US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

​

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/

 

[Stardust_Ziggy]

just don't get it, you faggots like reading text written by women? what about womens voice? their voice is as annoying as their text. i think a lot of you are just blind or 12 and can't tell text written by a women, you read it neutrally but you'd...

LOL your writing is abysmal and you sound like a faggot.*

*This text was written by a woman.

 

[deleuzeon]

Please, anyone on any website like this has parasocial relationships with "their" cows.

Uh, no, most are well aware we have no relationship to the cows and we don't want one.

 

[TenMilesWide]

us-politics-general + women, should be the title of this thread, only women would compain about my gramar, men know what i meant and can mentally fill in the gaps, but a woman always has to open her fucking mouth and complain.

men, how do you feel about yourself not knowing if this place still has any men left?

Man here; if you think the simple presence of women is abuse that means you're a fag.

 

[deleuzeon]

us-politics-general + women, should be the title of this thread, only women would compain about my gramar, men know what i meant and can mentally fill in the gaps, but a woman always has to open her fucking mouth and complain.

men, how do you feel about yourself not knowing if this place still has any men left?

You know who makes the conversation all about themselves for no reason? Lolcows.

 

[browserbowser]

If you're defining it differently with every generation, it's transparently socially created. Rape has been named and defined over and over different ways by different societies. You thinking you have the objective, observationally correct definition in this moment of 2025 defies reason and history. You do not live at the end of history, when we finally have the chance to see things as they are in a way that will never change again.

Trying to act like all societies have these and they're universal, rather than being deliberate and intentional changes to society constructed by the people within it, is insane. And the fact that we have socially constructed these ideas means that yes, they could be dismantled by others. In fact, that's WHY it's worrisome that someone immoral or evil could take over politics: because if currency is socially constructed, they could conceivably get rid of it. Because if the moral and legal idea of "rape" is narrowed, suffering could be the result. Of course, if the idea of "rape" is enlarged, suffering can also be the result. In the year 2300, it'd be possible for the definition of rape that people thought was simply natural and observable to be "well, you need to fill out the Sex Forms in triplicate and upload them to the cloud first, or it's obviously rape," or if society goes a very different way, "well, if she's your woman by right of conquest, she's yours, but if someone tries to take your woman, that's rape and punishable by death."

Now you can say from your 2025 perch "well, the person who didn't fill out the forms in triplicate isn't a rapist even if society says he was, and the person who takes a woman by conquest is obviously a rapist whatever his society says," but that just proves your social vantage point has a serious impact on this. This is literally why some societies are better than others. If it wasn't for social constructs, we'd all be identical. Claims at moral/ethical or lifestyle superiority are all made based on socially constructed discrepancies between places, social classes, races, etc..

That's what it is to be a social construct. Universals don't need to be fought for and legislated about.

All those words to simply admit that you can't comprehend the concept that something is not a matter of opinion merely because people can disagree, agree, name, and define it.

There are people who have believed varying creation myths, does that mean that the Big Bang is a social construct? Varying peoples have had differing cosmologies, does that make heliocentrism a social construct?

I didn't want to point at this since I detest the naturalist fallacy but even your own fucking concept undid you and you flopped on it:

You can say "animals have this and that and the other thing," but ok, then those are things that unify us with the animals. Even so, the things that you would agree differentiate us from the animals are things you would also agree are socially constructed (e.g. currency)!

vs

rape's unpleasantness has spiked as we've developed other social constructs like "dignity," "freedom of choice," "romance," "love," and "consent." Before those constructs, it's just how the deed was done, sometimes it was more pleasant than others but it wasn't some great wrong if it was unpleasant, just an unfortunate fact of life.

Sure, drakes "rape" female ducks, but it's just violent copulation. There's no intent behind it. It's only rape once someone intends to do something in violation of the other person's desires.

You flip flopped on this the moment I pointed out that no, rape is not a valid form of copulation and is considered invalid even by duck biology. You switched from pointing at it as a supporting case to the goalpost location ten yards back from it that 'the things that separate us from the animals are things you would also agree are socially constructed'.

You're genuinely a fucking retard if and only if you are making the argument in sincerity - which I am at this point assuming this is some kind of trolling effort - that because currency is a facet (that also is a technology) of human life that developed as a logical need with advancing technology in agriculture, that rape's moral abhorrence is a manufactured construct of the human mind.

