Youtube comments of Golag Is watching you (@golagiswatchingyou2966).

  1. 1700
  2. 627
  3. 568
  4. 528
  5. 481
  6. 469
  7. 414
  8. 318
  9. 258
  10. 238
  11. 237
  12. 228
  13. 182
  14. 181
  15. 179
  16. 173
  17. 171
  18. 154
  19. 130
  20. 127
  21. 122
  22. 120
  23. 119
  24. 119
  25. 114
  26. 114
  27. 112
  28. 108
  29. 107
  30. 101
  31. 95
  32. 93
  33. 88
  34. 86
  35. 83
  36. the main problem I'm seeing with the issue of refugees and migration in general is that it's unsustainable, regardless on who takes care of them or who houses them, the reality is that people will keep coming due to climate change, due to wars (sometimes caused by the USA, France, UK or internal conflicts) and Europe being closest to these danger zones (Africa, the Middle east, Central Asia) it will remain a major issue that neither side can realy solve. No migration side is wrong not for not wanting migrants but for not realising just how difficult it is to house and maintain such amount of people who either just want to survive or want to get ahead in life (we all do, that's what humans do), however the open migration side is also wrong because of the problems and costs it brings with it to western nations as well as spark the flames of resentment and nationalism which is not good for a European level solution which is what's actually needed. I would then propose a different solution, one that is unpopular and will set a new geopolitical reality that some of it's big players aren't welcoming of, EU Military peacekeeping missions, what this would mean is the creation of a legitimate EU level military force, to be placed or engage near the entry points of migration flows and outside of EU countries like Morroco, Turkey, Tunnisia, Libya, so on where they would be tasked with maintaining order, help screen refugees and host refugee camps where they can then be transported to host nations or be able to integrate into the local societies, economies or develop skills needed later in life to rebuild their country of origin if possible. the reason why this solution is unlikely to be taken is that the EU does not have the power or right to use such a military force, that it would be a more federated EU type of solution and that it would project an image of neo-collonialism to the rest of the world, as well as agitate certain geopolitical players by seeing a modern EU wide military force near their borders potentially but untill such a long term solution if implemented this will continue to be an issue and it's going to become much, much worse compared to 2015, as we move into the 2030s and 2040s, better to get to work with it now for when it's needed than the scramble later when shit inevitably hits the fan.
    82
  37. 78
  38. 72
  39. 71
  40. 71
  41. 71
  42. 70
  43. 69
  44. when we look at these maps there is a diffrent response to diffrent people, lets try and analise them and try to predict their outcomes long term the humanist might see this and say ''look at how many people there are, humans are more interconnected, more wide spread and more developed than ever before, how wonderfull'' the enviromentalist might see this and say ''look at how many people there exist, how can the enviroment deal and sustain such people? how horrible what can we do to prevent long term damage to nature?'' the globalist might see this and say ''look at how far we have gotten as a species, all this interconnected and trade relations must be good for humanity and human civilization overal'' the nationalist might see this and say ''look how many people exist in the world, who knows when massive waves of migrants and refugees may come to our shores if they can no longer sustain this growth, we must defend what's ours no matter what'' all these viewpoints in my opinion have some merrit and truth to them, some people like it, some people hate it, some people view it as progress, others as evil, some as unsustainable but in all cases it seems we as a species have no controle over how civilization develops, we can't stop growing, we can't stop reproducing and those that don't reproduce will find themselves being replaced or swarmed by those that do, such is the way of nature and human behavior. thus I ask you what will become of us in this dynamic? what future awaits us? who is right? who is wrong? do you disagree on moral grounds? pragmatic grounds? or ideologicaly grounds? is this good or bad? idk but I don't think the outcome will be as great as some people think, nor as evil as some imagine.
    69
  45. 65
  46. 65
  47. 62
  48. 59
  49. 58
  50. 56
  51. 56
  52. 55
  53. 53
  54. 52
  55. 50
  56. 48
  57. 48
  58. 47
  59. 46
  60. 46
  61. 44
  62. 43
  63. 43
  64. 40
  65. 40
  66. 39
  67. 39
  68. 38
  69. 37
  70. 37
  71. 36
  72. 35
  73. 35
  74. 34
  75. 34
  76. 33
  77. 33
  78. 33
  79. This is a pretty good video with some details missing or let out. For starters it was the German empire during ww1 that revived the Polish and central European states from Russian rule. Secondly the term "from Lisabon to Vlodivostok" is not a core part of European or even French policy making but rather a phrase of optimism and potential of closer economic ties with Russia, this was said before the 2022 invasion, during that time Russia was becoming more economically tied with the west and was showing signs of modernisation, all of that progress has now pretty much been swept away, thus making the phrase useless. Third France has been most vocal of trying to tie both German and French national security and economic interests together, anyone who has studied European history knows that Europe destroyed itself because of wars and national interest conflicting with eachother, the primary goal of the EU and Franco-German alliance has been to centralize power and policy to act in a collective interest for Europe as a whole with mixed results, the question is will Europe fall apart again into minor spheres of influence? Or can they solidify into something stronger? While many say it can't there are some signs of cooporation and development on this front, sadly these processes take time and effort in a world that's suddenly changing very quickly and with big players who already cleared this phrase on easy mode, mostly the US, China, India and Russia to a less degree. There has to come a change in Europe, the question is from who and how, the USA can't be fully trusted, their loyalty only lies in how it benefits their national interest which is balanced by needing both a strong Europe but divided enough to not act against it's interests, despite their big military support for central Europe, it's in economic ties where long term interest of these nations lie, after Russian defeat the defence spending will drop and US interest will shift to other fronts, leaving only Germany and France to fill the void.
    33
  80. 33
  81. 33
  82. 32
  83. 32
  84. 9:01 as a European citizen the conclusion of Europe being weak is kinda weird, we are largely industrialized nations with access to modern weaponry within it nations that have presence in Africa, small groups in the middle east and are on the frontlines against Russia, the overal population of Europe is larger than the USA's despite being much smaller and with potentially new members joining the EU we still have room to grow if we wanted to. that being said you are very correct in saying we are disunited and don't have a single cohesive ideology, culture, language or single federal government structure to run everything, we don't have the same advantages the USA has in terms of land, no native problems, easy defendable borders or lack of real enemies like the USA but when I look at Russia for example I don't see a new rising power or world power, I see a nation that's very corrupt, some of the worst demografics in all of Europe and huge internal problems, the only thing Russia has going for it is it's huge land mass, resources and military which are the only things keeping the nation together, in fact i would put Russia up on the list of nations most likely to fall apart in the coming years and either becoming a closer trading partner towards Europe or China, perhaps both. what Europe is lacking the most though is stable birthrates, a federalized form of government that works for all nation states, a single military and taxation system and a more innovative economy that's less regulated like it is today and while it's not sure if it can develop those things in the coming years or decades saying it's nothing and does not matter does not seem accurate to me, it's divided for sure, a distant 3-4th on the world stage as a whole but compared to some other nations it has a lot going well for it.
    32
  85. 32
  86. 32
  87. 32
  88. 31
  89. 31
  90. 31
  91. 31
  92. 31
  93. 30
  94. 30
  95. 30
  96. 30
  97. 29
  98. 29
  99. 29
  100. 29
  101. 29
  102. 29
  103. 29
  104. 29
  105. 28
  106. 28
  107. 28
  108. 28
  109. 28
  110. 28
  111. 27
  112. 27
  113. 27
  114. 26
  115. 26
  116. 26
  117. 25
  118. 25
  119. 25
  120. 25
  121. 25
  122. 25
  123. 25
  124. 25
  125. 25
  126. 24
  127. 24
  128. 24
  129. 24
  130. 24
  131. 24
  132. 23
  133. 23
  134. 23
  135. From a pragmatic standpoint it's stupid to develop two different fighter aircraft for Europe, after all the USA develops one singular aircraft to become it's future main aircraft and either experiments with the next potential model or maintains lower production levels for older models like the F-16 or F-22 As for why, it's mainly to do with political and economic interests because if the two projects were to merge it could very well produce a superior aircraft and be more cheaply produced but then some military companies would have to merge some of their factories producing some of those parts, some would be bought out or have to merge whole production lines, people would have to be fired or be asked to move to another country to work on the project and test in the field, not to mention the potential loss of intelectual property and technology transfers. That being said I think with the war in Ukraine and seeing just how dominant the USA is in military fighter aircrafts and the economic costs and political issues around developing a new fighter program, I do believe eventually one side is going to make greater progress and show more potential for all sides that the other just becomes uncompetitive and will either stall and join or scrap the whole project to begin with and stay with the USA but in so doing they will lose out on domestic production. In my view I think the FCAS project has a better chance at winning out, simply due to the economic and political instability in the UK, the higher funds and scale of industry in the EU and Airbus and how two members of the tempest project are also part of the EU which means they likely would have more interests in staying in Europe then going with the UK and other foreign nations (Japan and Korea had some interests in the project but aren't clear on where they are going) The sooner one side wins over the other the better, hopefully they can speed up to something like 2035 or even 2030 if they worked together.
    23
  136. 23
  137. 23
  138. 23
  139. 23
  140. 23
  141. 23
  142. 22
  143. 22
  144. 22
  145. 22
  146. 22
  147. 22
  148. 22
  149. 22
  150. 21
  151. 21
  152. 21
  153. 21
  154. 21
  155. 21
  156. 21
  157. 20
  158. 20
  159. 20
  160. 20
  161. 20
  162. 20
  163. 20
  164. 20
  165. 20
  166. 20
  167. 20
  168. 19
  169. 19
  170. 19
  171. 19
  172. 19
  173. 19
  174. 19
  175. 19
  176. 19
  177. 19
  178. 19
  179. 19
  180. 18
  181. 18
  182. 18
  183. 18
  184. 18
  185. 18
  186. 18
  187. 18
  188. 17
  189. 17
  190. 17
  191. 17
  192. 17
  193. 17
  194. 17
  195. 17
  196. 16
  197. 16
  198. 16
  199. 16
  200. 16
  201. 16
  202. 16
  203. 16
  204. 16
  205. 16
  206. 16
  207. 16
  208. 16
  209. 16
  210. 16
  211. 16
  212. 15
  213. 15
  214. 15
  215. 15
  216. 15
  217. 15
  218.  @Arcaryon  I don't see the rightwing as radical at all, in fact for a long time they have been very weak, Trump is not even a hardcore republican, he's donated to both causes the democrats and the progressives are the extreme radicals who mostly engage in violence, censorship and demonizing of others much more so then the right does, the rightwing in the USA hates the more fringe groups within their own party while the democrates embrace theirs, saying they are both the same just seems inaccurate to me. Im not even american and Im constantly finding more evidence that the left in the USA is nuts, the rightwing is very tame and not radical at all. I think I do understand your world view because before Trump you were correct, both parties sucked, they were all neocons and neo-libs but Trump was the outsider which is why the media and big tech hate him so much, many old republicans hate him and a lot of democrats who used to hate some of those republicans like George W bush now like him because he ain't Trump, it's insane which is why so many people voted for Trump, more than in 2016. Many in the far left also hate Biden and the democratic party looks more broken than the republicans under Trump, esspecialy the censorship and cancel culture of the left and big tech is clearly anti Trump and anti rightwing, it's far more worrying than Trump is, Trump is just one person, he's not some radical, he does not seek to end NATO but his replacement might and the republican voter base is not radical at all but if they were they could do a lot more damage than the left they just aren't radical but they might become due to the democrats flirting with the far left.
    15
  219. 15
  220. 15
  221. 15
  222. 14
  223. 14
  224. 14
  225. 14
  226. 14
  227. 14
  228. 14
  229. 14
  230. 14
  231. 14
  232. 17:12 very strange that they would label austrian economics as ''philosophy'' since it's more about ''Psychology'' which in many schools is still part of philosophy, the argument of austrian economics lacking verifiable data is somewhat silly, since all models created by economics is about Psychology of choice, resources and distribution of goods and services, in this way Austrian economics is more laissez faire than keynsian economics, where as Keynsian are almost authoritarian and corporatist in an attempt to quantify all economic data to it's models, merely having more data does not mean your analisis or superiority is somehow proven, in fact we've seen and endured the problems with keynsian economics for some time now, with the accumulation of debt, where as the invention of crypto currencies and other new forms of economic development shows that this debt based system of keynsian economics does not work long term, it collapses and merely borrows more money, creates more corruption, more government power to the point that we have protectionists and open socialist and communists claiming to want to abolish capitalism. I know this channel is honest and does good work and I think they are trying to represent both economic systems as best they can but I realy can't stand keynsian economics. but if what I wrote her comes across as arrogant, ignorant, austrian school, economics fanboyism, I would like to hear from you why that is and why keynsian is beter compared to austrian school, thank you for your time.
