U.S. Riots of May 2020 over George Floyd and others - ITT: a bunch of faggots butthurt about worthless internet stickers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Biggest waste of human fetus I have ever seen in my life. Dilarus you are a fucking idiot!
I really liked Dillarius art, he was usually non-political until now. Telling his fans to fuck off or racist for not liking him putting his mouth piece in fanart, in a franchise that doesn't have any thing close to the same racial politics is super pathetic. Welcome to fucking Clown World.
 
Dunno if anyone has posted about this yet, but Instagram (and presumably Twitter) users have started this #pulluporshutup callout tag for brands, primarily cosmetic brands as part of the BLM movement.
View attachment 1356922View attachment 1356923

A lot of mainstream brands have already caved to the pressure from angry 17 year old girls.

Colourpop employs the wrong kind of token minorities:
View attachment 1356928


Lime Crime has 0 black HQ members (based) but promises they'll pull in some diversity hires:
View attachment 1356932View attachment 1356933

This is my first post here, let me know if I'm retarded.
brandyouknowtheones.jpg
 
As an avowed southern supremacist...

If your kudzu isn't glowing already, it is now.

.... this is true. If we had won I would have hoped we'd still have ended slavery fairly soon. It was on borrowed time to be economically viable anyway, and dividing the nation would have saved us a lot of trouble with having a divided nation now.

Even if it hadn't immediately, the supply of fresh slaves had largely been choked off by then, and Europe wasn't going to continue trading with the Confederacy if it continued.

In any case, I figure America needs to be Balkanized at some point soon; or the very least breaking off places like LA into their own city-states, like DC.
 
I'm coming out blunt here, but if you believe the South ceded from the Union for any other major reason than slavery, you're a fucking retard. It is literally enshrined in their sham of a constitution.
Confederate Constitution:

Sec. 9. (I) The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.

(2) Congress shall also have power to prohibit the introduction of slaves from any State not a member of, or Territory not belonging to, this Confederacy.

(3) The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Outlaw of importation of slavery and language directly meant to refute the laws imposed by the north on them.

I don't know how you view it as a sham constitution, it is a document very similar to the original constitution with the exception of the rejection of the laws the north imposed.
 
This is true, but people seem to have forgotten why these myths about the lost cause and the "kindly general lee" who ordered his men home and to end the bloodshed were developed. All of it was an effort to knit the country back together. To remove the pain of defeat from the southern states. To turn what was the absolute ransacking and razing of their society into some sort of noble venture that failed. But failed for the best.

The recent push these days to break these myths is alarming because in many respects it goes to the very heart of the substructure that holds the country together. Some very smart people did some very delicate surgery to put the Union back together after the first civil war. And now a bunch of idiots are going in with hacksaws to rip out the stitches because "they ain't natural".

Of course the myths around the confederacy arent historically accurate. That is not the POINT. Worse however is the push to destroy the myths and replace them with equally hyperbolic myths in opposition. The first civil war was a shit show all around, as was slavery in America.

But it HAS to be pointed out that the depictions of both prebellum southern society and slavery in America as depicted by the modern Woke has very little basis in actual history. Case in point being the New York Times 1619 project, which is absolutely nothing but lies. For starters north America counted for less then 10% of the entire Atlantic slave trade and secondly a prospective slave captured by his fellow africans and Arab intermediaries would only be so lucky as to end up in North America. If he did he would live to old age. If he ended up in Brazil or Cuba he was a dead man within 2 years.

Yes it was all shit. But it was a very different time and for the standards of the time a Virginia tobacco plantation was a beacon of progressive thought.
I mean yeah an American slaves may live longer than one on a Brazilian sugar plantation. But that's like saying would you rather get mauled by crocodiles or choked to death by a fire. Slaves were still beaten to death by American Southerners.
 
I'm one of the further right people on the farm and I'm glad this is slowing down.

I'm just tired of seeing human suffering and this is coming from someone who could line black bloc low t faggots up and go down the line shooting them in the back of the head as if I'm in an ISIS vid.

I'd just like the world to just cool out for a bit. Maybe race war 2021?
 
Confederate Constitution:

Sec. 9. (I) The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.

(2) Congress shall also have power to prohibit the introduction of slaves from any State not a member of, or Territory not belonging to, this Confederacy.

