|
United Kingdom10005 Posts
On July 22 2025 08:36 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2025 07:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Tbh Excludos you might get a pass because presumably you've seen more of him in the Ukraine thread than the USpol thread. But even then you could look at the Norwegian political spectrum: Aiding Ukraine with weapons has had nearly unianimous support in among the political parties with parliamentary representation in Norway, all the way from FrP on the right to SV on the left. One party has been hesitant - because of their opposition to NATO and the American hegemony (not their support of Russia) - that party being Rødt, which I am sure you recognize as the 'considered most leftwing party we have'. The stuff you see GH stating about this conflict is stuff you'll see from internal discussions within that party.
Like for fuck's sake the guy has a blog called 'socialism, anyone?'
He's been posting about social democracy not being good enough because it still works within a capitalist (thus exploitative) framework for like, hundreds of posts over a decade? There's honestly no way to be polite about this - if you've read a lot of GH's posting and you conclude that he's a right-winger, either your reading comprehension or your understanding of political ideology is way off. Of course, for Serm, stating that he's a right winger is kind of on brand, as, as I just stated, there's no other poster more guilty of inventing opinions among his fellow forumers than he is, but christ. This isn't even me defending GH, it's just me being appalled. It's like, when Nicaragua initially refused to sign the paris agreement, that wasn't because they didn't believe in climate change, it was because they thought it didn't go far enough and was basically a path to failure. That's GH compared to the other american posters here. I do not really ascribe to the right wing troll theory on GH, I'm not sure if it is the horseshoe theory of politics or if just far right and far left are more susceptible to the Russian miss information because they do not require any facts or proof to believe things.The other thing is he condescending, rude , insults peoples morality, is not at all helpful to those looking to learn, and this is to basically everybody but like 3 people he has deemed worthy.
This alone is a work of art tbh.
Sentence 1 is condescending, rude and insulting.
Sentence 2 accuses someone else of being condescending, rude and insulting.
Are you trolling?
|
On July 22 2025 09:33 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2025 08:36 Billyboy wrote:On July 22 2025 07:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Tbh Excludos you might get a pass because presumably you've seen more of him in the Ukraine thread than the USpol thread. But even then you could look at the Norwegian political spectrum: Aiding Ukraine with weapons has had nearly unianimous support in among the political parties with parliamentary representation in Norway, all the way from FrP on the right to SV on the left. One party has been hesitant - because of their opposition to NATO and the American hegemony (not their support of Russia) - that party being Rødt, which I am sure you recognize as the 'considered most leftwing party we have'. The stuff you see GH stating about this conflict is stuff you'll see from internal discussions within that party.
Like for fuck's sake the guy has a blog called 'socialism, anyone?'
He's been posting about social democracy not being good enough because it still works within a capitalist (thus exploitative) framework for like, hundreds of posts over a decade? There's honestly no way to be polite about this - if you've read a lot of GH's posting and you conclude that he's a right-winger, either your reading comprehension or your understanding of political ideology is way off. Of course, for Serm, stating that he's a right winger is kind of on brand, as, as I just stated, there's no other poster more guilty of inventing opinions among his fellow forumers than he is, but christ. This isn't even me defending GH, it's just me being appalled. It's like, when Nicaragua initially refused to sign the paris agreement, that wasn't because they didn't believe in climate change, it was because they thought it didn't go far enough and was basically a path to failure. That's GH compared to the other american posters here. I do not really ascribe to the right wing troll theory on GH, I'm not sure if it is the horseshoe theory of politics or if just far right and far left are more susceptible to the Russian miss information because they do not require any facts or proof to believe things.The other thing is he condescending, rude , insults peoples morality, is not at all helpful to those looking to learn, and this is to basically everybody but like 3 people he has deemed worthy. This alone is a work of art tbh. Sentence 1 is condescending, rude and insulting. Sentence 2 accuses someone else of being condescending, rude and insulting. Are you trolling?
I'm sorry that a well researched psychological opinion felt condescending to you. Can you think of a better way I could have presented it? Spoilered below is a AI generated overview, but if you would like me to dig up some citations I probably would. (this does not mean I think far left and far right are the same, if I did I wouldn't post this that includes the differences, trying to guess the next silly attack claim).