    14
  233. 14
  234. 14
  235. 14
  236.  @Arcaryon  because they have no logical basis and counter early statements he made. Example, Trump in the 90s was very pro democrat, he donated to their political party, his hotels were open for all minorities regardless of color or religion, he himself is not some hillbilly from the south, he's from new york. The narrative of "he's a racist" only started to be spun when he put his candidate position for president forward and those claims were never based on anything he said or did and anything close to it was taken out of context and later redacted by the media that posted them as truth. For the last 4 years the media hammered on Trump on every little thing he did and pretended everything was somehow racist or stupid even through many worse things were said by the democratic candidates including Joe Biden, which the media never dared to adress, the contras between how the media treats Trump and how they treat Biden is night and day and the only reason why it seems is because Trump is not an insider, he's not the conventional leader, he's bold and his actions speak louder then his words. Another narrative that was spun is that he is somehow a tyrant, even though he was the most pro free speech and pro guns president in US history and within just a few days in office Biden has signed executive orders without stop to reverse all of Trumps policies (except tarriefs on China) and he wants to take your guns and rights away, not to mention the open racism and discrimination towards white people shown by the democratic party right now. The mask has been lifted, the media and elites have been revealed, trust in the media and politicians is more down then ever and it's not because of Trump, it's despite Trumps best efforts to unite the country against the hatred and violence of the left and the elites. Very few people now trust the media and big tech is so totalitarian and one-sided that most people consider them the enemy of the people which they are and only the leftwing is defending them because their opposition is being censored the most and they like it that way. You could write whole books about all the lies and inaccurate propaganda by the media and many do and then you will have Antifa and NYT write hit pieces about you, even the president himself got censored by Twitter, it can't get more clear who runs the show and it ain't the people, they voted for Trump.
    14
  237. 14
  238. 14
  239. 14
  240. 14
  241. 14
  242. 14
  243. 13
  244. 13
  245. 13
  246. 13
  247. 13
  248. 13
  249. 13
  250. 13
  251. 13
  252. 13
  253. 13
  254. 13
  255. 13
  256. 13
  257. 13
  258. 12
  259. 12
  260. 12
  261. 12
  262. 12
  263. 12
  264. 12
  265. 12
  266. 12
  267. 12
  268. 12
  269. 12
  270. 12
  271. 12
  272. 12
  273. 12
  274. 12
  275. 12
  276. 12
  277. 12
  278. 12
  279. 12
  280. 12
  281. 12
  282. 11
  283. 11
  284. 11
  285. 11
  286. 11
  287. 11
  288. 11
  289. 11
  290. 11
  291. 11
  292. 11
  293. 11
  294. as a Dutch person, we know surprisingly little about Indonesia or our own history related to it, all I know is that we did exploit the locals a lot, kept certain technologies away from the general public and mostly ran it on a combination of rubber, sugar, tea and spices plantation. We did not really try to convert the people to christianity though missionair's would try and convert locals of course and we also did not try and impose our language upon the local as a means of cultural colonialism, that being said we of course weren't very nice though not as cruel as some of the British, Belgium or Portuguese colonies were. As for the future of Indonesia, I can only look at the border maps of ethnic groups, religions and languages and ask myself ''how the hell did we manage to rule this place for so long?'' this place is a giant mess and it's also along the sea which makes isolationism for it's distinct cultures on each island even more likely, the fact that Java has such a massive population compared to the others is also very bizzar, you would think it be a little more spread out over all the islands. If I could think of any way of Indonesia to continue existing it would be to have a very federalist view of it's own identity, try and find ways to both supress and assimulate local cultures, languages, religions together, perhaps continue pressing the threat of China or other powers in the region as a means of maintaining their own national identity, though I think it's almost inevitable that major parts of the islands are going to break away at some point, not sure how to respond to those break away, doing nothing might cause a chain reaction, then again supressing those moves for succesion might further devolve the already fragile state. I have no idea, I think it's a miracle it stayed together for as long as it already has, just look at Yugoslavia, it had like 20 times less ethnic people between eachother and enemies to unite against and they still fell apart.
    11
  295. 11
  296. 11
  297. 11
  298. 11
  299. 11
  300. 11
  301. 11
  302. 11
  303. 11
  304. 11
  305. 11
  306. 11
  307. 11
  308. 11
  309. 10
  310. 10
  311. 10
  312. 10
  313. 10
  314. 10
  315. 10
  316. 10
  317. 10
  318. 10
  319. 10
  320. 10
  321. 10
  322. 10
  323. 10
  324. 10
  325. 10
  326. 10
  327. 10
  328. 10
  329. On the issue of civil war, I would say it's very unlikely, you can have a period like the troubles for sure but for an outright civil war you need certain factors that aren't present right now, one of them is not having any faith in the government process, being a democracy gives some more trust in people that they can always vote for someone to try and fix things, the law is the law untill people no longer follow it, the enforcers are no longer willing to enforce it and the army is no longer willing to enforce the enforcers. What is likely going to happen is that as the demografic collapses start to appear even more clear for most people and they start to feel how other groups start to dominate them they will be forced to pick a side, they will start to counter the rising group but find that their efforts aren't very effective and thus become more radicalized, the point at which a civil war would happen is when at a certain point you have armed groups, area's of controle, a semi collapse in government institutions and then a push for either creating their own new institutions or the take over of those institutions by one group or the other. The end result no matter who wins is going to be a splitting up of society, talented people leave for better shores, large destruction of society, collapse and birth of new systems and then a slow reconstruction with a new estabilished order which will then rule for good or bad for as long as they can untill a new series of conflicts erupts. The nations that will get ahead will be those that skipped all these parts and simply never get there or delay it as long as possible.
    10
  330. 10
  331. 10
  332. 10
  333. 10
  334. 10
  335. 10
  336. 10
  337. 10
  338. 10
  339. 10
  340. 10
  341. 10
  342. 10
  343. 9
  344. 9
  345. 9
  346. 9
  347. 9
  348. 9
  349. 9
  350. 9
  351. 9
  352. 9
  353. 9
  354. 9
  355. 9
  356. 9
  357. 9
  358. 9
  359. 9
  360. 9
  361. 9
  362. 9
  363. 9
  364. 9
  365. 9
  366.  @GUNN3R1990  it should have been closer to 90% for such an important vote but it's high enough to be legitimate for sure. I don't think you understand what I meant, your nation is not independent nor is it powerfull, the UK is a joke because the people voted for Brexit but don't vote for leaders that will actually keep it free, independent and strong which is what's needed for any nation's people, culture and identity to survive let alone thrive, I like the UK that's why it's so tragic and sad to see them this weak and not acting in their own self interest and as a result you now see more independence movements from the UK in northern ireland, scotland and wales, you say you care about your nation yet your nation seems to be imploding and collapsing and you don't even realise it. the irony is that the UK as a member of the EU would probably be a lot more stable and exist for much longer than it's current path it is on with it's current leadership, you might think that's not true and fair enough but I think the majority of people in the EU don't want to leave the EU because of the mess of brexit and the lack of real change that people want to see even if they dislike the EU seems better than leaving. that should be an indicator for you that brexit is not working otherwise other nations would have pushed for the same thing by now, when in fact the opposite is happening, now you can disregard everything i said and believe I only care about power or the world stage or whatever but that's just not true and hope the UK does well but im not seeing it doing well which makes me sad.
    9
  367. 9
  368. 9
  369. 9
  370. 9
  371. 9
  372. 9
  373. 9
  374. 9
  375. 9
  376. 9
  377. 9
  378. 9
  379. 9
  380. 9
  381. 9
  382. 9
  383. 9
  384. 9
  385. 9
  386. 9
  387. 9
  388. I do find it a bit confusing how Japan could beat Russia in the the Russio-Jappanese war and Germany could beat the Russian empire in ww1 but Germany and Japan combined on a much larger scale then either were before somehow could not adapt to beat Russia in ww2. I know that comparing Russia in ww1 vs the USSR in ww2 is a bit dishonest since a lot changed between those years but I do question how the USA would get involved, granted FDR was trying to get involved in ww2 but if Japan does not attack Pearl Harbor and Japan could block off any shipments of good from the east to the west from the Russian far east then this would change a lot going into the war, it also matters at what point does Japan join? if opperation Barbarosa is well underway and Japan attack right in the middle then it's effects will be quite minimal since it's already on a lot of other fronts and can't really use it's navy which it invested a lot of money and effort into. However a Japan that somehow makes a real effort to invade the USSR at the same time as Germany right when it started would give it more time to prepare and cut off all of far east Russia, the effects of this on Russian Moral and logistic is also overlooked as this weakens the troops in the west that need supplies, the USSR in our timeline lost over 20 million people, in this alternative timeline it could be much higher, thus leadership at the top or people below could very well decide to give up. changing all this would be significant and could change the outcome of the war but granted it's minor compared to other possible alternative historic paths, to get a real alternative outcome for sure there would be multiple changes you sometimes see in a Heart of Iron 4 game, like a Oswald Mosley rising in the UK to ignore anything going on in Europe or even allying with Germany or Japan not going into China and focussing soley on the USSR (assuming they improved their land army) or a Germany that does not make certain military mistakes or promises independence from the USSR thereby getting more manpower and weakening soviet resolve. The USSR was not invincible, hell the only one who really was is the USA with them out of the war things quickly change.
    8
  389. 8
  390. 8
  391. 8
  392. 8
  393. 8
  394. 8
  395. 8
  396. 8
  397. 8
  398. 8
  399. 8
  400. 8
  401. 8
  402. 8
  403. 8
  404. 8
  405. 8
  406. 8
  407. 8
  408. 8
  409. 8
  410. 8
  411. 8
  412. 8
  413. 8
  414. 8
  415. 8
  416. 8
  417. 8
  418. 8
  419. 8
  420. 8
  421. 8
  422. 8
  423. 8
  424. 8
  425. 8
  426. 8
  427. 8
  428. 8
  429. 8
  430. 8
  431. 8
  432. 8
  433. 8
  434. 8
  435. 8
  436. 8
  437. 8
  438. The main problem for Europe is not it's demografics or even it's low birthrates, it's main issues are: 1. Top level political corruption, the upper most levels of many European nations are very corrupt, they basically sold people out and actively work to undermine rights, contain political radicalism of the far right, while promoting far left delusional, harmful ideas of which we see everyday, they also ensure basically anarcho tyrany, laws for natives but not non-European citizens who commit horrific crimes, the lack of political will and corruption from our elites is perhaps our biggest issue, everything else can be solved with enough political will but elites who are hostile to the nation is harder to fix. 2. Europe is not singular, imagine if the USA was run like the EU? It be a mess of competing states, conflicting self interests and can't build good consensus among members, Europe suffers from a split in priorities, the national vs pan-European level, I do believe you will see more and more of a pan-European identity being formed, simply because the old nationalism of the past can't practically defend the nation anymore and has little to offer people in terms of economic potential or geo-economic interests, where as a European superstate could do all these things and more for all of Europe. Now is it likely that the EU becomes a federation? Unlikely right now but as the crisis continue and grow, radicalism and simply nessesity will force them to change. Europe still has a lot of potential and the rest of the world is going to collapse and try and leach off us, in the coming years and decades, securing the border and stopping immigrants is about national security more then anything else.
    8
  439. 8
  440. 7
  441. 7
  442. 7
  443. 7
  444. 7
  445. 7
  446. 7
  447. 7
  448. 7
  449. 7
  450. 7
  451. 7
  452. 7
  453. 7
  454. 7
  455. 7
  456. 7
  457. 7
  458. 7
  459. 7
  460. 7
  461. 7
  462. 7
  463. 7
  464. 7
  465. 7
  466. 7
  467. 7
  468. 7
  469. 7
  470. 7
  471. 7
  472. 7
  473. 7
  474. 7
  475. 7
  476. 7
  477. 7
  478. 7
  479. 7
  480. 7
  481. Looking at Turkey one could say it's an expanding power, trying to flex it's military industrial ability and trying to dominate the region it is involved with like a true great power in the region. I however see Turkey today as a Tragity, a nation with a huge potential and seeing it wasted on it's current leadership, it's hollow focus on regional conflicts and stagnating economic potential because of it's autocratic leadership. Turkey not so long ago was becoming closer to the western world, towards the EU and was focusing a lot on it's economic development, Turkey unlike most of the middle east is a democracy and a liberal one at that, it's growing population and strong military could have been a great pillar both for itself, NATO and the EU long term, now? most of Europe sees Turkey as a threat, much like the Ottoman empire of before, it's conflicts and engagements with fellow NATO members has become a crack in the Alliance as a whole, it's entanglements within Syria and Libya have made it a constant cost to it's coffers with little benefit to it's people or economy and as we speak Erdogan and his buddies are trying to undermine and destroy Turkish democracy and the rule of law. Going forward I don't see many great things for Turkey, either it is going to revolt and move towards embracing of the old path of progress set by Attaturk or it's going to continue down it's current neo-ottoman focus towards middle-eastern conflicts and at best pan-turkish expansionism, I don't think it's going to work out well for them if they pick the later option.
