Leaderboard

I just won a scholarship from the company I worked for over the summer's charity arm. HOOOolly ssheeeetttTT

Fine, fine. Here's my argument: (1) No matter what the establishment is, some people will dislike it. (2) People tend to group with like-minded individuals. (3) People with more extreme views tend to be more involved and outspoken, because they will typically be more passionate about either change or the lack thereof. By 1, 2, and 3, people will group into factions that are represented to un- and semi-informed outsiders by the most extreme members of that faction. Currently, that's "anti-free-speech bleeding-heart America-hating corrupt socialist cucks" for the democrats and "bigoted racist backwards corporate-owned poor-hating fascist warmongers" for the republicans. Obviously, this is a simplification on both parts. This caused the current party divide, and made an individual like Trump inevitable. The average person sees the other side as intolerable because they see the extremes - the radfem SJWS, the Westboros, the KKK, extreme branches of BLM, etc. This prevents compromise. When their is no compromise, when the nation changes it will change radically towards one direction or the other - and when there is compromise, people don't hear about it. This is because outrage sells papers/gets views/farms clicks. Compromise does not, typically, produce outrage. Thus, people only (or mostly) hear about the intolerableness of the other side. Culture moves in a pendulum - and the farther it swings one way, the farther it swings back. Everyone is a reactionary. Thus, when right-leaning citizens see the "anti-free-speech bleeding-heart America-hating corrupt socialist cucks", they rally and push back - and must support whoever can stop that opposition, which will tend to be an extreme, passionate individual. This is because the more anti-establishment, where the establishment is the current perception of the culture, the more votes they will gather from people who dislike the current culture and the opposition. This is why Trump (who I highly doubt will be a good president) was inevitable, and maybe a good thing to happen. Had any left-leaning politician been elected, the pushback would have been even stronger, and we could have got an actual fascist who would try for gay conversions or whatever - or the extreme leftists would have taken over and abolished free speech. Both the hyper-extremes are bad, so it is better to fluctuate between relatively moderate to somewhat extreme (Trump) individuals of the two parties. People were sick and tired of the left (or rather, its visible extremities), so they went right. In a few years, the opposite will happen. Maybe the average will shift slowly (and it's looking like the average is shifting left), but drastic shifts that society is not ready for will bring only chaos. This is why I think Trump was a better option than Hillary. And now we get to why I think you're being* stupid. And not just you - anyone who buys into the lie that the party is composed entirely or mostly of the extreme and visible individuals and groups we see. That is the reason we have the chaos, the riots, the fear. And those lead to further extremes - and the risk of individuals like Pence, who I believe is utterly intolerable (primarily due to his support of the suicide-factory conversion camps). People need to see beyond that. They need to realize that most people are not well-represented by the vocal extremists in their party. I doubt this will happen unless there is a drastic shift in how the media approaches reporting and how we consume news or a major move away from the two-party system/political parties in general. -------------- And a note towards what Raison's been saying. At first I didn't respond because I thought he was memeing, but now I think he's serious, so I'll talk towards it. Racial divides do not create the issue - cultural ones do. Diversity is a good thing and a bad thing - good because it can lead to greater understanding and cooperation in the long term, but bad because it creates cultural conflicts (which are often violent) in the short term. Look at Japan - ultra homogeneous, low crime. For the bad effects, look at inner city America, which is rife with conflict between impoverished black and white americans. I don't think there is any need to preserve white leadership, but I do think there is a need to preserve traditional American freedom and equality focused leadership. This could be black leaders, this could be Hispanic leaders, it could just still be white leaders - what matters is that they're American leaders. -------------- *Being is temporary in this case. I act stupid all the time. Everyone does. And everyone can change that, or at least try to.

Regardless I don't think anyone who's penned articles like these should be given a fuckin' chance

you know what, you're right. im going to give trump a chance. maybe he is not the racist sexist idiot hes been claiming to be for the entire election. maybe hes a reasonable guy, that would in no way hire a white supremacist as his chief strategist oh...

And here we are back to square one. Just because they overlook racism and sexism, and keep company with racists and sexists, and have been praised by other racists and sexists, doesn't make them racist or sexist. He's racist. "You have an individual, Mr Bannon, who’s basically creating the ideological aspects of where we’re going." - The former Imperial Wizard of the KKK. It's really not that hard.

He didn't write those articles. Here are the articles he has written and published on Breitbart (CTRL+F "women"). I believe most of those were written by Milo (presumably, Milo Yanopolus or however it's spelled). Many people believe in giving a platform to all views in support of free speech, even if they disagree with those views. His allowing such articles (assuming he's even the one with the final say) is not damning.

so you say you want whites to remain the minority, but even if we were to completely halt immigration, whites will lose majority status within the next few decades. how do you intend on changing that other than by gassing the melanin-enriched?