The latest anti-liberal rant thread (get your daily dose here)

[Toho]

The term "White" is flawed in and of itself. The reality is, "Whites" themselves are a mixture of many different cultures and national backgrounds that can all be shoehorned under one label due to similarities in their social and cultural traits. Which is why racism is so ridiculous to begin with. It's based on nothing but color of one's skin.

Reminds me of this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptSZnTtGCQA

[Basil II the B.S]

Great news everyone. New reasons to bash liberal journalism: zoophilia promotion.
Why are the cats sexy? And other Cats questions you were too embarrassed to ask.


https://www.vox.com/2019/7/19/207002...a-jellicle-cat

[fkizz]

The term "White" is flawed in and of itself. The reality is, "Whites" themselves are a mixture of many different cultures and national backgrounds that can all be shoehorned under one label due to similarities in their social and cultural traits. Which is why racism is so ridiculous to begin with. It's based on nothing but color of one's skin.

It gets more confusing than that. The Irish, possibly the people in Europe with the Whitest Skin color in Europe, were only considered white since XIX century.

In his book How the Irish Became White, author Noel Ignatiev notes, “While the white skin made the Irish eligible for membership in the white race, it did not guarantee their admission; they had to earn it.”

There's were also many political interests in defining what was white or not. Italians aren't/weren't considered "true whites" in some places, and such cases go on endlessly.

[conon394]

Great news everyone. New reasons to bash liberal journalism: zoophilia promotion.
Why are the cats sexy? And other Cats questions you were too embarrassed to ask.


https://www.vox.com/2019/7/19/207002...a-jellicle-cat

Bit bored today I see that's all you got. Not really read much sci fi or fantasy have you? Or looked at 60s era covers.

[The spartan]

Great news everyone. New reasons to bash liberal journalism: zoophilia promotion.

The are you even talking about?

[Cohors_Evocata]

Great news everyone. New reasons to bash liberal journalism: zoophilia promotion.
Why are the cats sexy? And other Cats questions you were too embarrassed to ask.


https://www.vox.com/2019/7/19/207002...a-jellicle-cat

Did... did you actually read the article in question? It's not about the animals, it's about Cats the musical and its movie adaptation.

And far from promoting zoophilia, the related question in the article (#9) is: "Why are all the Cats so ... sexualized? And what is with the fur?"

And here's the relevant section:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It’s no real secret that humans have always had a thing for sexualizing cats — and conversely using a wealth of cat euphemisms to objectify and dehumanize women. (Think about it.) We describe two women fighting over a man as a catfight; when they get competitive, we say their “claws” come out. Cats plays right into this narrative, though in its egalitarian way, it sexualizes the men just as much as the women — most notably, Rum Tum Tugger. Watch Terrence Mann, the original Rum Tum Tugger on Broadway, aggressively thrust sex appeal at the audience:

The blatant sexuality of this number didn’t go unremarked-upon at the time; Frank Rich stated in his New York Times review that “the only real flaw in this large company is Terrence V. Mann’s Rum Tum Tugger, who tries to imitate Mick Jagger’s outlaw sexuality and misses by a wide mark.” (Mann would go on to brilliantly create the role of Les Miserables’ Javert, the most sexually repressed character ever, in the original Broadway cast.)

It’s not just one cat that’s barely clothed and gyrating around the stage, of course, but all of them. To be fair to Cats, this is mainly because, again, it’s a dance musical — the actors are dancing the entire time, so their costumes are skin-hugging, light uniforms out of necessity as much as style.

But Hooper, in his strange relish for recreating the exact parameters of the musicals he adapts (arguably to their detriment), seems to have wanted to recreate the flesh-colored appearance of scantily clad, nearly-nude cats, in the vein of the original theatrical costumes — but using photorealistic CGI fur to do it with.

A note on CGI fur: Hooper and his cast of actors kept emphasizing the fur a tremendous amount in their behind-the-scenes footage of Cats. There’s a reason for that: The difficulty of making CGI fur look realistic is a notorious element of CGI animation; it’s apparently so difficult to animate that scientists are researching how to do it better. The difficulty of creating convincing CGI fur is partly what led to a brief fandom backlash over a pet in Game of Thrones. So when Taylor Swift says excitedly that Hooper has invented a new way to apply CGI fur to the actors in Cats, she’s probably really, truly excited. It’s probably a big deal.