    7
  482. 7
  483. 7
  484. 7
  485. 7
  486. 7
  487. 7
  488. 7
  489. 7
  490. 7
  491. 7
  492. 7
  493. 7
  494. 7
  495. 7
  496. 7
  497. 7
  498. 7
  499. 7
  500. 7
  501. 7
  502. 7
  503. 7
  504. 7
  505. 7
  506. 7
  507. 7
  508. 7
  509. 7
  510. 6
  511. 6
  512. 6
  513. 6
  514. 6
  515. 6
  516. 6
  517. 6
  518. 6
  519. 6
  520. 6
  521. 6
  522. 6
  523. 6
  524. 6
  525. 6
  526. 6
  527. 6
  528. 6
  529. 6
  530. 6
  531. 6
  532. 6
  533. 6
  534. 6
  535. 6
  536. 6
  537. 6
  538. 6
  539. 6
  540. 6
  541. 6
  542. 6
  543. 6
  544. 6
  545. 6
  546. 6
  547. 6
  548. 6
  549. 6
  550. 6
  551. 6
  552. 6
  553. 6
  554. 6
  555. 6
  556. 6
  557. 6
  558. 6
  559. 6
  560. 6
  561. 6
  562. 6
  563. 6
  564. 6
  565. 6
  566. 6
  567. 6
  568. 6
  569. 6
  570. 6
  571. 6
  572. 6
  573. 6
  574. 6
  575. 6
  576. 6
  577. 6
  578. 6
  579.  @Tyler_W  incel is mostly a derogatory term used by people to label people (mostly men) who struggle in the modern world for a variety of reasons ranging from depression, autism, narcicism, trauma, parental neglect or simply lack romantic value towards woman, there are "incels" who honestly try but get rejected because of their mental illness and social status, they work out and they do their best but fail and society judges them to be falures and that they must do better and will face descrimination and low social status as a result. Its also not just a western problem, it's a problem in all developed societies and made worse by high divorce rate and low birthrates as well as aging. Its easy to see why this is all problematic, elderly people need younger generations to take care of them, few future prospects, youth wasted on getting an education and a job, try and get status and in the meantime also deal with woman who understand their value but no responsibility thus you see the single mother, the 14 cats lady and the rabid feminist, society is pretty sick. Though society has always selected men and some just never got married or formed relationships, never on this scale and so total, most men 50 years ago could always marry down but woman also had to put in the effort or risk raising a child as a single mom which was a big shame and hard thing to do, still is just less so. There is also the reality that you only really need 1 men for 100 woman to get pregnant but 1 woman for 100 men will become a bloodbath or a simp fest, sometimes both. There is no easy solution, men can get wealthy and still find third world countries for woman, many do, others are forced to become hyper competitive, some men just give up or become resentful, take your pick in the mean time most people will be miserable, few children will be born and the west is going to likely become more and more islamic and third world ish as a result of the modern world. No doomerism, just reality, sad but true, adapt and overcome I say.
    6
  580. 6
  581. 6
  582. 6
  583. 6
  584. 6
  585. 6
  586. 6
  587. the thing is... the USA kinda did all the things the CCP is doing just in a different way, expansion, threats of violence, securing it's national interests, creating a culture and identity that sees itself as better than the rest of the world, in fact all major nations have done this and all minor nations at some point have attempted this, even the USA well before ww1 was going around fighting and expanding it's sphere of influence and getting involved in the games of the rest of the world, ww1 and ww2, the outcome of which placed the USA as the world's super power and enabled the current system because it is most beneficial to itself as well as the threat of nuclear war forcing the world to behave less imperialistic or desire to expand their lands. China does want to rule the world but it can only start doing so by trying to rule Asia, just like the USA started it's global reach by taking over and ruling first North America and then securing South america, China as a totalitarian state is quite different from the fascist, national socialist or even soviet era dictatorships, they might use the same methodes sometimes but the level of technology is so vastly different from before that it's unclear if the western nations can compete both short and long term. the closest regime China currently looks like would be to me at least national socialist germany, it's han chinese focus, attempt at controling/raising birthrates, it's militarism and desire for expansion and securing what it sees as former lands of it's own like Taiwan, however we can't assume that just because that regime in the past was defeated through a global effort in a time very different from today that this is inevitable to be repeated again, China has many more people, has more lands, has better technology, has global trade networks and a less confident USA or powerfull European allies to draw from, Russia is China's ally for the most part and while China focuses on Taiwan today it's already trying to secure India through it's controle of the water supply in Tibet. now do I think China is going to be the world's super power? no, not realy, I think it will be, a superpower on the continent of asia as well as new super powers coming to dominate other parts of the world, I think the era of US sole super power status is coming to an end and we are moving towards a multipolar world and have to come to terms with a new orientation of power which may or may not lead to another global conflict, the world simply can't stay within status quo reality forever, history shows us how this never lasts forever.
    6
  588. 6
  589. 6
  590. 6
  591. 6
  592. 6
  593. 6
  594. 6
  595. 6
  596. 6
  597. 6
  598. 6
  599. 6
  600. 6
  601. 6
  602. 6
  603. 6
  604. 6
  605. 6
  606. 6
  607. 6
  608. 6
  609. 6
  610. 6
  611. 6
  612. 6
  613. 6
  614. 6
  615. 6
  616. 6
  617. 6
  618. 6
  619. 6
  620. 5
  621. 5
  622. 5
  623. 5
  624. 5
  625. 5
  626. 5
  627. 5
  628. 5
  629. 5
  630. 5
  631. 5
  632. 5
  633. 5
  634. 5
  635. 5
  636. 5
  637. 5
  638. 5
  639. 5
  640. 5
  641. 5
  642. 5
  643. 5
  644. 5
  645. 5
  646. 5
  647. 5
  648. 5
  649. 5
  650. 5
  651. 5
  652. 5
  653. 5
  654. 5
  655. 5
  656. 5
  657. 5
  658. 5
  659. 5
  660. 5
  661. 5
  662. 5
  663. 5
  664. 5
  665. 5
  666. 5
  667. 5
  668. 5
  669. 5
  670. 5
  671. 5
  672. 5
  673. 5
  674. 5
  675. 5
  676. 5
  677. 5
  678. 5
  679. 5
  680. 5
  681. 5
  682. 5
  683. 5
  684. 5
  685. 5
  686. 5
  687. 5
  688. 5
  689. 5
  690. 5
  691. 5
  692. 5
  693. 5
  694. 5
  695. 5
  696. 5
  697. 5
  698. 5
  699. 5
  700. 5
  701. 5
  702. 5
  703. 5
  704. 5
  705. 5
  706. I think the majority of EU member states would support a federal Europe, the main issues is what kind of Europe? it's clear that the more conservative side of the EU would be eastern Europe where as the western side is much more progressive and open minded to ideas of a federal Europe, I won't get into which is better or worse for whatever specific topic or how things would evolve if it came about today but what I will say is that for this new federal Europe to work both sides need to be represented in a manner that might be disliked by the other but still with enough checks and balances that overreach or seccesion movements don't break it apart, in this regard the EU might be at a major disadvantage because it does not have proper checks and balances or the same kind of liberty focused constitution as the USA has, nor does it want to be exactly like the USA in this regard. Though without some form of compremise and a platform for futher expansion the union is not going to work as federation, there is also the military aspect and while nations have improved their military projects cross member state lines there is still much work to be done for it to even pose a threat to say Russia, in this regard the actions of Russia are almost a blessing for the EU since the threat of Russia, China and of a more distant USA might motivate people and governments to accept federalization as a means of gaining national security the same way Germany was created due to the threat of France. while not inevitable and still very much in question, the recent developments and threats from outside the EU are forcing members to consider federalism as a solution and I believe many of the anti European voices and parties are going to end up leading parts of the more conservative pan-european political parties in the future when they see the benefits of such a federation.
    5
  707. 5
  708. 5
  709. 5
  710. 5
  711. 5
  712. 5
  713. 5
  714. 5
  715. 5
  716. 5
  717. 5
  718. 5
  719. 5
  720. 5
  721. 5
  722. 5
  723. 5
  724. 5
  725. 5
  726. 5
  727. 5
  728. 5
  729. 5
  730. 5
  731. 5
  732. 5
  733. 5
  734. 5
  735. 5
  736. 5
  737. 5
  738. 5
  739. 5
  740. 5
  741. 5
  742. 5
  743. 5
  744. 5
  745. 5
  746. 5
  747. 5
  748. 5
  749. 5
  750. 5
  751. 5
  752.  @danielsteger8456  you assume human beings, societies and religions are way more rational than they tend to be and remember im saying this in the long term, long term as in between now 100 years + I never said that if it only destroys 85% then wars would suddenly happen, you are saying that, I'm saying bringing that number down to 0-1% would make that event far more likely and as technology keeps advancing the idea that nothing will ever stop an ICBM is the same logic people used in ww1 thinking nothing is ever going to outshine the horse or the rifle armed soldier, today we have things like advanced AI, robotics, next generation fighters, let alone in the near future, the USA alone and Israel have advanced missle defence systems and are trying to develop better ones, it's not hard to imagine at some point the defence and counter attack systems become better than the ICBM's used today, we are simply extending the usefullness of ICBM's by making them faster, what happens when someone goes into space and places weapons like it above the world's head? it just seems naive to think this can go on forever. as for child sitting in front of the tv, that sounds more like you, trying to make childish insults and comparing real rogue nuclear states (which already exist today) aren't going to become a more common thing, you might not know this but places in the middle east might consider getting nukes if Iran gets them, Japan could become a nuclear power because of the threat of China, India and Pakistan also have nukes and hate eachother the only thing that's preventing them from engaging in open warfare is the USA world system and the fact that they aren't sure if they would win such a conflict, now add in potential new players or terrorists gaining the ability to make nukes or weapons like it and you could see a world that spirals into desperation, fear and thus irrational behavior. everyone knew going into ww1 and ww2 would destroy most of their own and enemy nations and they had plenty of people saying the people on the top that would be the case and they went along with it anyways because that is the nature of human civilization and how wars happen, most of human history is waging wars or preparing for the next war, the only time this did not happen is when one side becomes so powerfull that forces others to not wage wars, as the USA becomes less powerfull, other nations catching up to them and more internal problems keep dividing people that will lead to more irrational governments and you only need a few of them to do something stupid to start a world war or just a large global conflict on a smaller scale. some religions have death cults in them or end of the world visions of the future, for them killing everything and everyone is the goal, most of the world is becoming more nihilistic and out competed or controled by technology, the idea that such cults and religions would not rise to some degree again is very naive. now look if you don't care about any of this and want to pretend like this little bubble is going to work forever then go ahead, I just think it's very naive and will probably not be very usefull to have when shit hits the fan.
    5
  753. 5
  754. 5
  755.  @mjwilliamsb2676  the reason why it's spreading in Europe, north america and asia while being almost nonexistent in places like Africa is because the former populations are greying and much older than the ones from 3rd world nations, the virus largely hurts the elderly, the lockdowns and other measures taken are primarily for them, at the cost of the youth who from statistics show are about 99% able to survive the disease sometimes without even showing symptoms below the age of at least 50+ Yes it is a bit of a rant because im sick and tired of scared and afraid karens and political interest groups trying to capitalize on a crisis to benefit large corporations while the people who actualy have to pay for it all get fucked to extend the life of a bunch of elderly people who already lived through the good times and now demand even more. Im esspecialy tired of the spliting narrative by most people whenever I mention this who pretend it's "total lockdown or no lock down at all and if you disagree you hate people" bullshit I keep seeing, why not a smart lockdown? Where people who are most at risk, (elderly mostly) go into quarantine, while the rest of us can just do our jobs and earn food on the table for our families, force people to ware masks if you have to, desinfect hands more, this is partly what we did in the Netherlands and we are doing pretty good. The lockdowns were done in a moment of panic because the CCP lied and censored information from the start of the outbreak, if anything we sould be adressing them and how the disease came to be and potentialy create a more and smarter international response team/policy when this inevitably happens again. Im just so pissed at the lack of rationalism today and lying ass media trying to start a panic, they selectively report on infections and only mention deaths when they are high, rather than all the facts and data, demografics and how immunity works, it's frankly discusting and immoral how they have acted during all this and im sick of it.
    5
  756. 5
  757. 5
  758. 5
  759. 5
  760. 5
  761. 5
  762. 5
  763. 5
  764. 5
  765. 5
  766. 5
  767. 5
  768. 5
  769. 5
  770. 5
  771. 5
  772. 5
  773. 5
  774. 5
  775. 5
  776. 5
  777. 5
  778. 5
  779. 5
  780.  @lordsev666  you are spreading misinformation and attacking people who point out the high suïcide rates due to their transitioning, we've seen the results of children being forced and convinced to undergo gender transitioning as well as hormoon treatment and it does immense damage to the people as well as not result in them in most cases accepting their new gender. Now you don't care about human beings and I know that you know you don't care because your not the one that suffers because of it and you can always point to "society" for somehow leading to people commiting suicide or causing self harm to themselves and their bodies. There is nothing transphobic of mentioning the facts and your response only shows how toxic, self destructive and narcissitic this ideology is. If a person does not feel in tune with their biological sex it is a sign of deep emotional trauma, what a person needs most is therapy, family bonds, caring emotional support, medication and learn to accept their gender identity. Gender transitioning only makes things worse, creates conflicts within the family, friends, imbalance in body functions, brain hormoon levels as well as multiple other complications and we have the suïcide rates, as well as levels of depression, combined with multiple other coormorbid mental issues to prove it. But again you don't care about any of that and want to reduce anyone pointing it out as being "transphobic" trust me if anyone hated Trans people they would encourage them to keep doing what they are doing right now.