I say this with no sarcasm or hyperbole, you are admitting here that you are a solipsistic moral relativist who does not understand the concept of aspects of human life that can be subject to opinion but fundamentally exist absent opinion. Meaning, you are admitting in public that you do not understand the difference between a moral crime that is a matter of opinion vs an actual moral failing of a human.

You are the literal definition of 'scrupleless'. And you are that way because you have bought this retarded and insane misunderstanding wholesale that 'the left' wants you to... what? Have objective morality? What the fuck are you smoking that you think the left is against subjective morality?

Rape, murder, theft, kidnapping: these are not 'social constructs'. Are the societies around them? I'd still argue not. Are the laws around them? Perhaps, if you consider public opinion to be a work of the collective society's mind, but I'd still argue not, that the punishments might be - that is up for debate I'd admit.

The fucking crimes however are still not a social construct in and of themselves just because differing peoples have had opinions, policies, names, and definitions on them that differ.

 

[Hemlock Latte]

Uh, no, most are well aware we have no relationship to the cows and we don't want one.

The key word was "parasocial."

men, how do you feel about yourself not knowing if this place still has any men left?

Agree with the other poster, go buy a server and a XenForo account and make your own super cool forum that's only for men and requires you to photograph yourself physically holding up your cock and a piece of paper with today's date on it to join. There's nothing stopping you.

Yes, I perfectly understood you and responded flawlessly.

Alright. I know how I feel about this but I'm not trying to tell you how to feel about it.

 

[Hey Johnny Bravo]

Uh, no, most are well aware we have no relationship to the cows and we don't want one.

I dunno, the slapfights we get into here could count.

 

[FILTH Tourist]

Muslims were used for the gay book case for the same reason why Asians were used for the Affirmative-Action case despite the extreme amount of Asian nepotism in the tech industry and universities giving Asians plenty of quota while reducing the White quota to near zero excluding legacies.

It's not within the Overton Window to say that White people or Christians are discriminated against.

Then why did they use a straight white woman for the recent discrimination case?

 

[nelly98]

James Dyson, of vacuum cleaner fame, has built a fully-automated strawberry farm:

Spoiler: Archive

View attachment 7569730

We don't need illegals.

But who will throw globs of sugar and corn syrup onto the strawberries to turn them into diabetes desserts for breakfast? Checkmate, chud.

 

[inetsone]

The only men who complain about women (on the internet no less) are the ones bitter they never get any pussy. There I said it.

 

[The Last Stand]

That

No. Technically speaking white people don't have to comply either. But they'll use social pressure and conditioning from that angle, something that absolutely doesn't work against Muslims (and is slowly failing to work on Whites).

That's my point. When I say "comply," I'm speaking in terms of social acceptance WITH conducting yourself appropriately with modern society. This will sound racist as shit, but from observation, White people are most likely to comply with society's laws and practices, as in if they need to protest or organize, they would be most likely to go about it as legally and peacefully. PTA meetings, town hall meetings, social media groups.

Contrast that with non-White majorities, officially or not, that tend to initiate aggression and incite violence within group settings. There are reasons for that, henceforth the many race riots in the US from yesteryear, but that rationalization falls straight out the window when A) several government organizations allow them to operate with impunity, B) they would be expected, under the notion of equity/equality to conduct them accordingly.

Imagine White Christians taking LGBTQ+ people, gagging them, and throwing them off roofs. It would be an international instance. Meanwhile, there are stories of such in the Eastern world that make headlines. Or, there are Black people that outright beat up, even KILL LGBTQ+ because somebody wanted a fling but was misinformed of their sex. Or even better, the liberal usage of "faggot" in rap music without a peep from anybody.

 

[quaawaa]

The only men who complain about women (on the internet no less) are the ones bitter they never get any pussy. There I said it.

I see you’ve never been to a boomer forum and heard them talk about their wives.

 

[LOWERCASE LETTERS]

us-politics-general + women, should be the title of this thread, only women would compain about my gramar, men know what i meant and can mentally fill in the gaps, but a woman always has to open her fucking mouth and complain.

men, how do you feel about yourself not knowing if this place still has any men left?

Lmao here for a year and all you do is whine about women. I bet you're threadbanned from multiple Beauty Parlor threads.

 

[deleuzeon]

The only men who complain about women (on the internet no less) are the ones bitter they never get any pussy. There I said it.