But of course, as we all saw in the trailer, no matter how advanced the technology is, CGI fur still looks really weird, especially when it’s paired with Hooper’s near-nude costume designs. And especially when those nearly-nude costumes mainly seem to be worn by the young women in the cast and not the men:

Then there’s the existential crisis that results when you have cat-furred cats wearing cat-fur coats — like a terrible CGI furception:

All in all, sexy cats notwithstanding, this does not seem to be the kind of movie that results in a new generation of furries being born. If anything, Cats might actually have the opposite effect, and cause many of us to reconsider why we’ve spent so much time anthropomorphizing our feline friends into sexy creatures of the night.

Quality of the article aside, it's not endorsing or promoting anything, just remarking on a trend it signals. Given the last paragraph it's arguably against the sexualisation.

[Basil II the B.S]

And here's the relevant section:
It’s no real secret that humans have always had a thing for sexualizing cats — and conversely using a wealth of cat euphemisms to objectify and dehumanize women.

No. That's not human practice. Here the closest thing I can find to my memory are Japanese cosplayers with cat ears. That's it. Humans don't have a thing for sexualizing cats. Liberals that write at Vox apparently do, thus I don't want them anywhere near my cat, my girlfriend or in my society.

ing liberals of Vox are now molesting cats.

[PointOfViewGun]

Interesting. Journalists write about one aspect of idolization of cats that perhaps is as old as the ancient world and Basil feels the need to express that as a molestation of cats because by his own admission he has no personal knowledge on the matter. That's what we call degenerate stance on trivial matters.

[Cohors_Evocata]

No. That's not human practice. Here the closest thing I can find to my memory are Japanese cosplayers with cat ears. That's it. Humans don't have a thing for sexualizing cats. Liberals that write at Vox apparently do, thus I don't want them anywhere near my cat, my girlfriend or in my society.

ing liberals of Vox are now molesting cats.

Possibly mildly NSFW, though nothing that would break site terms I imagine.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

-Gustave Moreau, Oedipus and the Sphinx, 1864

-Halle Berre as Catwoman, 2004

-Bastet, an ancient Egyptian goddess associated with (human) fertility, of whom Herodotos recounts that she was worshipped in a festival which involved a lot of alcohol and women lifting their skirts.(2.60):

The song Cat Man by Gene Vincent, 1957. Lyrics:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Cat Man's a-coming, you better look out
Cat Man's a-comin', running about
Cat Man's a-comin', lookin' for a girl
Better hide your sister man!
"C" is for the crazy hairdo that he wears around
"A" is for the arms, that he'll sneak around your waist
"T" is for the taste of lips belong to you
Cat Man, CAT MAN!
(Yeah...git it...go!)
"M" is for the mean things that this mean man does
"A" is for a-lot-of hearts that he has ever broke
"N" is for the names of the list you may be on
Cat Man, CAT MAN!
(Rock!)
Cat Man a-lookin' for a woman all day long
Ah-better watch out 'cause he is in you midst
Ah-better watch out 'cause or you're gonna be kissed
Better watch out 'cause he is in you midst
Cat Man, CAT MAN! (Yeah)
Better watch out 'cause I'm the Cat Man
CAT MAN!

I could probably find different (and raunchier) examples, but the idea stands that people have associated cats with human sexuality in the past, though generally in the shape of antropomorphizing cats or ascribing feline traits to humans. Not so much, you know, bing actual cats. You also conveniently ignored the last paragraph I quoted in my previous post, which expresses a lack of enthusiasm for the portrayal of the cats in the Cats movie described therein and hence goes against the idea that the writers were promoting zoophilia.

[Basil II the B.S]

I didn't find the last paragraph particularly interesting.

As for the examples you posted, Bastet isn't particularly relevant when in the context of a religion of zoomorphic gods and the goddess of fertility was Isis. The Sphinx technically was female, but I'm unsure about its sexualization. Catwoman definitely counts, we can accept the Catman song you posted as well.

I don't find the sexualization as common as suggested.It can be an occasional thing, but then again, so are furries and I'm not exactly a fan of their lifestyle.

[Prodromos]

I heard that in Europe there's bestiality brothels all over the place. So enlightened and progressive.