    5
  781. 5
  782. 5
  783. 4
  784. 4
  785. 4
  786. 4
  787. 4
  788. 4
  789. 4
  790. 4
  791. 4
  792. 4
  793. 4
  794. 4
  795. 4
  796. 4
  797. 4
  798. 4
  799. 4
  800. 4
  801. 4
  802. 4
  803. 4
  804. 4
  805. 4
  806. 4
  807. 4
  808. 4
  809. 4
  810. 4
  811. 4
  812. 4
  813. 4
  814. 4
  815. 4
  816. 4
  817. 4
  818. 4
  819. 4
  820. 4
  821. 4
  822. 4
  823. 4
  824. 4
  825. 4
  826. 4
  827. 4
  828. 4
  829. 4
  830. 4
  831. 4
  832. 4
  833. 4
  834. 4
  835. 4
  836. I think your analisis of European politics is incorrect, slightly. For one the western Europeans love the current economic situation, their main issue is with immigration and a sense of cultural and ethnic decline. The eastern european countries are largely depended on western Europe economically, while they oppose migration they know they need us as much as we need them, in fact if you look at the eastern economic policies we are kinda expanding and trying to gear countries like Ukraine further towards our block, idk if you heared but Donald Trump has put sanctions on Germany's Nordstream 1 and 2 project, this will fuel anti americanism even more, making that EU army seem more justified. As for brexit, idk what evidence you have the EU is doing anything with the UK, they just want a deal and get on with it, the UK was the biggest block of hard Euro-sceptic, now the EU has returned to their core countries, Germany, France, the Netherlands so on. What I do see is a rise in populism, nativism, anti americanism, anti islam and pro European idenitify politics. I hope the UK does well with brexit, if they have a deal with the EU they remain in the single market, might mean they will vote again on membership at some point, or perhaps northern ireland and scotland might leave, that's a moral blow to the UK, though that's still speculation, depends on the economic growth and potential terrorist attacks. I think NATO might be reformed or end at the end of the next decade, Europeans are tired of US wars and Trump may very well try to invade iran in his second term which would be a big deal for European countries since we buy a lot of their oil, overal it seems our focus is shifting from the USA towards the east and asia.
    4
  837. 4
  838. 4
  839. 4
  840. 4
  841. 4
  842. 4
  843. 4
  844. 4
  845. 4
  846. 4
  847. 4
  848. 4
  849. 4
  850. 4
  851. 4
  852. 4
  853. 4
  854. 4
  855. 4
  856. 4
  857. 4
  858. 4
  859. 4
  860. 4
  861. 4
  862. 4
  863. 4
  864. 4
  865. 4
  866. 4
  867. 4
  868. 4
  869. 4
  870. 4
  871. 4
  872.  @Janoip  I think she is still one of the worst leaders of Germany, no real long term vision for people to believe in, basicaly abandoned the youth of Germany and enforcing policies that will have long term ripple effects that will tear apart the german society and position in the world. The next leaders of Germany will be mostly busy trying to fix the mess she left behind, with new crisis in the near future, few will be able to do much of anything. She in many ways mirrors Tony Blair in enforcing policies that will effect and ruine the country she was suppose to govern, Germany did not even meet their co2 reduction quota's, phased out nuclear energy, I expect a lot of political instability and dread in the german society as they deal with how things were left. Her only saving grace is that she could have been much worse. Now it's easy to just look down on her mistakes and what she could have done better but how about this point that few people bring up, why has she not attempted to push for basic liberal rights? Why has she empowered the authoritarians? Antagonized the nationalists, divided the country, done away with clean forms of energy in favor of mob rule and gas pipelines with another authoritarian state called Russia? Why do all this if she is a liberal and focused on western values? She barely has any, all Merkel realy seemed to care about is power and her actions made major problems worse. I could go on but it's just sad to see this woman be seen as some model politician, while I would describe her more as cunning, cold and calculating, without vision or long term plans. The AFD might have some bad policies here and there but I rather give them a shot compared to Merkel, it's sad to see what Germany has become, esspecialy remembering the optimism of the early 2000s, making way for the sad state of Europe today.
    4
  873. 4
  874. 4
  875.  @mehmetersahin9602  you want war, misery, conflict, terrorism and rapists around the world. I want peace, open borders is the road to war, you call me names, you wish to see my family and nation be raped, you wish to dehumanze us, wish to stir up resentment and conflict in the west. You are a totalitarian, ideological driven fanatic who is projecting your ignorance, intolorances and lack of western values onto someone els. It is people like you that threaten and try to stir conflict who are the ones who want more Hitlers and stalins to rise to power, you want that for Europe and the west so you can get your end times conflict and stir up war between islam and Christianity. But it won't work, muslims all over the world are rejecting your narrative of war and conflict, the imam of peace in Australia gets death threats from you people all the time but he is brave and will seek to reform islam. In Europe muslims who intergrate themselves are welcomed, while muslims who seek to divide and controle people (like you) are being rejected, attacked and ridiculed by other muslims like Achmed amoutalep in Rotterdam, the Netherlands and everyone els. Your era of terror is coming to an end, your words do not controle me, your fears do not hurt me, your hatred does not make me back down, I wish you peace and hope that all borders be raised and violent elements be removed so we can all live in peace, no more support for israeli and US wars, no more tolorance for warmongers like you. I know the road is difficult, I know you want more immigrants to stir up conflicts, I know force must be used on warmongers like you and the USA but it is a small price to pay for lasting peace, your biggest fear. Peace be with you, may you find salvation in truth and not war.
    4
  876. 4
  877. 4
  878. 4
  879. 4
  880. 4
  881. 4
  882. 4
  883. 4
  884. 4
  885. 4
  886. 4
  887. 4
  888. 4
  889. 4
  890. 4
  891. 4
  892. 4
  893. 4
  894. 4
  895. 4
  896. 4
  897. 4
  898. 4
  899. 4
  900. 4
  901. 4
  902. 4
  903. 4
  904. 4
  905. 4
  906. 4
  907. 4
  908. 4
  909. 4
  910. 4
  911. 4
  912. 4
  913. 4
  914. 4
  915. 4
  916. 4
  917. 4
  918. 4
  919. 4
  920. 4
  921. 4
  922. 4
  923. 4
  924. 4
  925. 4
  926. 4
  927. 4
  928. 4
  929. 4
  930. 4
  931. 4
  932. 4
  933. 4
  934. 4
  935. 4
  936. 4
  937. 4
  938. 4
  939. 4
  940. 4
  941. 4
  942. 4
  943. 4
  944. 4
  945.  @oremfrien  first thanks for writing your response, it was interesting to read. that being said, im not so convinced that Trump was as bad as you say, from what I've seen from him his tax changes were not just for the upper class of the USA and the concentration of wealth in the richest few has been going on long before he came into power and will continue even after he left, his anti China stance is actually something very brave and respectable because while many corporations want to outsource to China and even if many lower skilled jobs or voters who voted for him him lose money, the threat of China on the world stage is much more concerning than their wealth. Obama envisioned a world where the USA and China benefit eachother and Trump views China more as an antagonistic player and a potential threat to US hegemony and I think he is correct in engaging against China, it does not mean all his actions were effective and I would disagree more with his hostile stance towards NATO and his stance against his European allies, though his demands towards them were not very unreasonable, though could have been done better. Trump has always been very pro freedom of speech, signing executive orders specifically to protect freedom of speech at universities and speak out against mainstream media misinformation and online censorship, though he could have done a lot more if he wanted to. I find the 4 years of nonstop anti Trump propaganda and big tech censorship of him while being acting president, far more disturbing and without the corona virus and changes to voter laws he would not have lost the 2020 election, about the issue of voter fraud, from what I gathered the amount of dislike people have towards Biden compared to the amount of votes he has gotten, while also compared to the limited number of counties he actually got the claims of voter fraud seem quite convincing but to see that and prove it in court are two very different things, which is why it's also very telling that the supreme court did not weigh in on this, if they had done so this story would have been laid to rest for everyone, Trump would have looked like a fool and the democrats would have appeared far better than they actually did all year. many if not most of Trump's voter base still believes he was rigged out of the presidency and trust in the government, the media and government institutions is at an all time low, violent gangs run parts of major cities, the capital riots did not happen because of Trump but the view that his supporters were not being represented and then demonized in the media while all year long riots and deaths by other more democratic supported sides were allowed and praised. there is a massive disconnect between the elites, the political parties and the people, Trump and his voter base are still present within the general population, Trump or his potential replacement will most likely run in 2024. my view is that Trump was a great president who was undone because he tried to take the neo-con route of trying to make compremises between elites within his party and the democratic party, he did not go full populist on issues that realy matter to the people and he was too populist when it came to allies and creating a comprehensive plan against China, for a person who never was in politics, who suddenly became the president, with elites, the media and the rich largely against him, like never before against any president, despite not having caused any new wars and actually trying to bring troops back but being denied by his own generals, this is quite concerning. love him, hate him, Trump is here to stay and represents a revolt of the masses against the current structure in power, that does not mean he will win, that does not mean he won't matter, it does not mean he is fantastic and will always do the right thing or wrong thing, it just means he has influence in the USA and people will support him, if he wins in 2024 or picks a new candidate to give his support to, he will influence politics for better or for worse, I think it will be for the better. for the record, im not even American, I'm Dutch but I think he is the best choice for the USA and for now the best person to stand up against China, though I will agree with you, if the democrats ran with someone like Andrew Yang then that would be a good choice against Trump and for the USA, from my view it would be one good choice against another potentially good choice, where as with Biden it's just bad and just Obama 2.0
    4
  946. 4
  947. 4
  948. 4
  949. 4
  950. 4
  951. 4
  952. 4
  953. 4
  954. I slightly disagree with the proposition at the end, because while Balkanization is certainly possible and is even likely in certain parts of the west like the UK, Belgium, France perhaps, Italy as the central government and culture changes so does the loyalty to those nations change for better or for worse, that being said the opposite is also true, environments with a lot of chaos in them and a sense of fear and despair are going to turn towards either religion or utopian ideologies, now some nations will turn to religion as is likely the case in most of eastern Europe but in the west it's likely to be more utopian ideologies that takes shape and I think the main ideas that will start to melt into the wider societies will be nationalism, pan nationalism, transhumanism, techno-gainism, communism/neo communism and ethnic nationalism/racial nationalism The reason why I think these ideologies will play a role in whole or in part is due to the ethnic/cultural tensions, climate change, present day environmentalism not working as envisioned and collapse of economic systems as well as new technologies shaping society, all these things thrown together is going to be a free for all for competing groups and they can evolve in very strange ways, you could see environmentalist islamists who want equality in ways that mirror communists from the past, you could see pan European transhumanists who want to create their own god machine "leader" to guide them, you could see fascistic capitalists with christian state religion. It all depends on who grows the most, gets the upper hand and crushed the other.
    4
  955. 4
  956. 4
  957. 4
  958. 4
  959. 4
  960. 4
  961. 4
  962. 4
  963. 4
  964. 4
  965. 4
  966. 4
  967. 4
  968. 4
  969. 4
  970. 4
  971. 4
  972. 4
  973. 4
  974. 4
  975. 4
  976. 4
  977. 4
  978. 4
  979. 4
  980. 4
  981. 4
  982. 4
  983. 4
  984. 4
  985. 4
  986. 4
  987. 4
  988. 4
  989. 4
  990. 4
  991. 4
  992. 4
  993. 4
  994. 4
  995. 4
  996. 4
  997. 4
  998. 4
  999. 4
  1000. 4
  1001. 4
  1002. 4
  1003. 4
  1004. 4
  1005. 4
  1006. 4
  1007. 4
  1008. 4
  1009. 4
  1010. 4
  1011. 4
  1012. 4
  1013. 3
  1014. 3
  1015. 3
  1016. 3
  1017. 3
  1018.  @magnuscritikaleak5045  they both were, hell Mussolini used to be a member of the socialist party of italy before he became fascist and Hitlers national socialism is an almost exact copy of fascism but with an added volkish and racist ideology. The easiest way to understand it is thus, communism is international socialism and fascism/national socialism is a nationalistic form of socialism, the current nation of China has the same type of government and ideology as national socialism and fascism which is also reflected in their transition from national cultural destruction during Mao's reign and the current government that wants to praise and restore cultural traits and identities around the older era's of China, which is very much in line with the ideology of historical fascism and national socialism, the idea of expanding the nation, regaining lands, socialising the people to this goal, guiding the economy to produce wealth and materials needed to expand via war, all of this is in line with national socialism, communism and fascism, socialists today simply want to use this same method of government for their goals of public education, healthcare, identity, government regulation while often still having market forces and capitalistic structures to support it, like Sweden which is both very socialistic with wellfare programs while being much more free market then the USA. Being a socialist or support of socialism does not make you a national socialist or a fascist but denying that nat-soc and fascistic regimes did not employ socialism is just being dishonest and inaccurate and it's easy to see why, since that might convince people that socialism is a bad idea, which it is.