(3) The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Outlaw of importation of slavery and language directly meant to refute the laws imposed by the north on them.

I don't know how you view it as a sham constitution, it is a document very similar to the original constitution with the exception of the rejection of the laws the north imposed.
You do know that they were using local stock by this time right? Look at prices for fertile female slaves or "fancy" slaves of pre antebellum once the Trans Atlantic slave trade died off, they aren't being bought because of woke feminism. They are being bought for being bred like literal cattle. It's why a mother's lineage denoted if you were free or slave.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Clark Kent
Confederate Constitution:

Sec. 9. (I) The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.

(2) Congress shall also have power to prohibit the introduction of slaves from any State not a member of, or Territory not belonging to, this Confederacy.

(3) The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Outlaw of importation of slavery and language directly meant to refute the laws imposed by the north on them.

I don't know how you view it as a sham constitution, it is a document very similar to the original constitution with the exception of the rejection of the laws the north imposed.
Yeah, uh

All of those were violated continuously by the Confederate States as at in no time of the existence of the rebel bastards were they ever at peace, and the Atlantic slave trade was literally still a thing until Brasil abolished it in the 1880s - Confederate exiles literally took their slaves with them when they left, and there was definitely still Atlantic and Brasilian slave importation going on INTO the Confederacy
 
  • Agree
Reactions: thx1138
Dunno if anyone has posted about this yet, but Instagram (and presumably Twitter) users have started this #pulluporshutup callout tag for brands, primarily cosmetic brands as part of the BLM movement.
View attachment 1356922View attachment 1356923

A lot of mainstream brands have already caved to the pressure from angry 17 year old girls.

Colourpop employs the wrong kind of token minorities:
View attachment 1356928


Lime Crime has 0 black HQ members (based) but promises they'll pull in some diversity hires:
View attachment 1356932View attachment 1356933

This is my first post here, let me know if I'm retarded.

You're not retarded, you're autistic. You'll fit right in, welcome home.

Also: how the fucking fuck is it "not enough" to have 93% minority workers and 78% female-or-wannabe-female?!?
 
I'm one of the further right people on the farm and I'm glad this is slowing down.

I'm just tired of seeing human suffering and this is coming from someone who could line black bloc low t faggots up and go down the line shooting them in the back of the head as if I'm in an ISIS vid.

I'd just like the world to just cool out for a bit. Maybe race war 2021?

I wouldn't consider myself on the farm, but i'm pretty far right. I wish more was happening, it's literally driving people to our cause and to our beliefs. But i agree, i hate seeing "normal" people get fucked with, it breaks my heart. (Normal people doesn't mean white folks, it means more apolitical folks, small business owning colored folks, and"normies" as much as i hate that word)
 

Attachments

  • 2021.mp4
    3.3 MB
I'm coming out blunt here, but if you believe the South ceded from the Union for any other major reason than slavery, you're a fucking retard. It is literally enshrined in their sham of a constitution.

The North was perfectly fine with slavery so long as the fruits of it were feeding the North’s industrial factories at bargain basement prices. The trigger for the South’s actions was the North made moves to prevent the South from selling their raw materials such as Cotton directly to Europe, and instead forced them to sell to Northern factories for less so the North could then sell Europe manufactured goods. It was an economic war. Most wars are at the end of the day. The institution of slavery in the South had largely been dying off for economic reasons, until the Industrial Revolution and the invention of Ely Whitney’s famous Cotton Gin, which allowed for the processing of cotton at Industrial Levels, which suddenly turned Cotton into a cash crop and spiked the demand for Cotton growing. Thus reinvigorating the demand for agricultural slaves.

I’m not condoning slavery. Merely pointing out that the issues of slavery and the issues surrounding the US Civil War were far more complex and intertwined than you are commonly spoon fed by the media. The root cause was ultimately Energy. In the 18th Century the primary source of energy for the society was straight up manpower. And sadly slavery was the sheapest source of such energy. By the mid 19th Century the North with its heavy industrial factories had largely evolved to coal and steam as the primary energy source fueling their economy. But due to it’s largely agrarian economy the South was still locked into Manpower as the only viable energy source. And forcefully yanking out that energy source with no viable replacement would crater the a Southern economy for a century or more. Which is what in fact happened to the south after the civil war. It’s only in the last 2-3 decades that the Southern economy has begun to equal or surpass the North’s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back