[Basil II the B.S]

Nah. They are or were legal in Denmark or something along the lines. Germany is filled with furries though.

[Cohors_Evocata]

I didn't find the last paragraph particularly interesting.


As for the examples you posted, Bastet isn't particularly relevant when in the context of a religion of zoomorphic gods and the goddess of fertility was Isis. The Sphinx technically was female, but I'm unsure about its sexualization. Catwoman definitely counts, we can accept the Catman song you posted as well.


I don't find the sexualization as common as suggested.It can be an occasional thing, but then again, so are furries and I'm not exactly a fan of their lifestyle.

The last paragraph was arguably the one most disapproving of the portrayal in the movie, but I digress.


Bastet's case was chosen more for the worship described by Herodotos, though the the great thing about polytheism is that multiple gods can have multiple roles (heck, even Aphrodite was more of a martial goddess in Sparta). Nor do I assume the choice of animal attributes for the various Egyptian gods was entirely random; AFAIK it's assumed that the zoomorphism must have had some symbolic importance (e.g. Anubis: jackal-death, Horus: falcon-sky, far-seeing etc.), but I won't pretend to be an expert on that, The painting of the sphinx was chosen because of the pose Moreau placed the characters in, in contrast to e.g. this one, which seems more chaste (and even then the painter is quite specific with his highlighting):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Regardless, for some other examples (once again, fairly tame):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

-Charles Baudelaire, Le Chat (1857 - in English translation)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

My beautiful cat, come onto my heart full of love;
Hold back the claws of your paw,
And let me plunge into your adorable eyes
Mixed with metal and agate.
When my fingers lazily fondle
Your head and your elastic back,
And my hand gets drunk with the pleasure
Of feeling your electric body,
I see in spirit my personal lady. Her glance,
Like yours, dear creature,
Deep and cold, slits and splits like a dart,
And from her feet to her head,
A subtle atmosphere, a dangerous perfume,
Swim around her brown body.
— Geoffrey Wagner, Selected Poems of Charles Baudelaire (NY: Grove Press, 1974)

-Freyja, Norse goddess of love, rode on a cart pulled by two cats (Gyflaginning, 24)
-Édourd Manet, Olympia, 1863. Quite controversial at the time. The usage of the black cat is ambiguous, but is supposed to have been associated with promiscuity, femininity and even prostitution, from what I've been able to find.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

-Various terms related to sexuality and women in the English language: sex kitten, cougar and most obviously, well...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Look, I'm not saying that the link between cats and (female) human sexuality is one that is all over the place in modern culture (really, so far it seems mostly a French thing ), but it's not pulled out of thin air either. Accusing the writers of VOX of promoting zoophilia or molesting cats by pointing that out is somewhat unfair IMO.

I heard that in Europe there's bestiality brothels all over the place. So enlightened and progressive.

Ya got a source for that?

[conon394]

really, so far it seems mostly a French thing

Was a cat in the picture often a note that the women was of the sexually available type even outside of nudes?

[Basil II the B.S]

The last paragraph was arguably the one most disapproving of the portrayal in the movie, but I digress.


Bastet's case was chosen more for the worship described by Herodotos, though the the great thing about polytheism is that multiple gods can have multiple roles (heck, even Aphrodite was more of a martial goddess in Sparta). Nor do I assume the choice of animal attributes for the various Egyptian gods was entirely random; AFAIK it's assumed that the zoomorphism must have had some symbolic importance (e.g. Anubis: jackal-death, Horus: falcon-sky, far-seeing etc.), but I won't pretend to be an expert on that, The painting of the sphinx was chosen because of the pose Moreau placed the characters in, in contrast to e.g. this one, which seems more chaste (and even then the painter is quite specific with his highlighting):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Regardless, for some other examples (once again, fairly tame):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

-Charles Baudelaire, Le Chat (1857 - in English translation)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

My beautiful cat, come onto my heart full of love;
Hold back the claws of your paw,
And let me plunge into your adorable eyes
Mixed with metal and agate.
When my fingers lazily fondle
Your head and your elastic back,
And my hand gets drunk with the pleasure
Of feeling your electric body,
I see in spirit my personal lady. Her glance,
Like yours, dear creature,
Deep and cold, slits and splits like a dart,
And from her feet to her head,
A subtle atmosphere, a dangerous perfume,
Swim around her brown body.
— Geoffrey Wagner, Selected Poems of Charles Baudelaire (NY: Grove Press, 1974)