    3
  1019. 3
  1020. 3
  1021. 3
  1022. 3
  1023. 3
  1024. 3
  1025. 3
  1026. 3
  1027. 3
  1028. 3
  1029. 3
  1030. 3
  1031. 3
  1032. 3
  1033. 3
  1034. 3
  1035. 3
  1036. 3
  1037. 3
  1038. 3
  1039. 3
  1040. 3
  1041. 3
  1042. 3
  1043. 3
  1044. 3
  1045. 3
  1046. 3
  1047. 3
  1048. 3
  1049. 3
  1050. 3
  1051. 3
  1052. 3
  1053. 3
  1054. 3
  1055. 3
  1056. 3
  1057. 3
  1058. 3
  1059. 3
  1060. 3
  1061. 3
  1062. 3
  1063. 3
  1064. 3
  1065. 3
  1066. 3
  1067. 3
  1068. 3
  1069. 3
  1070. 3
  1071. 3
  1072. 3
  1073. 3
  1074. 3
  1075. 3
  1076. 3
  1077. 3
  1078. 3
  1079. 3
  1080. 3
  1081. 3
  1082. 3
  1083.  @Pincer88  that's a bit untrue to a degree, yes the current organisation how they are today would not exist without NATO but that's not to say organisations like them would not exist, in fact the EU is not much different from Germany's goals in ww1 which was to create a network of nations and create a international body for economic and political matters, it was to be called ''MittelEuropa'' in which Germany would be the main economic and military engine of Europe and then grow, compete and unify the rest of Europe under it's sphere (kind of like the EU is today) in many ways that's even what the nazi's wanted just with a lot more slavery, genocide and settler based colonialism. the current world order is because of the cold war and the policies set by the USA and the USSR, this destroyed the old order of European nations and thus we were forced to change and adapt to this new reality, now we've all benefited a lot from this new order and it's mostly thanks to the USA but also the invention of nuclear weapons, this made wars much more impossible and working together much more nessisary and profitable but we should not forget how strange this new reality actually is from most of human history and also don't forget it can't last forever, before ww1 no major industrial nation was at war with eachother for over 98 years I believe and then ww1 and ww2 happened, the current long peace can't last forever and when it happens new political systems and governments will be nessisary, it is inevitable.
    3
  1084. 3
  1085. 3
  1086. 3
  1087. 3
  1088. 3
  1089. 3
  1090. 3
  1091. 3
  1092. 3
  1093. 3
  1094. 3
  1095. 3
  1096. 3
  1097. 3
  1098. 3
  1099. 3
  1100. 3
  1101. 3
  1102. 3
  1103. 3
  1104. 3
  1105. 3
  1106. 3
  1107. 3
  1108. 3
  1109. 3
  1110. 3
  1111. 3
  1112. 3
  1113. 3
  1114. 3
  1115. 3
  1116. 3
  1117. 3
  1118. 3
  1119. 3
  1120. 3
  1121. 3
  1122. 3
  1123. 3
  1124. 3
  1125. 3
  1126. 3
  1127. 3
  1128. 3
  1129. 3
  1130. 3
  1131. 3
  1132. 3
  1133. 3
  1134.  @richardthomson4693  I'm not sure if France went out of the eurofighter just because it was not compatable with their aircraft carrier which is also weird because you could just make a variant for such purposes, the F-35 comes in different variants as well, probably more politically motivated rather then pragmatically motivated. nations getting F-35's is not an indication that they aren't interested in building their own fighter, simply the war in Ukraine makes it wiser to get something that's modern and actually done already now then to develop something 9-15 years down the line when you might need it now, it's not mutually exclusive. France and Germany already work on multiple goals together, Euro-drone I believe, Euro-tank as well, no reason they can't work with each other, thought there are issues for sure. USA does not want many plans of the F-35 to fall in other people's hands, if you make a deal for F-35 a lot of the secrets are kept in US hands and by US personal, trainers and engineers, that's a major issue for military hardware imports, there is a good video by Perun on youtube that goes into the whole process you probably would enjoy it. not sure how good the Tempest is going to be or if it's going to get started, UK does not look so fresh right now, Japan might pullout or focus on their own project, Sweden might be considering their options, basically both sides aren't very sure on what to do but I think in the end the FCAS program will be put forward simply because it's best for everyone, more funds and more talent to be poured into it compared to the Tempest, could be wrong but in terms of scale and economic power France and Germany have more to offer then the UK, Italy or Sweden combined.
    3
  1135. 3
  1136. 3
  1137. 3
  1138. 3
  1139. 3
  1140. 3
  1141. 3
  1142. 3
  1143. 3
  1144. 3
  1145. 3
  1146. 3
  1147. 3
  1148. 3
  1149. 3
  1150. 3
  1151. 3
  1152. 3
  1153. 3
  1154. 3
  1155. 3
  1156. 3
  1157. 3
  1158. 3
  1159. 3
  1160. 3
  1161. 3
  1162. 3
  1163. 3
  1164. 3
  1165. 3
  1166. 3
  1167. 3
  1168. 3
  1169. 3
  1170. 3
  1171. 3
  1172. 3
  1173. 3
  1174. 3
  1175.  @lynn4062  yes, I do know, you don't, that's the problem. What happened was that European powers left due to the USA withholding funds from the Marshall plan if they did not abandon their colonies, many of these colonies fell into dictatorships, local warlords or turned to communism, the borders drawn by the Europeans and then local leaders taking them over left a very unstable situation, many of the investments into the colonial economy vanished and were not maintained by the local leaders. You have to understand how much these places benefited by western rule for a long time compared to the state they were in before, you also have to take into account if the colonial economy was settler based or exploitative based, the Congo is a good example of the later while south africa is a good example of the former. Western powers did very little to fuck up the situation and in fact allowed massive population growth due to improved farming and connection with the rest of the world, Zimbabwe used to be the breadbasket of Africa before communist Mugabe came into power, the only two things the western powers did that was very bad was 1. Leave and 2. Kept the borders as they were instead of dividing the lands to local leaders based on ethnic, language and vital resources lines. Though regardless the situation was bound to decline and stagnate due to the vastness of Africa itself, the massive populations there and the lack of modern nation states and institutions there, why this myth then of the west becoming rich due to colonialism? Because it's easy and takes responsability away from the natives and blames the west, even though the west was already rich before the scramble for africa, did not make up a big part of their economies and after decolonisation the western powers thrived economically while the former colonies stagnated. Whatifalthist has some video's on the subject if your interested.
    3
  1176. 3
  1177. 3
  1178. 3
  1179. 3
  1180. 3
  1181. 3
  1182. 3
  1183. 3
  1184. 3
  1185. 3
  1186. 3
  1187. 3
  1188. 3
  1189. 3
  1190. 3
  1191. 3
  1192. 3
  1193. 3
  1194. 3
  1195. 3
  1196. 3
  1197. 3
  1198. 3
  1199. 3
  1200. 3
  1201. 3
  1202. 3
  1203. 3
  1204. 3
  1205. 3
  1206. 3
  1207. 3
  1208. 3
  1209. 3
  1210. 3
  1211. 3
  1212. 3
  1213. 3
  1214. 3
  1215. 3
  1216. 3
  1217. 3
  1218. 3
  1219. 3
  1220. 3
  1221. 3
  1222. 3
  1223. 3
  1224. 3
  1225. 3
  1226. 3
  1227. 3
  1228. 3
  1229. 3
  1230. 3
  1231. 3
  1232. 3
  1233. 3
  1234. 3
  1235. 3
  1236. 3
  1237. 3
  1238. 3
  1239. 3
  1240. 3
  1241. 3
  1242. 3
  1243. 3
  1244. 3
  1245. 3
  1246. 3
  1247. 3
  1248. 3
  1249. 3
  1250. 3
  1251. 3
  1252. 3
  1253. 3
  1254. 3
  1255. 3
  1256. 3
  1257. 3
  1258. 3
  1259. 3
  1260. 3
  1261. 3
  1262. 3
  1263. 3
  1264. 3
  1265. 3
  1266. 3
  1267. 3
  1268. 3
  1269. 3
  1270. 3
  1271. 3
  1272. 3
  1273. 3
  1274. 3
  1275. 3
  1276. 3
  1277. 3
  1278. 3
  1279. 3
  1280. 3
  1281. 3
  1282. 3
  1283. 3
  1284. 3
  1285. 3
  1286. 3
  1287. 3
  1288. 3
  1289. 3
  1290. 3
  1291. 3
  1292. 3
  1293. 3
  1294. 3
  1295. 3
  1296. 3
  1297. 3
  1298. 3
  1299. 3
  1300. 3
  1301. 3
  1302. 3
  1303. 3
  1304. 3
  1305. 3
  1306. 3
  1307. 3
  1308. 3
  1309. 3
  1310. 3
  1311. 3
  1312. 3
  1313. 3
  1314. 3
  1315. 3
  1316. 3
  1317. 3
  1318. 3
  1319. 3
  1320. 3
  1321. 3
  1322. 3
  1323. 3
  1324. 3
  1325. 3
  1326. 3
  1327. 3
  1328. 3
  1329. 3
  1330. 3
  1331. 3
  1332. 3
  1333. 3
  1334. 3
  1335. 3
  1336. 3
  1337. 3
  1338. 3
  1339. 3
  1340. 3
  1341. 3
  1342. 3
  1343. 3
  1344. 3
  1345. 3
  1346. 3
  1347. 3
  1348. 3
  1349. 3
  1350. 3
  1351. 3
  1352. 3
  1353. 3
  1354. 3
  1355. 3
  1356. 3
  1357. 3
  1358. 3
  1359. 3
  1360. 3
  1361. 3
  1362. 3
  1363. 3
  1364. 3
  1365. 3
  1366. 3
  1367. 3
  1368. 3
  1369. 3
  1370. 3
  1371. 3
  1372. 3
  1373. 3
  1374. 3
  1375. 3
  1376. 3
  1377. 3
  1378. 3
  1379. 3
  1380. 3
  1381. 3
  1382. 3
  1383. 3
  1384. 3
  1385. 3
  1386. 3
  1387. 3
  1388. 3
  1389. 3
  1390. 3
  1391. 3
  1392. 2
  1393. 2
  1394. 2
  1395. 2
  1396. 2
  1397. 2
  1398. I feel like Truth does not exist, not in a real sense, yet at the same time truth in the material has real effects, it can help you survive and in fact thrive to win at the biological game of life that all things living are doing which in essence would be the meaning of life and being in tune with nature but at the same time this truth to many seems meaningless, without purpose and reduces the human experience to it's primary biological essence while ignoring everything else, thus whatever truth we come to will be non-materialistic, it will be abstract, different from the norm, it will be something odd, strange or detached from the real world. imagine if you wish to be the best chef in the world, you study material means but also experiment to reach the art of perfection in your craft, people around you praise you for your work and you yourself have found meaning in this act, does that mean you live in truth? can you live this truth without the material? what if your a monk trying to find enlightenment is that truth? what if you are a scientist trying to find the secrets of the universe through complex concepts of science, is that truth. the truth is subjective to the person, the higher cause you seek is not universal, it might find a universal conclusion for meaning but the path towards it is highly individual and abstract, the more you focus on the inner mind and workings of abstract ideas the less materialistic and focused on biological sense of purpose you will be, you can try and balance these two but in doing so one can say you have forsaken truth for the material there is no escape of this dillema.
    2
  1399. 2
  1400. 2
  1401. 2
  1402. 2
  1403. 2
  1404. 2
  1405. 2
  1406. 2
  1407. 2
  1408. 2
  1409. 2
  1410. 2
  1411. 2
  1412. 2
  1413. 2
  1414. 2
  1415. 2
  1416. 2
  1417. 2
  1418. 2
  1419. 2
  1420. 2
  1421. 2
  1422. 2
  1423. 2
  1424. 2
  1425. 2
  1426. 2
  1427. 2
  1428. 2
  1429. 2
  1430. 2
  1431. 2
  1432. 2
  1433. 2
  1434. 2
  1435. 2
  1436. 2
  1437. 2
  1438. 2
  1439. 2
  1440. 2
  1441. 2
  1442. 2
  1443. 2
  1444. 2
  1445. 2
  1446. 2
  1447. 2
  1448. 2
  1449. 2
  1450. 2
  1451. 2
  1452. 2
  1453. 2
  1454. 2
  1455. 2
  1456. 2
  1457. 2
  1458. 2
  1459. 2
  1460. 2
  1461. 2
  1462. 2
  1463. 2
  1464. 2
  1465. 2
  1466. 2
  1467. 2
  1468. 2
  1469. 2
  1470. 2
  1471. 2
  1472. 2
  1473. 2
  1474. 2
  1475. 2
  1476. 2
  1477.  @robertkeaney9905  it's more so due to scale of industry, USA dominating after ww2 and kept that edge sharp by not being involved in many wars but maintaining their industrial base and by the luck of having their main rival be the communist USSR which while somewhat competent with its designs quickly fell out of favor and then collapsed. USA does not need to wage wars or have proxy conflicts to maintain that edge, in fact over the last few decades the USA has been doing exactly that thing that has made them lose that edge which is transfering a lot of industry to China, waging wars on their own dime with little benefit, while ignoring issues at home and lowering the values of a competent military leadership that reduces it's effect on their enemies, Victor David Hanson had a great article a few days ago on why the US military is slipping in it's recruitment numbers, the trust in it's military and those that lead it. The USA is still the worlds super power but time as of now, is not on their side, the USA needs to change gears if it wants to maintain that edge, I think they will change but that's not inevitable and in the meantime the enemies of the USA will continue to adapt and learn. The only good news has been the recent Russia Ukraine conflict, lots of weapon deals, F-35 deals, new interest in NATO alliance and two of their potential competition hindering eachothers economies and revealing weakness in the Russian army. When things get tough for the americans, god throws them a bone it seems, when things get tough for the Europeans, god adds another war to the list.