+ Show Spoiler +Yes, both the far-left and far-right are susceptible to propaganda, although the types of narratives and the specific mechanisms they utilize may differ. Research indicates that both ends of the political spectrum can be vulnerable to misinformation, with partisanship and echo chambers playing significant roles.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
Far-Right:
Populist ideologies:
Far-right movements often leverage populist narratives that focus on exclusionary ideologies and hostility towards democratic institutions.
Anti-elitism and cultural grievances:
They frequently employ narratives that emphasize cultural grievances and opposition to mainstream institutions, creating fertile ground for misinformation.
Alternative media ecosystems:
Far-right movements have been effective in creating and utilizing alternative media ecosystems to amplify their viewpoints, which can lead to echo chambers and the spread of misinformation.
Examples:
Studies show that far-right groups are more likely to engage with and spread fake news, particularly during elections.
Far-Left:
Economic grievances:
While far-left movements may focus on economic grievances, they can also be susceptible to misinformation, especially when it aligns with their pre-existing beliefs.
Conspiracy theories:
Some research suggests that the far-left may be more prone to believing in conspiracy theories, particularly those that target powerful entities like corporations and the wealthy.
Echo chambers:
Similar to the far-right, echo chambers and partisan news sources can contribute to the spread of misinformation on the far-left as well.
Examples:
Some research indicates that while conservatives may be more likely to share misinformation overall, there is evidence that certain types of misinformation can resonate more strongly with left-leaning individuals.
Shared susceptibility:
Partisanship and echo chambers:
Both the far-right and far-left are susceptible to misinformation due to their strong partisan affiliations and tendency to exist within echo chambers where their views are reinforced.
|
On July 22 2025 07:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Tbh Excludos you might get a pass because presumably you've seen more of him in the Ukraine thread than the USpol thread. But even then you could look at the Norwegian political spectrum: Aiding Ukraine with weapons has had nearly unianimous support in among the political parties with parliamentary representation in Norway, all the way from FrP on the right to SV on the left. One party has been hesitant - because of their opposition to NATO and the American hegemony (not their support of Russia) - that party being Rødt, which I am sure you recognize as the 'considered most leftwing party we have'. The stuff you see GH stating about this conflict is stuff you'll see from internal discussions within that party.
Like for fuck's sake the guy has a blog called 'socialism, anyone?'
He's been posting about social democracy not being good enough because it still works within a capitalist (thus exploitative) framework for like, hundreds of posts over a decade? There's honestly no way to be polite about this - if you've read a lot of GH's posting and you conclude that he's a right-winger, either your reading comprehension or your understanding of political ideology is way off. Of course, for Serm, stating that he's a right winger is kind of on brand, as, as I just stated, there's no other poster more guilty of inventing opinions among his fellow forumers than he is, but christ. This isn't even me defending GH, it's just me being appalled. It's like, when Nicaragua initially refused to sign the paris agreement, that wasn't because they didn't believe in climate change, it was because they thought it didn't go far enough and was basically a path to failure. That's GH compared to the other american posters here.
I'm not familiar with his blog, but it does surprise me that I've been able to misread someone this badly if this truly is the case. It's difficult to see what GH truly wants most of the time, but him arguing vehemently against anyone who is left leaning has definitively skewed my view of where his ideology truly lies. But as Billy points out, it's entirely possible he's just horseshoeing so far left he's ended up echoing many of the talking points of the right.
|
I enjoy that three days later MP is still in full man-vs-world all over the other thread, and yet here we've somehow ended up arguing about GH for the millionth time. It's like some irresistible law of TLpol.
|
On July 22 2025 16:51 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2025 07:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Tbh Excludos you might get a pass because presumably you've seen more of him in the Ukraine thread than the USpol thread. But even then you could look at the Norwegian political spectrum: Aiding Ukraine with weapons has had nearly unianimous support in among the political parties with parliamentary representation in Norway, all the way from FrP on the right to SV on the left. One party has been hesitant - because of their opposition to NATO and the American hegemony (not their support of Russia) - that party being Rødt, which I am sure you recognize as the 'considered most leftwing party we have'. The stuff you see GH stating about this conflict is stuff you'll see from internal discussions within that party.
Like for fuck's sake the guy has a blog called 'socialism, anyone?'