-Freyja, Norse goddess of love, rode on a cart pulled by two cats (Gyflaginning, 24)
-Édourd Manet, Olympia, 1863. Quite controversial at the time. The usage of the black cat is ambiguous, but is supposed to have been associated with promiscuity, femininity and even prostitution, from what I've been able to find.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

-Various terms related to sexuality and women in the English language: sex kitten, cougar and most obviously, well...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Look, I'm not saying that the link between cats and (female) human sexuality is one that is all over the place in modern culture (really, so far it seems mostly a French thing ), but it's not pulled out of thin air either. Accusing the writers of VOX of promoting zoophilia or molesting cats by pointing that out is somewhat unfair IMO.

But in many of those cases it's not the cat that's sexualized. There's a sexualized woman and a cat presence possibly hinting some ambiguous behavior. If we want to go with that point, then fine but conceptually speaking those are quite different.

[Basil II the B.S]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...to-fight-about

Who's he?
The former Minister for European Affairs under the center-left liberal governments of Matteo Renzi and Paolo Gentiloni.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandro_Gozi

Recently hired in the very same position by Emmanuel Macron for the French government. Gozi had also run for Macron's party in the recent European Parliament elections, falling short due to the abysimal performance of the party of the highly impopular French President, whose government so far has killed at least 10 protesters.

Macron's liberal government has also waged war against freedom of speech:
https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-ri...to-free-speech
and freedom of information:
https://www.ft.com/content/6fe3b1fc-...9-290979c9807a

He's also actively destabilizing Lybia by providing weapons to insurgements against the UN recognized Tripoli government.

I find it pretty interesting that liberals are overly eager to use conspiracy theories to associate patriotic parties to the Russian government, yet they are the ones to regularly backstab their fellow countrymen at every occasion. A country's Minister swears on the Constitution to serve the national interest and only that.

How can someone like Gozi, who probably knows confidential information due to his work for the Italian government, serve a hostile foreign power?
For those who studied a bit of colonialism, they should be aware that colonial empires regularly relied on local elites to manage affairs. Gozi is a perfect example, alongside his party, the Italian Democratic party, whose enamourment for Macron is notorious as they added the French flag to their social communication profiles:
https://www.repubblica.it/politica/2..._me-218650843/

The irony is that plenty of stupid liberals still wonder why they are despised so much by the vaste majority of the country. They legitimately get off at the idea of prostituting themselves to foreigners and seem to be unable to understand why the rest of the population is not appreciative of such habits.

I think this is a great example that truly reveals the great cleavage about our time: the people against the liberal elite. A true battle of good versus evil.

What do you guys think? Would you be happy to see a former minister of your country serving a hostile foreign power? Would you consider him a traitor?

Similar threads merged. ~Abdülmecid I

[Kritias]

Who's he?
The former Minister for European Affairs under the center-left liberal governments of Matteo Renzi and Paolo Gentiloni.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandro_Gozi

Recently hired in the very same position by Emmanuel Macron for the French government. Gozi had also run for Macron's party in the recent European Parliament elections, falling short due to the abysimal performance of the party of the highly impopular French President, whose government so far has killed at least 10 protesters.

Macron's liberal government has also waged war against freedom of speech:
https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-ri...to-free-speech
and freedom of information:
https://www.ft.com/content/6fe3b1fc-...9-290979c9807a

He's also actively destabilizing Lybia by providing weapons to insurgements against the UN recognized Tripoli government.

I find it pretty interesting that liberals are overly eager to use conspiracy theories to associate patriotic parties to the Russian government, yet they are the ones to regularly backstab their fellow countrymen at every occasion. A country's Minister swears on the Constitution to serve the national interest and only that.

How can someone like Gozi, who probably knows confidential information due to his work for the Italian government, serve a hostile foreign power?
For those who studied a bit of colonialism, they should be aware that colonial empires regularly relied on local elites to manage affairs. Gozi is a perfect example, alongside his party, the Italian Democratic party, whose enamourment for Macron is notorious as they added the French flag to their social communication profiles:
https://www.repubblica.it/politica/2..._me-218650843/

The irony is that plenty of stupid liberals still wonder why they are despised so much by the vaste majority of the country. They legitimately get off at the idea of prostituting themselves to foreigners and seem to be unable to understand why the rest of the population is not appreciative of such habits.