    2
  1478. 2
  1479. 2
  1480. 2
  1481. 2
  1482. 2
  1483. 2
  1484. 2
  1485. 2
  1486. 2
  1487. 2
  1488. 2
  1489. 2
  1490. 2
  1491. 2
  1492. 2
  1493. 2
  1494. 2
  1495. 2
  1496. 2
  1497. 2
  1498. 2
  1499. 2
  1500. 2
  1501. 2
  1502. 2
  1503. 2
  1504. 2
  1505. 2
  1506. 2
  1507. 2
  1508. 2
  1509. 2
  1510. 2
  1511. 2
  1512. 2
  1513. 2
  1514. 2
  1515. 2
  1516. 2
  1517. 2
  1518. 2
  1519. 2
  1520. 2
  1521. 2
  1522. 2
  1523. 2
  1524. 2
  1525. 2
  1526. 2
  1527. 2
  1528. 2
  1529. 2
  1530. 2
  1531. 2
  1532. 2
  1533. 2
  1534. 2
  1535. 2
  1536. 2
  1537. 2
  1538. 2
  1539. 2
  1540. 2
  1541. 2
  1542. 2
  1543. 2
  1544. 2
  1545. 2
  1546. 2
  1547. 2
  1548. 2
  1549. 2
  1550. 2
  1551. 2
  1552. 2
  1553. 2
  1554. 2
  1555. 2
  1556. 2
  1557. 2
  1558. 2
  1559. 2
  1560. 2
  1561. 2
  1562. 2
  1563. 2
  1564. 2
  1565. 2
  1566. 2
  1567. 2
  1568. 2
  1569. 2
  1570. 2
  1571. 2
  1572. 2
  1573. 2
  1574. 2
  1575. 2
  1576. 2
  1577. 2
  1578. 2
  1579. 2
  1580. 2
  1581. 2
  1582. 2
  1583. 2
  1584. 2
  1585. 2
  1586. 2
  1587. 2
  1588. 2
  1589. 2
  1590. 2
  1591. 2
  1592. 2
  1593. 2
  1594. 2
  1595. 2
  1596. 2
  1597. 2
  1598. 2
  1599. 2
  1600. 2
  1601. 2
  1602. 2
  1603. 2
  1604. 2
  1605. 2
  1606. 2
  1607. 2
  1608. 2
  1609. 2
  1610. 2
  1611. 2
  1612. 2
  1613. 2
  1614. 2
  1615. 2
  1616. 2
  1617. 2
  1618. 2
  1619. 2
  1620. 2
  1621. 2
  1622. 2
  1623. 2
  1624. 2
  1625. 2
  1626. 2
  1627. 2
  1628. 2
  1629. 2
  1630. 2
  1631. 2
  1632. 2
  1633. 2
  1634. 2
  1635. 2
  1636. 2
  1637. 2
  1638. 2
  1639. 2
  1640. 2
  1641. 2
  1642. 2
  1643. 2
  1644. 2
  1645. 2
  1646. 2
  1647. 2
  1648. 2
  1649. 2
  1650. 2
  1651. 2
  1652. 2
  1653. 2
  1654. 2
  1655. 2
  1656. 2
  1657. 2
  1658. 2
  1659. 2
  1660. 2
  1661. 2
  1662. 2
  1663. 2
  1664. 2
  1665. 2
  1666. 2
  1667. 2
  1668. 2
  1669. 2
  1670. 2
  1671. 2
  1672. 2
  1673.  @AtomicReverend  not accuate at all, Russia is no threat to Europe, in fact Russia trades the most with Europe and the sanctions on Russia and Germany are promoted by the USA and it's easy to see why, the USA loves it's power projection and good relations between Europe and Russia stand in the way of that. We don't need NATO, you need NATO, hell we are likely to go to war with Turkey which the USA has propt up whole waging wars in the middle-east threatning Iran (who just so happen to be a major trading partner for Europe) The USA benefits the most from NATO, it pays rather little for the amount of influence they get, in exchange for free movement, Logistic support and supplylines for it's wars in the middle-east. The USA has weakend Europe, caused waves of migrants and is the main reason we even have multiculturalism in Europe, it's not the European media calling white people racists for existing, mostly US media and US NPO's. The USA even allied with Saudi-arabia who funds most terrorism in Europe to begin with. I don't think your very intrested in hearing our opinion on the matter, nor do you seem to care that anti americanism is more populair than anti migrant sentiment, the USA won't lift a finger to help us, won't support nationalism for us and most likely will engage in hostile action and support of our enemies to try and destabalize us, I don't like Merkel or the rest of the globalist trash but you do realise globalism is a US ideology one you only resently with Trump, kinda, sorta not realy tried to adress. Demografics in the USA are much more severe and the retoric much more anti white than in Europe, with exception of the UK and perhaps Sweden.
    2
  1674. 2
  1675. 2
  1676. 2
  1677. 2
  1678. 2
  1679. 2
  1680. 2
  1681. 2
  1682. 2
  1683. 2
  1684. 2
  1685. 2
  1686. 2
  1687. 2
  1688. 2
  1689. 2
  1690. 2
  1691. 2
  1692. 2
  1693. 2
  1694. 2
  1695. 2
  1696. 2
  1697. 2
  1698. 2
  1699. 2
  1700. 2
  1701. 2
  1702. 2
  1703. 2
  1704. 20:06 dude what are you talking about? it honestly is confusing to make sense of what your saying, the USA wants to decide these policies, the whole reason of NATO is to keep russians out, germans down and the americans in, that's what NATO is, what you are basically saying here is that it's pafetic that the Europeans do what the USA wants them to do and allows the USA to dictate to them how to run their countries, how big their armies are allowed to be and what kind of treaties they are allowed to make with Russia and other nations, the NATO high command of Europe specifically says that the USA does not want Europe to have it's own military or to go against the US wishes or get involved in the middle east unless it is led by the USA or NATO directly. unlike most European leaders, I deeply distrust the USA and think we would be better off building up our own military, rejecting US protection and should find a way to get Russia into the Euro-sphere of influence but the USA does not want that and since the EU is not a full federation like the USA and the USA also does not want Europe to be it's own entity without US support, it puts Europe in a catch 22, we are made fun of and weak if we follow the USA and their model and agenda or we pick our own side and get crushed or divided by the americans or russians to keep us divided. for Europe to reclaim it's place in the world it would have to become more hostile to the USA and their interest while either taking over russia or getting them in our sphere, working with other nations like China, while exploiting the middle east and africa whenever possible, Germany would have to pull a Bismark and create a federal European state in a moment of crisis where every member state would feel threatened by external presures and basically strong arm everyone else to their agenda while the USA does nothing. if there are two mistakes the europeans did after ww2 that hurt them the most, it's trusting the USA too much and not finding more ways to unite into a single continental federation.
    2
  1705. 2
  1706. 2
  1707. 2
  1708. 2
  1709. 2
  1710. 2
  1711. 2
  1712. 2
  1713. 2
  1714. 2
  1715. 2
  1716. 2
  1717. 2
  1718. 2
  1719. 2
  1720. 2
  1721. 2
  1722. 2
  1723. 2
  1724. 2
  1725. 2
  1726. 2
  1727.  @vojislavl6665  yes national socialism is socialism as in your shared article. Did you read the rest of it though? Socialists used force and propaganda to try and get socialism enacted for their own benefit not because they care about people and it indirectly led to the deaths of millions. Look we can go back and forth here, you can cherry pick any tiny detail and pretend like it makes your ideology look good, im sure other mass movements that led to war and famine at some point did something good but that's not the core of their ideology, that's not the foundation of their policies and how they are implemented. You are acting like a ideologically possed person who can't doubt their own ideology and the problems it has caused, the deaths, the famines, lifting people out of poverty for a few years and then collapsing the economy into famines and death is not a stable ideology. You don't care about economics and neo-liberalism has long since abandoned any ideas of individual freedom or regulations and intervention in the market for the good of the people, the bail outs of banks in 2008 only helped the banks not the people, while the government in iceland did jail the bankers and their practices and are doing fine years later as a result. There is no perfect economy, there is no total capitalism or total communism anymore, most of the world now has a mixed model of diffrent kinds of policies for each industry which bring diffrent kinds of results. In Russia the state owns most of the energy companies because that is a key part of their economy which drives investment into their other industries. In Venezuela they nationalized the oil industry but because of costly and top down socialist programs and lack of investment in new sectors when the oil prize collapsed their economy collapsed. In the USA they have an almost self sufficient economy and internal market, partly due to capitalism and largely due to annexation and collonial policies during it's first few decades of existing as a state on the continent. In israel they have a big tech and military industry, in south korea the same. Some nations are more victims of sanctions and policies by the world bank, like African nations, Russia and Iran. Im not trying for some gotcha moment, im trying to teach you that Socialism as an economic model has failed time and time again, the people might want it, clever propagandists and violent political actors might force the government to implement their policies but they will generaly bring bad results. Nations like Sweden and the UK are completly swarmed by migrants which cripple their healthcare system, their economy, their public security and political stability, those most in favor of it are once again mostly socialists who want to bring in more voters for their bad economic policies. Hell corporations like Google love to work for them since they get to abuse and censor people they don't like because individual rights aren't often supported by socialists, I have to copy this comment to check if it does not get insta censored, more of a side issue unrelated to this but it's super annoying and I never see any socialists authoritarians stand up to it. Socialism has failed and will continue to fail and drag down more and more nations that capitalist nations will have to deal with, next one to fall I expect will be Mexico, i live in the Netherlands we invented capitalism, the Americans perfected it and profited by it greatly while nationalist and militarist annexation of north America made them the superpower they are today. Capitalism works, it has flaws because humans have flaws, humanity is greedy and violent by nature, in Socialism and communism even more so.
    2
  1728. 2
  1729. 2
  1730. 2
  1731. 2
  1732. 2
  1733. 2
  1734. 2
  1735. 2
  1736. 2
  1737. 2
  1738. 2
  1739. 2
  1740. 2
  1741. 2
  1742. 2
  1743. 2
  1744. 2
  1745. 2
  1746. 2
  1747. 2
  1748. 2
  1749. 2
  1750. 2
  1751. 2
  1752. 2
  1753.  @TheBenj30  Japan has zero experience in building their own fighter jet and actually are/were planning their own domestic fighter jet which seems unlikely now to go through. As for the UK, their main experience is with the Eurofighter, same as Germany and Italy, Sweden's Grippen is a less developed but cheaper aircraft compared to the Eurofighter. Tempest and FCAS have different goals in mind, Tempest is mostly just a new fighter aircraft, where as FCAS is a whole new system of multiple side projects to become intergrated with it, the scale of the project is much bigger and thus will take more time. Speaking of scale, the economies of FCAS and the EU are much larger then the UK or Japan, Italy is also part of the EU same as Sweden but they alone are not as big as the rest combined and also create friction with in-fighting and production issues and the scale of production growth is different. Once both projects are done, production for FCAS can scale up much more then Tempest, granted Tempest might take the place of Rafale as being a good choice for cost to quality for third world countries that does have a lot of potential profits for the project if that's their aim. Ideally I wished FCAS won over Tempest and we all just focused on one project for cheaper and better quality for all but perhaps that's only possible next development cycle. Of course maybe im wrong and FCAS will scale down and do more in-fighting over the next few years but same could be said for Tempest, we have to wait and see.