He's been posting about social democracy not being good enough because it still works within a capitalist (thus exploitative) framework for like, hundreds of posts over a decade? There's honestly no way to be polite about this - if you've read a lot of GH's posting and you conclude that he's a right-winger, either your reading comprehension or your understanding of political ideology is way off. Of course, for Serm, stating that he's a right winger is kind of on brand, as, as I just stated, there's no other poster more guilty of inventing opinions among his fellow forumers than he is, but christ. This isn't even me defending GH, it's just me being appalled. It's like, when Nicaragua initially refused to sign the paris agreement, that wasn't because they didn't believe in climate change, it was because they thought it didn't go far enough and was basically a path to failure. That's GH compared to the other american posters here. I'm not familiar with his blog, but it does surprise me that I've been able to misread someone this badly if this truly is the case. It's difficult to see what GH truly wants most of the time, but him arguing vehemently against anyone who is left leaning has definitively skewed my view of where his ideology truly lies. But as Billy points out, it's entirely possible he's just horseshoeing so far left he's ended up echoing many of the talking points of the right.
GH is a tankie. The far left dislikes non-far leftists almost as much as the right. Most of the forum is also on the left. So it's not too surprising that he argues the most against the left.
|
United States44352 Posts
Hey, the duck may quack like a duck and he may swim like a duck and he may fly like a duck but he has been very clear that he’s doesn’t want to be called a duck.
Also I don’t really feel like tankies even belong under the left umbrella. If you look at the regimes around the world that GH and other tankies simp for it’s not generally countries like Norway where the government has ownership of natural resources and stewards the wealth of the nation on behalf of the people, using it for a strong welfare state. Some of the regimes they support have leftist elements, but an awful lot of others don’t.
Basically the only thing they have in common is that they are one party states. If it’s not a one party state they’re not into it. If it’s a one party state then they don’t give a fuck how oligarchic, imperialist, capitalist, and socially regressive it is, they’ll forgive all of that.
|
On July 22 2025 20:02 Belisarius wrote:
I enjoy that three days later MP is still in full man-vs-world all over the other thread, and yet here we've somehow ended up arguing about GH for the millionth time. It's like some irresistible law of TLpol.
I think this is the part where I'm supposed to go full Serm and point out how obviously Kwark is being anti-trans with statements like his about ducks. + Show Spoiler +
I used to get angry, now it mostly just makes me sad for them.
|
On July 23 2025 02:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2025 20:02 Belisarius wrote:
I enjoy that three days later MP is still in full man-vs-world all over the other thread, and yet here we've somehow ended up arguing about GH for the millionth time. It's like some irresistible law of TLpol. I think this is the part where I'm supposed to go full Serm and point out how obviously Kwark is being anti-trans with statements like his about ducks. + Show Spoiler +I used to get angry, now it mostly just makes me sad for them.
At least you're not shaking the troll tag, and we should continue to never take anything you say with even the most remote seriousness. Honestly, most of the time I don't even know why you're here, because you've never had any intention to debate in good faith, and your attitude makes it certain no one is going to listen to anything you say. So what is even the point? Go on and live your life instead
|
On July 23 2025 02:15 KwarK wrote:
Hey, the duck may quack like a duck and he may swim like a duck and he may fly like a duck but he has been very clear that he’s doesn’t want to be called a duck.
Also I don’t really feel like tankies even belong under the left umbrella. If you look at the regimes around the world that GH and other tankies simp for it’s not generally countries like Norway where the government has ownership of natural resources and stewards the wealth of the nation on behalf of the people, using it for a strong welfare state. Some of the regimes they support have leftist elements, but an awful lot of others don’t.
Basically the only thing they have in common is that they are one party states. If it’s not a one party state they’re not into it. If it’s a one party state then they don’t give a fuck how oligarchic, imperialist, capitalist, and socially regressive it is, they’ll forgive all of that.
That's an idiotic take and you know it. GH is not a simp for SA, Turkey or Iran, to name a few.
They have to at least pretend to try communism, even if they're hypercapitalist kleptocracies in practice.
|
United States44352 Posts
On July 23 2025 03:11 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2025 02:15 KwarK wrote:
Hey, the duck may quack like a duck and he may swim like a duck and he may fly like a duck but he has been very clear that he’s doesn’t want to be called a duck.
