being worse than transAtlantic slavery), 5 (but don't include that bullshit about "Jews being the biggest slave-owners in America per capita"), 6 (you might want to amend it to "Whites were the first race to actively fight against the institution of slavery in modern times"), 7, and 8

I think I've just found the strangest fucking fanfiction.net account ever: Travis 2016. He writes about characters from the TV show Arthur going to gay bathhouses and getting their cocks cut off. I don't know what to make of this guy at all, but… what the absolute fuck?

https://www.fanfiction.net/u/4486163/Travis-2016

>>204130

>But it ignores the unique properties of the American slavery (and I think that Latino slavery was similar) that made it so bad. It was the breeding of an entire race of slaves, forcing their children to be slaves from the womb.

But that's not unique at all, that's happened throughout history. The fact of the matter is that American slaves had the highest life expectancy and the majority shipped to South America were essentially worked to death. I mean the entire idea that slaves COULD, in fact, have children and relationships and give birth to healthy offspring is evidence of the relative safety.

The thing nobody wants to talk about - and this is one of the main things that lead to segregation and other things that eventually went away - is that they WERE an underclass of uneducated and largely unskilled people and to integrate them into society was going to take a long time anyway. So even if the child was born "free," where the fuck would they go? What would they do? Former slaves were burdens of the state for a long time for a lot of reasons, the sociopolitical ramifications of having current or former slaves be contributing members of society is really complicated and nuanced.

>>206484

Oh, wrong thread. Woops.