    2
  1754. 2
  1755. 2
  1756. 2
  1757. 2
  1758. 2
  1759. 2
  1760. 2
  1761. 2
  1762. 2
  1763. 2
  1764. 2
  1765. 2
  1766. 2
  1767. 2
  1768. 2
  1769. 2
  1770. 2
  1771. 2
  1772. 2
  1773. 2
  1774. 2
  1775. 2
  1776. 2
  1777. 2
  1778. 2
  1779. 2
  1780. 2
  1781. 2
  1782. 2
  1783. 2
  1784. 2
  1785. 2
  1786. 2
  1787. 2
  1788. 2
  1789. 2
  1790. 2
  1791. 2
  1792. 2
  1793. 2
  1794. 2
  1795. 2
  1796. 2
  1797. 2
  1798. 2
  1799. 2
  1800. 2
  1801. 2
  1802. 2
  1803. 2
  1804. 2
  1805. 2
  1806. 2
  1807. 2
  1808. 2
  1809. 2
  1810. 2
  1811. 2
  1812. 2
  1813. 2
  1814. 2
  1815. 2
  1816. 2
  1817. 2
  1818. 2
  1819. 2
  1820. 2
  1821. 2
  1822. 2
  1823. 2
  1824. 2
  1825. 2
  1826. 2
  1827. 2
  1828. 2
  1829. 2
  1830. 2
  1831. 2
  1832. 2
  1833. 2
  1834. 2
  1835. 2
  1836. 2
  1837. 2
  1838. 2
  1839. 2
  1840. 2
  1841. 2
  1842. 2
  1843. 2
  1844. 2
  1845. 2
  1846. 2
  1847. 2
  1848. 2
  1849. 2
  1850. 2
  1851. 2
  1852. 2
  1853. 2
  1854. 2
  1855. 2
  1856. 2
  1857. 2
  1858. 2
  1859. 2
  1860. 2
  1861. 2
  1862. 2
  1863. 2
  1864. 2
  1865. 2
  1866. @Atrid you do realise much of the multicutural crap (which I agree is cancer) was implemented on the national level and it started in the USA. Secondly how can the US dollar work for it's fast and international commerce but not in Europe? The southern European nations (mostly greece) sould not have been allowed to adopt the Euro, they ran their economy into the dirt and the EU had to bail them out multiple times, now after a harsh periode of reform they are kinda sorta doing oke but they need a lot more investment and realy they don't have much to offer the world or the EU besides nice holiday locations and good food. Thirdly most of the migrants come from africa and the middle-east because of US intervention in those regions which destabalized Both them and us, the USA don't mind they can hide from the fallout of their wars, I think NATO sould be disolved, USA is not a very reliable ally, their alliance with saudi arabia is why we have so many wahabi terrorists in the west, nothing to do with Iran btw. And finaly, yes the commision is not directly voted on and they reserve the right to make legisation, however the parlement must still aprove it and in the past the parlement had no vote at all. Personality I blame Merkel and her actions during the debt crisis and migrant crisis that made Europe so unstable, she tried to kill two bird with one stone, get cheap slave labor and curb the aging problems of Europe which only angered and divided the whole of Europe, however she is going out and we have a new push by reformers and identitarian movements to try and subvert the EU, I understand where your coming from but the USA won't change, the EU can if it can not then it's truely doomed.
    2
  1867. 2
  1868. 2
  1869. 2
  1870. 2
  1871. 2
  1872. 2
  1873. 2
  1874. 2
  1875. 2
  1876. 2
  1877. 2
  1878. 2
  1879. 2
  1880. 2
  1881. 2
  1882. 2
  1883. 2
  1884. 2
  1885. 2
  1886. 2
  1887. 2
  1888. 2
  1889. 2
  1890. 2
  1891. 2
  1892. 2
  1893. 2
  1894. 2
  1895. 2
  1896. 2
  1897. 2
  1898. 2
  1899. 2
  1900. 2
  1901. 2
  1902. 2
  1903. 2
  1904. 2
  1905. 2
  1906. 2
  1907. 2
  1908. 2
  1909. 2
  1910. 2
  1911. 2
  1912. 2
  1913. 2
  1914. 2
  1915. 2
  1916. 2
  1917. 2
  1918. 2
  1919. 2
  1920. 2
  1921. 2
  1922. 2
  1923. 2
  1924. 2
  1925. 2
  1926. 2
  1927. I can understand why payment processors have such immense power over these companies, we saw it a few months ago with pornhub, I think the New york times made a hit piece against pornhub, something about underaged girls being used, idk seemed very weird, I never seen anything like that on their platform but idk some might exist there, kinda hard to find it 24/7 on such a big platform but afterwards mastercard cut the payment processors for whatever reason and pornhub deleted 80% of their entire video content! 80%! that's insane just to please some payment processors. now what I don't get is why? why do they do this? aren't these companies in the market to idk, make money? should they not be entirely focused on being as libertarian as possible? only realy wanting to stop payment for actual illigale stuff like terrorism or arms sales? like how do payment processors benefit from this? they destroy whole business models and harm content creators or other startups, we've seen this with some of the new platforms for social media, they got momentum, people wanted to get off twitter or facebook and then ''shut it down! shut it down!'' goes again and again. could someone explain it to me? I watched the video and I still don't get why they do this, they aren't an investment bank, they are middle men companies to ensure that person a can give person b money for a product that person a is selling, it's super easy and simple, it's hard to set up perhaps since you need a large amount of capital to build the systems of networks and IT systems but once your done you basically don't have to change at all. my theory so far is that these companies have so much money, so much easy cash flow that they have moved beyond simply wanting money, they want power, they want controle and they want to please outside companies that help them when they need help, one hand washes the other as they say. a new startup company is threatening the business model of facebook, mastercard pulls the plug and in return when a huge scandal or corruption case comes forwards involving mastercard which might hurt their stock, facebook makes sure people get blacklisted or comes after them, perhaps leak person information or finds support via another company. Saying it out loud sounds like a conspiracy and it kinda is but it's more like an open secret at this point, if you ask and connect the dots you can understand why and everyone knows this is true but only normies and people who don't understand corporate culture and think this is how capitalism always works (which it's not) just nod their heads and don't care at all.
    2
  1928. 2
  1929. 2
  1930. 2
  1931. 2
  1932. 2
  1933. 2
  1934. 2
  1935. 2
  1936. 2
  1937. 2
  1938. 2
  1939. there is a lot of sound arguments made here but I can't see the USA as an Utopia or even close to it, the advantages the USA has are real and the historical events that led to those advantages being used are also real but there are a number of reasons why the USA can't go on like it has for so long forever. for starters, it's currency is the most used curency because of the petro dollar that forces other nations to buy US dollars in order to have oil, this brings more value to the US dollar compared to others, it's also how it's government is able to go into massive, massive debt to the point where both they themselves and everyone in the USA accepts that the debt will never, ever be paid, that's not something you can ignore forever. as for immigrants, if you are an immigrant then you migrate for a reason, in the case of Europe most workers from say Turkey work in low skilled jobs, they also most often don't want to intergrate and native people don't always want their nation to become more Turkish, this is indeed a major advantage of the USA but that has less to do with people simply not wanting them or not accepting them but for the fact that where the USA has a massive landmass and area to grow and house people, Europe is already densely populated with housing crisis's and no singular language or culture, Germans are rather accepting of most people compared to say most of Eastern Europe thus everyone wants to move there but in doing so makes natives more threatened by migrants, the same is true in the USA if the area is already densely populated, notice how many rich people live in well off, gated comunities and take effort to keep it that way. as for China or Russia, they aren't doing so well at the moment and their geography is not as good as that of Europe actually. could the USA become an Utopia? no, is it close to a Utopia compared to most of the rest of the world? probably yes, will it stay that way or improve towards it? I highly doubt it.
    2
  1940. 2
  1941. 2
  1942. 2
  1943. 2
  1944. 2
  1945. 2
  1946. 2
  1947. 2
  1948. 2
  1949. 2
  1950. 2
  1951. 2
  1952. 2
  1953. 2
  1954. 2
  1955. 2
  1956. 2
  1957. 2
  1958. 2
  1959. 2
  1960. 2
  1961. 2
  1962. 2
  1963. 2
  1964. 2
  1965. 2
  1966. 2
  1967. 2
  1968. 2
  1969. 2
  1970. 2
  1971. 2
  1972. 2
  1973. 2
  1974. 2
  1975. 2
  1976. 2
  1977. 2
  1978. 2
  1979. 2
  1980. 2
  1981. 2
  1982. 2
  1983. 2
  1984. 2
  1985. 2
  1986. 2
  1987. 2
  1988. 2
  1989. 2
  1990. 2
  1991. 2
  1992. 2
  1993. 2
  1994. 2
  1995. 27:21 is this like your opinion? because France is actually waging wars, using military force to pressure a nation like Turkey, while Germany's constitution enforced by the USA and other treaties limit their ability to build up military forces and use them to wage war if need be, while also being part of the EU that is actively trying to create a more pan-european army structure which the americans in NATO don't like. the reason why Europe is less pro war is because we had many centuries of having way to many of them and mostly against ourselfs while our populations today are rapidly aging so even if we wanted to our ability to produce massive armies is kinda limited, plus even if we did we risk the USA getting pissed off about it. the USA is in a very privilaged position of having huge land mass, massive population centers and the ability to wage wars around the rest of the world while being practically immune from any negative backlash from those they invade or wage war on, while Europe is basically the frontlines of the aftermath of any involved wars. basically the way I see it, Europe is less warlike because of the USA and them failing is likely to spur the same old war minded mentality the USA currently has, the main question is, where does russia fit into this, China and the future relation with the USA? right now it's kind of a mess but I've seen some people say that Europe is going to become more alined with China and Russia and there is some evidence to back this up but it also depends on how the USA acts. from an outside perspective NATO seems to slowly fall apart due to internal problems and a more isolationist USA.
    2
  1996. 2
  1997. 2
  1998. 2
  1999. 2
  2000. 2
  2001. 2
  2002. 2
  2003. 2
  2004. 2
  2005. 2
  2006. 2
  2007. 2
  2008. 2
  2009. 2
  2010. 2
  2011. 2
  2012. 2
  2013. 2
  2014. 2
  2015. 2
  2016. 2
  2017. 2
  2018. 2
  2019. 2
  2020. 2
  2021. 2
  2022. 2
  2023. 2
  2024. 2
  2025. 2
  2026. 2
  2027. 2
  2028. 2
  2029. 2
  2030. 2
  2031. 2
  2032. 2
  2033. 2
  2034. 2
  2035. 2
  2036. 2
  2037. 2
  2038. 2
  2039. 2
  2040. 2
  2041. 2
  2042. 2
  2043. 2
  2044. 2
  2045. 2
  2046. 2
  2047. 2
  2048. 2
  2049. 2
  2050. 2
  2051. 2
  2052. 2
  2053. 2
  2054. 2
  2055. 2
  2056. 2
  2057. 2
  2058. 2
  2059. 2
  2060. 2
  2061. 2
  2062. 2
  2063. 2
  2064. 2
  2065. 2
  2066. 2
  2067. 2
  2068. 2
  2069. 2
  2070. 2
  2071. 2
  2072. 2
  2073. 2
  2074. 2
  2075. 2
  2076. 2
  2077. 2
  2078. 2
  2079. 2
  2080. 2
  2081. 2
  2082. 2
  2083. 2
  2084. 2
  2085. 2
  2086. 2
  2087. 2
  2088. 2
  2089. to understand how ww3 would be fought, it should be speculated on where and for what reasons it will be fought over? one of the resources that I think we will see more conflicts over, is water but also farmland and rare resources for high end technologies like rare earths, in the case of the USA they don't realy need the rest of the world in terms of resources or economic motivation, they would realy be dragged into a war between other powers like China, Russia or perhaps in the future India, African nations or Europe. I can see China starting a war for domination over asia and wanting to defeat the US navy around them to then expand around them, while securing their sphere of influence. perhaps India will follow the same way, perhaps Russia would want to expand for security related reasons and Europe against Russia or some african or middle eastern hostile force. the tools of war we use today aren't realy that great, they are complex and accurate but not realy effective in a new great power conflict, the nice toys will be used up rather quickly, except perhaps for fighter planes since they are just so agile, fast and effective for hit and run tactics. I think once the tanks and most of the planes are destroyed you will see things like drone swarms, robotic assassins, automatic defence systems, these are cheap to make, can be mass produced and only realy need energy to run if made properly, I expect China would deploy them first and others having to adapt to them. for sure though the idea that ww3 would be fought like ww1 or ww2 is just going to be wrong.
    2
  2090. 2
  2091. 2
  2092. 2
  2093. 2
  2094. 2
  2095. 2
  2096. 2
  2097. 2
  2098. 2
  2099. 2
  2100. 2
  2101. 2
  2102. 2
  2103. 2
  2104. 2
  2105. 2
  2106. 2
  2107. 2
  2108. 2
  2109. 2
  2110. 2
  2111. 2
  2112. 2
  2113. 2
  2114. 2
  2115. 2
  2116. 2
  2117. 2
  2118. 2
  2119. 2
  2120. 2
  2121. 2
  2122. 2
  2123. 2
  2124. 2
  2125. 2
  2126. 2
  2127. 2
  2128. 2
  2129. 2
  2130. 2
  2131. 2
  2132. 2
  2133. 2
  2134. 2
  2135. 2
  2136. 2
  2137. 2
  2138. 2
  2139. 2
  2140. 2
  2141. 2
  2142. 2
  2143. 2
  2144. 2
  2145. 2
  2146. 2
  2147.  @grantlit2196  communism is always forced upon people, subverted into institutions and almost always can only be removed by force and has led to more deaths, starvation and misery then any other ideology in human existence. it's quite bizzar how some people (not you) still defend this ideology and the reason why ''western liberalism'' is no longer working is because it is no longer driven by capitalism, free markets, human rights and sanity but instead is driven by emotions, regulations, corporations, government spending and controle over economics. I partly agree, most other nations can't be democracies or show great resistance against them and it's unrealistic to try and shove them in, better to lead by example not by force i would say. the USA is special in that it's location is perfect, has expanded through war and treaties, has no external enemies and has vast amount of resources and little to no internal conflict like say with the natives (since there aren't many around) ironically the USA form of collonialism was one of the harshest ones around, European colonies were quite mild in comparison which is why decolonalism even happened and it's even more ironic how people remember it as being so horrible yet very few people make the same comparison to the USA and the reason is because the USA is so powerfull and everyone wants to be their friend and not insult them by telling the truth. btw I don't support any form of reparations or whatever, I think that's nonsense but I do take issue with how people seem to demonize European colonialism as the worst thing ever, yet ignore all the other and far more sever ideologies and nations in history, another ones are the ottoman empire, the russian empire, the USSR, South american nations.