Also I don’t really feel like tankies even belong under the left umbrella. If you look at the regimes around the world that GH and other tankies simp for it’s not generally countries like Norway where the government has ownership of natural resources and stewards the wealth of the nation on behalf of the people, using it for a strong welfare state. Some of the regimes they support have leftist elements, but an awful lot of others don’t.
Basically the only thing they have in common is that they are one party states. If it’s not a one party state they’re not into it. If it’s a one party state then they don’t give a fuck how oligarchic, imperialist, capitalist, and socially regressive it is, they’ll forgive all of that. That's an idiotic take and you know it. GH is not a simp for SA, Turkey or Iran, to name a few. They have to at least pretend to try communism, even if they're hypercapitalist kleptocracies in practice.
The rule is non western aligned one party state so no Turkey or SA as you say.
|
On July 21 2025 21:32 Liquid`Drone wrote:
No, if anyone has gotten preferential treatment, it's several different people and you are near the top. (Serm) I don't think a single poster is more guilty of inventing opinions or stances among other posters and that, honestly, is the main area I wish we had moderated in a more strict and stringent manner. I don't mind the occasional insult, but claiming that people are holding positions they deny holding because you think you know better than they do is cancerous for fruitful discussion.
Wouldnt hold my breath expecting change, but this is where I wish we could see some improvement.
Anyway, the idea that GH is a right wing troll is fucking idiotic. There's plenty of legitimate criticism to throw his way, that is not it.
Kind of late but wanted to agree with this a lot.
Unfortunately this kind of issue cannot be solved because a lot of this is just core politics. Most political positions have contradictions within them, and then people have to find ways to work around them in order to continue to support their positions, because nobody has an easy time dealing with their own contradictions. How can you have liberal values and then defend capitalism, a system that makes it impossible for any of those values to materialize in the real world? Well you need some sort of reason why the people who do not support capitalism are bad, maybe they're rightwing trolls in disguise because the far left and the far right are hard to tell apart (somehow), or maybe they're children who don't understand politics and are misinformed. This happens a lot and is probably the main reason why political discussions can't go anywhere, I can bring up like ten examples before I have to think about anything. The idea that "the far left" are too extreme to appeal to a significant amount of voters and therefore shouldn't be offered anything in terms of their political goals, but at the same time are responsible for Trump being elected because so many of them didn't vote for Biden. This doesn't work logically on a basic level, but it's a core idea of democratic party politics. It's impossible to support how the Dems are going about US politics without some form of that idea, and that's how you get to GH single-handedly handing the presidency to Trump by not voting for Biden in fucking Washington in several different posts by several different posters.
Tl;dr yes it's annoying but I don't think it's solvable in any kind of significant way.
|
only just saw the mp ban now. holy moly he must be so insanely tilted by that lol
|
Northern Ireland27456 Posts
On July 21 2025 21:32 Liquid`Drone wrote:
No, if anyone has gotten preferential treatment, it's several different people and you are near the top. (Serm) I don't think a single poster is more guilty of inventing opinions or stances among other posters and that, honestly, is the main area I wish we had moderated in a more strict and stringent manner. I don't mind the occasional insult, but claiming that people are holding positions they deny holding because you think you know better than they do is cancerous for fruitful discussion.
Wouldnt hold my breath expecting change, but this is where I wish we could see some improvement.
Anyway, the idea that GH is a right wing troll is fucking idiotic. There's plenty of legitimate criticism to throw his way, that is not it.
Agreed on the bolded, as well as with your subsequent post.
I generally like the relatively lax moderation in terms of enabling vibrant discussion, and also the shift over the years to purge out things like bigoted slurs while still maintaining a pretty open space.
If there’s one area I find problematic, and getting actively worse not better, it’s probably the amount of shitstorms prompted by really blatant strawmanning and misrepresentation. Combined with just consistent doubling down when it is called out.
I’m not going to use the thread to air grievances with particular posters, I think this is a problem that a lot engage in, and it ain’t for the betterment of threads.