I think this is a great example that truly reveals the great cleavage about our time: the people against the liberal elite. A true battle of good versus evil.

What do you guys think? Would you be happy to see a former minister of your country serving a hostile foreign power? Would you consider him a traitor?

You fail to include in the OP that Sandro Gozi entered the Republique en Marche party for the European Elections in 2019. Electoral Laws can be confusing for non Europeans but a quick search in the EU Commission's site can dispel any confusion

All EU citizens have the right to vote for and stand as a candidate in European Parliament elections in their country of origin, or if they live in another EU country, they may choose to vote and stand there, under the same conditions as the nationals of that country. EU citizens who live in another EU country also have the right to vote and stand as candidate in local or municipal elections in the country they live in, again under the same conditions as the nationals of that country.

So, according to EU laws, Gozi had every right to participate in a French party and vote in its elections. Since the EU is becoming a supranational entity with unified politics and parties, the convergence of civil rights across the entirety of the EU isn't something treasonous - it's the same as a congressman from Alabama deciding to run in New York.

Hostile foreign power is a tad of an over-exaggeration, considering that both France and Italy are members of the EU. There was some tension between France and Italy due to the Five-Star Movement mischaracterizing France's actions in concord with Marie LePen's party over migration policies. This was during the Yellow Vest situation and the french ambassador was recalled for consultations on the basis that Le Pen was attempting to topple Macron's government in collusion with the then Italian government. According to French sources

"The most recent interferences constitute an additional and unacceptable provocation. They violate the respect that is owed to democratic choices made by a nation which is a friend and an ally. To disagree is one thing, to exploit a relationship for electoral aims is another."

The Italian Democratic Party, the opposition to the then Italian government, took a stance to defend democracy in France and showed its support on twitter by adding the graphic of the flag next to the EU and the Italian flag. Is it treason? No. Just EU politics.

The inclusion of a different subject, Macron's government's proposal to fine media and social media platforms for hate speeches is misdirecting, trying to show that Macron is some kind of tyrant. He's definitely a very pro-establishment politician who enjoyed to slam citizens and calling them revolutionaries out of hand, but he's no tyrant.

[Basil II the B.S]

You fail to include in the OP that Sandro Gozi entered the Republique en Marche party for the European Elections in 2019. Electoral Laws can be confusing for non Europeans but a quick search in the EU Commission's site can dispel any confusion

Ok, that doesn't change anything.

So, according to EU laws, Gozi had every right to participate in a French party and vote in its elections. Since the EU is becoming a supranational entity with unified politics and parties, the convergence of civil rights across the entirety of the EU isn't something treasonous - it's the same as a congressman from Alabama deciding to run in New York.

Sura, except for one thing: there's no such thing as ''supranational democracy''. It doesn't exist, it nevel will. The EU is a playground for oligarchs to bypass democracy by simply buying influence in Brussels.

As the latest decisions to positions have shown, ''unified parties and politics'' is a complete myth. The EU is too diverse to succeed. Governments are too busy protecting what they can in terms of nationalities and form groups according to shared interests, so you have the German block for the 4th reich, the Visegrad Group and the Mediterranean Losers. We also have seen what the Euronazi government of Angela Merkel did to Greece. That's the basis for the European Union: Germany squeezes other countries.
Very cheap to defend the action of someone based on something that does not exist. The reality is that the EU serves oligarchs first and Germany second. There's no such thing as ''unified parties'' and certainly someone from Greece running in Germany isn't defending Greek interests.

Hostile foreign power is a tad of an over-exaggeration, considering that both France and Italy are members of the EU. There was some tension between France and Italy due to the Five-Star Movement mischaracterizing France's actions in concord with Marie LePen's party over migration policies. This was during the Yellow Vest situation and the french ambassador was recalled for consultations on the basis that Le Pen was attempting to topple Macron's government in collusion with the then Italian government. According to French sources

No.
Macron ever since the Italian elections has repeatedly insulted the Italian government as ''filthy populists''. He has actively undermined Lybia preventing a solution to the migrant crisis, because so long that Lybia is destabilized, it's not a safe country. He has launched several diplomatic initiatives to attempt to get the European Commission to fine Italy for budget breach, despite himself doing bigger breaches. He has actively conspired with the Democratic Party to bring down the current Italian government. He constantly tries to isolate us in the EU meetings.