That's an embarrassing thing to say because it reveals that you think women are beyond complaint, which obviously isn't true, they're flawed human beings like everyone else. You're what's called a simp. But don't you think we should get on topic?

 

[nelly98]

Buddy, I don't have a firm grip on reality, let alone an entire industry. One, you don't know that I'm a woman. Two (more importantly), I didn't even say I was working with kids in education. I said I've worked with kids and that, in my experience, they have poor computer literacy on average. What got you worked up about this?

If you're not a woman you sure type like a woman. Typing like a sassy black woman tbh.

 

[CaliforniaRaisin]

I see you’ve never been to a boomer forum and heard them talk about their wives.

That's different. At least those boomers were socially adjusted enough to attract a mate and enter into an relationship and marriage. Most internet incels who complain about women being on the internet are just plain weirdos and probably should be medicated to prevent mass shootings.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

Muslims were used for the gay book case for the same reason why Asians were used for the Affirmative-Action case despite the extreme amount of Asian nepotism in the tech industry and universities giving Asians plenty of quota while reducing the White quota to near zero excluding legacies.

It's not within the Overton Window to say that White people or Christians are discriminated against.

Remember the Overton Window is "acceptable to say but batshit" to normal to "acceptable to say but batshit on the other side". I've always felt that "you can't be racist against white people" was "acceptable to say but batshit" to actual fringe leftist beliefs. Normal people will certainly pause a bit when hearing that theory and think it's kind of "out there." Leftists, of course, have a different window, but Joe Normie on the street? They've done studies on this and outside of 1. leftists and 2. blacks no one buys that bullshit.

Now consider that as part of the left slowly losing the culture war and losing their ability to social engineer -- to intentionally fuck with the overton window -- all those "acceptable to say but batshit" things are going to become fringe beliefs that aren't acceptable to say anymore. Still better, a LOOOOOT of conservative beliefs are currently unacceptable, cancelable beliefs to state you have becuase of the specific way the left has engineered the Overton window over the past 30 years or so. We're already seeing this with the growing pushback against troons and faggots and other degenerates.

I've gone into this before and someone on Twitter had a much better way of explaining it, but the long and the short of it is there are always going to be "batshit insane, out there, completely unhinged" beliefs on the left and right. Barring some sort of massive cultural shift that will leave us with a society none of us recognize, white supremacy / white nationalism will never be an acceptable belief to express to normies, nor will normies support pedophilia or the removal of property rights. These things will always be outside of the Overton Window. They are anchor points, in other words. By pretending everything to the right of Mao was "nazi adjacent" -- by tying beliefs such as nationalism to the anchor -- they're pulled outside the window.

Now the neat trick here if you're a batshit insane leftist is this doesn't just shrink the window. It actually makes fringe lefty beliefs -- "you can't be racist against white people" or "you can't arrest criminals if they're black because that's racist" -- slide into the window from the other side. It slides the window, it doesn't shrink it.

By pulling this game where you make the right's beliefs completely verboten to even talk about, yet alone profess a belief in, you make your batshit leftist friend's beliefs acceptable.

 

[No-Eyed Square Guy]

If you identify a thing as a "social construct," what new understanding do you have of the thing? How is it changed? "Well, you see, it's not given by nature." You can say that about anything. Words for things aren't precisely the things. Words are the wrong words, or forgotten, or reused, subsumed into jargons, customarily misspoken, or whatever. So?

"Race is a social construct," says some nigger, acting white. What does he know? What do we learn from what he says? Are we allowed to answer?

The social reason people call something a "social construct" is to discredit or illegitimize the thing and some people who talk about it, to exclude it and some people from consideration or discussion, to eject it from reality and some people from society, etc., under certain specific, hypocritical, irrational, otherwise-determined terms set by the sayers of "social construct"—by whoever says it first, like "You're it."

Why join this game? What can we win?

 

[Conan]

The only men who complain about women (on the internet no less) are the ones bitter they never get any pussy. There I said it.

My grandmother hated women, my mother hates women, my wife hates women.
I come from a long line of women haters and I will not have you besmirch my heritage with falsities.

 

[browserbowser]

If you identify a thing as a "social construct," what new understanding do you have of the thing?

I think we can find out by deporting anyone who says rape is a social construct to the nearest island inhabited by homosexual, rapist cannibals.