Some are ambiguous, or perhaps just down to fundamental differences in worldview, but some instances are absolutely blatant
Perhaps the odd mod action in the worst instances, even if it’s merely warnings may improve things slightly. Just my half a dollar
|
On July 23 2025 21:42 evilfatsh1t wrote:
only just saw the mp ban now. holy moly he must be so insanely tilted by that lol
Wouldn't be surprised if he made an alt account to continue his noble fight.
|
Norway28900 Posts
|
Northern Ireland27456 Posts
On July 22 2025 16:51 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2025 07:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Tbh Excludos you might get a pass because presumably you've seen more of him in the Ukraine thread than the USpol thread. But even then you could look at the Norwegian political spectrum: Aiding Ukraine with weapons has had nearly unianimous support in among the political parties with parliamentary representation in Norway, all the way from FrP on the right to SV on the left. One party has been hesitant - because of their opposition to NATO and the American hegemony (not their support of Russia) - that party being Rødt, which I am sure you recognize as the 'considered most leftwing party we have'. The stuff you see GH stating about this conflict is stuff you'll see from internal discussions within that party.
Like for fuck's sake the guy has a blog called 'socialism, anyone?'
He's been posting about social democracy not being good enough because it still works within a capitalist (thus exploitative) framework for like, hundreds of posts over a decade? There's honestly no way to be polite about this - if you've read a lot of GH's posting and you conclude that he's a right-winger, either your reading comprehension or your understanding of political ideology is way off. Of course, for Serm, stating that he's a right winger is kind of on brand, as, as I just stated, there's no other poster more guilty of inventing opinions among his fellow forumers than he is, but christ. This isn't even me defending GH, it's just me being appalled. It's like, when Nicaragua initially refused to sign the paris agreement, that wasn't because they didn't believe in climate change, it was because they thought it didn't go far enough and was basically a path to failure. That's GH compared to the other american posters here. I'm not familiar with his blog, but it does surprise me that I've been able to misread someone this badly if this truly is the case. It's difficult to see what GH truly wants most of the time, but him arguing vehemently against anyone who is left leaning has definitively skewed my view of where his ideology truly lies. But as Billy points out, it's entirely possible he's just horseshoeing so far left he's ended up echoing many of the talking points of the right.
If you’re genuinely anti-capitalist and that’s your jam, the average centre-left person is pro-capitalist to some degree. So you’re not actually aligned at a real fundamental level.
One is, in effect an ‘enemy’ of socialism if one has those views. Just a slightly lesser enemy than Dave MAGA or whatever.
If one views it through that kind of lens, it doesn’t change all that much functionally, but I think is more accurate, and it sees things like Horseshoe Theory somewhat evaporate.
This doesn’t mean GH gets a pass on everything from my side of the ledger, but I think certain framings don’t hold up to scrutiny really. Abstract WombaT is probably rather closer to GH on certain issues than many pol posters, but I consider things like pragmatism, realistic likelihoods and harm reduction versus his propensity to fall into the ‘perfect is the enemy of the good’ trap.
I think his stances on some international conflicts are deeply flawed, inconsistent with his other stated stances and pretty darn incoherent as a result. I just don’t think his general socio-economic worldview and how he expresses that is bad faith, or trolling or whatever else the accusation is.
|
United Kingdom10005 Posts
From the Israel thread:
On July 24 2025 00:21 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2025 21:06 Nebuchad wrote:On July 23 2025 20:49 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 23 2025 20:34 Jankisa wrote:
So the guy got banned for, being annoying?
I'm aware that there is no real freedom of speech in places like this, but you guys all engaged with him on this ridiculous tangent, collectively derailed the thread and then banned the guy because he was being annoying to a moderator and wouldn't back down from his position?
Seems pretty silly and petty, on top of basically shutting down any relevant discussion in this thread.
This discussion was entirely, 100% irrelevant and he wouldn't let it go. Were you actually enjoying reading about whether or not he said something earlier this year? The ban can be defended easily but there are many many other people that could have been banned using that standard and weren't. It shouldn't have just been him, for sure. I think our little community would benefit a lot from some actual slaps on the wrist here and there to prevent the personal back and forth that's become way too prevalent lately. Show nested quote +On July 23 2025 21:43 Jankisa wrote:On July 23 2025 20:49 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 23 2025 20:34 Jankisa wrote:
So the guy got banned for, being annoying?