He's an enemy, unlike Russia, of our country and our people. Any Italian working for him is a traitor and there are plenty.
https://scenarieconomici.it/le-curio...neur-tra-i-pd/
13 Democratic party members.

The Italian Democratic Party, the opposition to the then Italian government, took a stance to defend democracy in France and showed its support on twitter by adding the graphic of the flag next to the EU and the Italian flag. Is it treason? No. Just EU politics.

The inclusion of a different subject, Macron's government's proposal to fine media and social media platforms for hate speeches is misdirecting, trying to show that Macron is some kind of tyrant. He's definitely a very pro-establishment politician who enjoyed to slam citizens and calling them revolutionaries out of hand, but he's no tyrant.

No. Macron is actively suppressing various freedoms as shown in the OP. Supporting him is a stance against democracy, not for it. His government has also killed at least 10 protesters. He's a tyrant and a murderer.

[Kritias]

Ok, that doesn't change anything.

It actually changes quite a lot. You said in the OP that he's a traitor for running in the European elections with a french-based party. This is not the case.

Sura, except for one thing: there's no such thing as ''supranational democracy''. It doesn't exist, it nevel will. The EU is a playground for oligarchs to bypass democracy by simply buying influence in Brussels.

As the latest decisions to positions have shown, ''unified parties and politics'' is a complete myth. The EU is too diverse to succeed. Governments are too busy protecting what they can in terms of nationalities and form groups according to shared interests, so you have the German block for the 4th reich, the Visegrad Group and the Mediterranean Losers. We also have seen what the Euronazi government of Angela Merkel did to Greece. That's the basis for the European Union: Germany squeezes other countries.

The European Union is the epitome of a supranational democracy. You really can't deny it exists. Whether you want to argue that it's good or corrupt is another case entirely. But it does exist and in nomine is a democracy. But this whole segment is your opinion on the EU and not a fact.

Very cheap to defend the action of someone based on something that does not exist. The reality is that the EU serves oligarchs first and Germany second. There's no such thing as ''unified parties'' and certainly someone from Greece running in Germany isn't defending Greek interests.

It is not cheap to inform you that the EU law allows for such a thing. If you want to make it seem as if it's somehow treasonous, or 'liberal' - two terms you wish to make a connection between here - that's your opinion, but don't misinform others. Also, I noticed the populism cry here about Greeks working for Germans. Kudos.

No. Macron ever since the Italian elections has repeatedly insulted the Italian government as ''filthy populists''. He has actively undermined Lybia preventing a solution to the migrant crisis, because so long that Lybia is destabilized, it's not a safe country. He has launched several diplomatic initiatives to attempt to get the European Commission to fine Italy for budget breach, despite himself doing bigger breaches. He has actively conspired with the Democratic Party to bring down the current Italian government. He constantly tries to isolate us in the EU meetings.

How is this Gozi's treason? Your thread reads a case of liberal treason, no? He could and did run for a party in France for the European elections. The law allows for this. You want to say that Macron (liberal) is evil, so Gozi (a liberal) is also evil for working in a french party.

The first problem I see is that the word 'liberal' doesn't mean the same in the U.S and Europe; the European liberals are for state deregulation, work deregulation, tax cuts for the rich and austerity for the rest etc etc They are in a sense, the exact opposite of what an american reader would understand by reading the word 'liberal'. The second problem is, of course, that americans generally have no idea about EU politics, and as such misinformation such as this thread is very easy to spread.

Also, Macron is in favour of all types of deregulation which is why the french people are protesting against him with movements such as the Yellow Vests; the rest of your points are generally from the sphere of misinformation to the sphere of over-exaggeration. So, I'm going to ask for sources.


[

]He's an enemy, unlike Russia, of our country and our people. Any Italian working for him is a traitor and there are plenty.
https://scenarieconomici.it/le-curio...neur-tra-i-pd/
13 Democratic party members.