I'm aware that there is no real freedom of speech in places like this, but you guys all engaged with him on this ridiculous tangent, collectively derailed the thread and then banned the guy because he was being annoying to a moderator and wouldn't back down from his position?
Seems pretty silly and petty, on top of basically shutting down any relevant discussion in this thread.
This discussion was entirely, 100% irrelevant and he wouldn't let it go. Were you actually enjoying reading about whether or not he said something earlier this year? I'm generally against banning unless it's spam, extremely bad faith or harassment, so I wanted to check what happened here. Thank you for pointing me at the feedback thread, I'll check it out as I can see there is discussion of that ban there. I think using bans to serve a role similar to a mute on Discord is reasonable. Give someone 6 hours to cool off a bit etc
This is exactly right, the only people who have been banned from the politics thread content are people who are overtly, ridiculously racist or homophobic or something, or people who have been posting like a twat for years and only post shitty stuff over long period of time.
Otherwise its just a time out.
What's interesting to me is whether danglars, xdaunt and those who were banned for being extremely hardcore right wing would get banned in the era of Trump, or whether their behaviour would be seen as fairly normal these days.
|
United States44352 Posts
My recollection is that xDaunt went full whites only ethnostate after spending too long on the internet. Sad.
|
On July 24 2025 00:41 Jockmcplop wrote:From the Israel thread: Show nested quote +On July 24 2025 00:21 Mohdoo wrote:On July 23 2025 21:06 Nebuchad wrote:On July 23 2025 20:49 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 23 2025 20:34 Jankisa wrote:
So the guy got banned for, being annoying?
I'm aware that there is no real freedom of speech in places like this, but you guys all engaged with him on this ridiculous tangent, collectively derailed the thread and then banned the guy because he was being annoying to a moderator and wouldn't back down from his position?
Seems pretty silly and petty, on top of basically shutting down any relevant discussion in this thread.
This discussion was entirely, 100% irrelevant and he wouldn't let it go. Were you actually enjoying reading about whether or not he said something earlier this year? The ban can be defended easily but there are many many other people that could have been banned using that standard and weren't. It shouldn't have just been him, for sure. I think our little community would benefit a lot from some actual slaps on the wrist here and there to prevent the personal back and forth that's become way too prevalent lately. On July 23 2025 21:43 Jankisa wrote:On July 23 2025 20:49 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 23 2025 20:34 Jankisa wrote:
So the guy got banned for, being annoying?
I'm aware that there is no real freedom of speech in places like this, but you guys all engaged with him on this ridiculous tangent, collectively derailed the thread and then banned the guy because he was being annoying to a moderator and wouldn't back down from his position?
Seems pretty silly and petty, on top of basically shutting down any relevant discussion in this thread.
This discussion was entirely, 100% irrelevant and he wouldn't let it go. Were you actually enjoying reading about whether or not he said something earlier this year? I'm generally against banning unless it's spam, extremely bad faith or harassment, so I wanted to check what happened here. Thank you for pointing me at the feedback thread, I'll check it out as I can see there is discussion of that ban there. I think using bans to serve a role similar to a mute on Discord is reasonable. Give someone 6 hours to cool off a bit etc This is exactly right, the only people who have been banned from the politics thread content are people who are overtly, ridiculously racist or homophobic or something, or people who have been posting like a twat for years and only post shitty stuff over long period of time. Otherwise its just a time out. What's interesting to me is whether danglars, xdaunt and those who were banned for being extremely hardcore right wing would get banned in the era of Trump, or whether their behaviour would be seen as fairly normal these days.
I'm guessing it would be seen as fairly normal because fortunately part of the group that kept spamming the report button also left.
Danglars might be safe to post today. His views were riskier to express here but it would be hard to imagine a rational moderation team that would be okay with perming him and keeping Magic Powers.
|
United Kingdom10005 Posts
On July 24 2025 00:59 KwarK wrote:
My recollection is that xDaunt went full whites only ethnostate after spending too long on the internet. Sad.
That's what I mean.
The full whites only ethnostate is now reminiscent of how government policy in the US is being carried out (forcibly kidnapping and deporting random non white people regardless of their legal status) and people here defend it regularly.
Its the new normal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