How is France the U.S' enemy?

[

]No. Macron is actively suppressing various freedoms as shown in the OP. Supporting him is a stance against democracy, not for it. His government has also killed at least 10 protesters. He's a tyrant and a murderer.

How? The OP shares sources where Germany and France wish to impose fines on social media platforms for spreading hate speech. Of course, the papers who have much more revenue and benefits from said media platforms are going to defend their biggest clients, aren't they? Show me the laws and point towards the limitation of various freedoms.

[Basil II the B.S]

Alright, the filthy, treacherous liberal vermins that have infiltrated our institutions accidentally let the true economic purpose of immigration slip. Keep you poor:
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/money/tops...ank/ar-AAF2qCp

Not enough migrants arriving to keep pay down - Central Bank

THE number of people willing to move here to work is not going to hit levels seen during the last boom and will not keep wages down, economists at the Central Bank are forecasting. The Department of Finance expects that another 50,000 jobs will be added this year, barring a hard Brexit, and predicts average wages will rise 3pc in 2019, 3.2pc in 2020 and 3.3pc the following year.
While that message spells bad news for employers trying to address shortages in key areas, it is good news for those in work, as it implies that wages will continue to rise.

With a record 2.32 million people now in work and recent data showing that just 110,000 are classified as unemployed, pay has started to rise.

Wage gains averaged 2.8pc in 2018, up from just 0.8pc in 2017, according to Central Bank economists Stephen Byrne and Tara McIndoe-Calder.

In the past, migrants from the EU would have filled skills gaps in the economy as they did in the boom years when, in 2007, net migration here topped 100,000 people. By contrast, as the labour market here tightened through 2018, net migration was just 34,000, the economists wrote in an analysis published yesterday.



Rising job opportunities and wages in eastern Europe mean migrants are less tempted to come to Ireland, unless the pay gap is very big. "As such, attracting migrants may only occur at higher wage differentials, going forward, than seen in the 2004-07 period that coincided with the EU accession countries joining the pool of available EU migrants at relatively low wages," Mr Byrne and Ms McIndoe-Calder wrote.
"This implies that the wage-dampening effect of net inward migration may be subdued when compared to the pre-crisis period," they said.


There is also a risk that a rise in the number of workers coming here could put further pressure on infrastructure, especially in housing, which is in short supply in booming parts of the country.
Business group Ibec has highlighted the risk that labour shortages pose to local firms, suggesting they have emerged as a factor in the construction industry. Labour costs typically account for half of businesses' overall costs, and so they are highly sensitive to changing wage levels.
A separate Central Bank of Ireland research analysis, also published yesterday, highlighted the risks from a lack of housing.

"Ireland is likely to require significant inflows of workers from abroad over the coming years, provided the economy remains on a favourable growth trajectory," the report said.

"A continued focus on addressing housing supply shortages can help ensure that Ireland remains an attractive location for the migrants who will be needed to fill vacancies in the labour market."

This is something that's being increasingly censored in the academia under the pressure of liberals who demand the denial at all costs that immigration is fundamentally bad for the workers of host countries. Those who benefit from immigration are employers and immigrants themselves, while everyone is a net loser. The same liberals then complain about ''populism'' and the ''ungrateful masses'' that apparently do not enjoy that their income is shifted towards other people, alongside the benefits of multicultural societies like mass rape gangs, terrorism and similar forms of cultural enrichment.

Noteworthy to mention, they admit that housing shortages are also fault of their economic policies. So, every problem in our society is caused by the liberal elite.

The solution to the problem is a social, economic and cultural annihilation plan. The liberal elite has been waging war against us, stripping us of our wealth and culture. The liberal elite is trying to destroy us. There's simply no possible peaceful coexistence with them. It's us or them. Another good way it to separate national and global citizenship. Cosmopolitan liberals must take the global citizenship, thus they can't be employed in national institutions to poison them, nor vote in national democracies since their goal is to simply demolish them.

It's also pretty astonishing how stupid the liberal economic model is: more people=more GDP. That's it. Even if that increase comes at the expense of your own fellow citizens. This is treason.

All of this proves what I've been discussing all along: liberals are using immigrants as a battering ram against the people.
How can the people fight back according to you guys?

-Similar threads merged. ~Abdülmecid I