    2
  2148. 2
  2149. 2
  2150. 2
  2151. 2
  2152. 2
  2153. 2
  2154. 2
  2155. 2
  2156. 2
  2157. 2
  2158. 2
  2159. 2
  2160. 2
  2161. 2
  2162. 2
  2163. 2
  2164. 2
  2165. 2
  2166. 2
  2167. 2
  2168. 2
  2169. 2
  2170. 2
  2171. 2
  2172. 2
  2173. 2
  2174. 2
  2175. 2
  2176. 2
  2177. 2
  2178. 2
  2179. 2
  2180. 2
  2181. 2
  2182.  @oremfrien  ''Obviously, I disagree with you that Trump was a good president; I rank him among our worse Presidents like Grant or Harding. I believe he led to increased partisanship, massive deregulation of the economy, failed in responding to the greatest American tragedy since World War II, and committed numerous other failings. My hope, as unlikely as it seems for the moment, is that the Elites come to realize that an economy that only does well for them will bring about another Gilded Age with all of the pain and horror that this would lead to.'' I heard Tomas Sowel call Obama the worst president in US history and seeing how his presidency led to the rise of Trump there is some evidence to support this. as for Trump's presidency, I listened to Victor David Hansons views of his presidency and he seemed far more positive towards Trump, Trump was an unusual president and bombastic for sure but his efforts and policies along with his direct means of communication towards the people felt very sobering and connective to his supporters. many people supported his views on the media, big tech, the US roll in wars over seas, his attempts to empower the US economy and standing up to China, even now Biden's policy is a continuation of Trump's policy towards China though perhaps less antagonistic towards US allies like in Europe which is good but at the same time he appears weak and mild towards Russia. Victor David Hanson put Trump's policies as ''wielding a big stick'' now what I find more worrying is how Trump got kicked off Twiter while being the president, if he runs again in 2020 will he be allowed to communicate with the people? if not then perhaps his own platform will be the only way to speak to his fans. now do I think he might win in 2024? well it depends, he lost in 2020 due to the corona pandemic and constant media hunting his ever move for 4 years, so now the media is a bit quiet but their rates are likely to tank the moment the pandemic ends, which if it's not resolved by 2024 will be more ammo for Trump's potential relection run. some people though think it might be best for him to pass the torch to someone els, which is possible but as of right now unlikely to me, who knows? we shall see, overal I disagree with your points but I respect your opinion and perhaps your right and im wrong but im just not sure so il go with what my gut tells me to be true.
    2
  2183.  @oremfrien  interesting, what do you think of the whole ID cards are racist coming from some people on the democratic side? Honestly as a non american looking in how americans do their elections and how the media and politicians talk about certain issues is absolutely bizzar and insane. Here in the Netherlands, people all vote in person, show ID card, their ballot card and cast a vote, that's it. The only exception to this would be people unable to vote for whatever reason and so either allow other people to cast their vote for them in person or mail in vote but always with ID copy and signature, the idea of vote harvesting is bizzar to me. As for the manner in which the USA elections spend so much per party, make ads while at the same time never talking about actual policies is so weird, I mean we all know politicians lie but the USA it's a huge puppet show and everyone just goes along with it, it's bizzar to see. Im not sure if courts in the USA are that great, they seem biased and are influenced if there is an angry mob standing outside, I always thought higher courts had to accept cases that were dismissed in lower courts, here in the Netherlands if your case gets dismissed you can go to higher courts all the way to the European court of justice, most don't because it's very costly and time consuming but in the USA it looks like the Supreme court can decide to take any or no cases at all, so what's the point of having them if they don't weigh in on important questions for the public? Regardless if there is little to no evidence, if the Supreme court is the highest law of the land, them not giving a verdict to me at least seems like a dividing issue for american citizens, I talk to a lot of Trump fans and most of them feel robbed and cheated out of the election which if Proven wrong by the highest court in the land would convince many of them that this is not the case, instead I saw a lot of censorship, cases being thrown out and the same propaganda media that lied for 4 years say "this was the most secure election ever" which is the most gaslighting phrase I've ever heard, not good for anyone trying to unite the country, in my view. Doubt 2024 will be any better, expect more of the same.
    2
  2184. 2
  2185. 2
  2186. 2
  2187. 2
  2188. 2
  2189. 2
  2190. 2
  2191. 2
  2192. 2
  2193. 2
  2194. 2
  2195. 2
  2196. 2
  2197. 2
  2198. 2
  2199. 2
  2200. 2
  2201. 2
  2202. 2
  2203. 2
  2204. 2
  2205. 2
  2206. 2
  2207. 2
  2208. 2
  2209.  @TorianTammas  speaking the language is just a small part of representing the governed, the USA went in thinking they could turn it into a nation state with western values and what not, which was just stupid and some people at the start pointed it out, much more reasonable would have been to make a constitutional monarchy or just a monarchy to begin with and have them rule as your puppet, even then it does not always work out but that would have lasted much longer than the weak government the USA set up. im not too sure how the British and Russians did or their mistakes but in the case of the russians it had a lot to do with the USA backing the rebels and the russians having poor tactics but before Afganistan has been taken over before so it's not impossible just very hard. the USA has a habit of going to war with nations which it knows it can stomp with ease and also has pretty strong allies that it can help to share the burden but the USA has not been engaged in any war with equal forces, the closest is probably the korean war with China or ww2 and even then it was more so the russians doing the fighting than the americans. Today the USA would have a hard time dealing with a war with Russia and/or China and many of the top generals openly say now they can't beat them at the same time alone and would need to arm and prepare their allies for such a conflict which lucky for the USA many alies would probably do but as we see China become stronger economically and Russian being so vital for EU energy sources the US-EU alliance as well as US-Japan-Korean alliance becomes more difficult, remember the USA was able to get and maintain it's current army due to being the world's biggest economy, the USA might lose that to China as well as lose the scientific race if it lags behind. The USA is by no means doomed but me a European citizen looking towards the USA can see the cracks and the disfunctional behaviour in US leadership and ability to project force, if I can see it then so can the US enemies, hell the USA lost a war game with a Swedish sub and had one of it's aircraft carriers hit and a few weeks ago they lost another war game to the British, there is still room for improvement and China does already have some advantages in terms of cybersecurity and hypersonic missles, it's very concerning.
    2
  2210. 2
  2211. 2
  2212. 2
  2213. 2
  2214. 2
  2215. 2
  2216. 2
  2217. 2
  2218. 2
  2219. 2
  2220. 2
  2221. 2
  2222. 2
  2223. 2
  2224. 2
  2225. 2
  2226. 2
  2227. 2
  2228. 2
  2229. 2
  2230. 2
  2231. 2
  2232. 2
  2233. 2
  2234. 2
  2235. 2
  2236. 2
  2237. 2
  2238. 2
  2239. 2
  2240. 2
  2241. 2
  2242. 2
  2243. 2
  2244. 2
  2245. 2
  2246. 2
  2247. 2
  2248. 2
  2249. 2
  2250. 2
  2251. 2
  2252. 2
  2253. 2
  2254. 2
  2255. 2
  2256. 2
  2257. 2
  2258. 2
  2259. 2
  2260. 2
  2261. 2
  2262. 2
  2263. 2
  2264. 2
  2265. 2
  2266. 2
  2267. 2
  2268. 2
  2269. 2
  2270. 2
  2271. 2
  2272. 2
  2273. 2
  2274. 2
  2275. 2
  2276. 2
  2277. 2
  2278. 2
  2279. 2
  2280. 2
  2281. 2
  2282. 2
  2283. 2
  2284. 2
  2285. 2
  2286. 2
  2287. 2
  2288. 2
  2289. 2
  2290. 2
  2291. 2
  2292. 2
  2293. 2
  2294. 2
  2295. 2
  2296. 2
  2297. 2
  2298. 2
  2299. 2
  2300. 2
  2301. 2
  2302. 2
  2303. 2
  2304. 2
  2305. 2
  2306. 2
  2307. 2
  2308. 2
  2309. 2
  2310.  @nonserviam4813  in a way your right but these were not collectvist ideas or forms of government, they were kings, monarchy's mostly, rule by the military. The modern nation state is not exactly this model, it's connected to the people on a deeper level which was not how it used to be, the development of this is also tied to technology and means of communication, what we had in the past was in essence a free for all formed from individual self interest, then expressed into group interest, then organised in different methodes the ones that won out were those more organized, with better resources, people, food and code of law, collective groups have existed for millenia for sure but they weren't total collective civilizations, the closest I can think of would be the Spartans which did rule like a totalitarian state. But you are correct, modern views of individualism is rather new, every individual is part of a group and has to act in some group effort to maintain their individual freedoms and power, working a job is an example of this, you work for a collective but gain money which you can spend for your individual choices, both individual and collective realities exist at once, the issue is how to balance these things in the optimal manner and these things change as technology, culture, people, nations and environments change, that's also why things like fascism or national socialism can't maintain their fanaticism forever, it's a temporal state of high energy movement within society which then "cools off" over time, you see the same reaction though much less intense in the formations of new countries, religions, cultural movements, technological revolutions or political revolutions.
    2
  2311. 2
  2312. 2
  2313. 2
  2314. 2
  2315. 2
  2316. 2
  2317. 2
  2318. 2
  2319. 2
  2320. 2
  2321. 2
  2322. 2
  2323. 2
  2324. 2
  2325. 2
  2326. 2
  2327. 2
  2328. 2
  2329. 2
  2330. 2
  2331. 2
  2332. 2
  2333. 2
  2334. 2
  2335. 2
  2336. 2
  2337. 2
  2338. 2
  2339. 2
  2340. 2
  2341. 2
  2342. 2
  2343. 2
  2344. 2
  2345. 2
  2346. 2
  2347. 2
  2348. 2
  2349. 2
  2350. 2
  2351. 2
  2352. 2
  2353. this is barbarism to the extreem degree and it often feels like the media, big tech companies and western governments all downplay, lie and excuse this insane barbaric act of violence which has happened over and over and over again with no end in sight. and we are told over and over again to be tolorant, to only act like it's just a few bad apples, like it's not a constant and consistant patern of behavior with the current status quo and now again, what sould be done to stop this? because many on the so called ''far right'' would love to act harsher towards the demografics that cause these kinds of attacks and the center parties are giving them the future on a silver plater if they keep allowing and tolorating these attacks. the worst part at this point is not even that it happens, horrible things and extreem violence happens once every few years from all religions and people's but this is consistant, every year and we aren't allowed to be honest about it or act in ways that would actualy reduce these attacks and some people even defend the killer! saying they are tempted to act like this because of our behavior! are you kidding me! it's this behavior by most of the left wing, the center political parties, the media and the big tech companies that realy demoralize me, that realy paint a picture of the future of Europe at this point, one of fear, death and misery because we aren't allowed to ''offende'' the privilaged class and for all those who are of the specific religion that shall not be named that are decent, western people, aren't you sick of it by now? don't you want to be viewed as normal citizens and not watched like you could be the next one to go crazy like this?
    2
  2354. 2
  2355. 2
  2356. 2
  2357. 2
  2358. 2
  2359. 2
  2360. 2
  2361. 2
  2362. 2
  2363. 2
  2364. 2
  2365. 2
  2366. 2
  2367. 2
  2368. 2
  2369. 2
  2370. 2
  2371. 2
  2372. 2
  2373. 2
  2374. 2
  2375. 2
  2376. 2
  2377. 2
  2378. 2
  2379. 2
  2380. 2
  2381. 2
  2382. 2
  2383. 2
  2384. 2
  2385. 2
  2386. 2
  2387. 2
  2388. 2
  2389. 2
  2390. 2
  2391. 2
  2392. 2
  2393. 2
  2394. 2
  2395. 2
  2396. 2
  2397. 2
  2398. 2
  2399. 2
  2400. 2
  2401. 2
  2402. 2
  2403. 2
  2404. 2
  2405. 2
  2406. 2
  2407. 2
  2408. 2
  2409. 2
  2410. 2
  2411. 2
  2412. 2
  2413. 2
  2414. 2
  2415. 2
  2416. 2
  2417. 2
  2418. 2
  2419. 2
  2420. 2
  2421. 2
  2422. 2
  2423. 2
  2424. 2
  2425. 2
  2426. 2
  2427. 2
  2428. 2
  2429. 2
  2430. 2
  2431. 2
  2432. 2
  2433. 2
  2434. 2
  2435. 2
  2436. 2
  2437. 2
  2438. 2
  2439. 2
  2440. 2
  2441. 2
  2442. 2
  2443. 2
  2444. 2
  2445. 2
  2446. 2
  2447. 2
  2448. 2
  2449. 2
  2450. 2
  2451. 2
  2452. 2
  2453. 2
  2454. 2
  2455. 2
  2456. 2
  2457. 2
  2458. 2
  2459. 2
  2460. 2
  2461. 2
  2462. 2
  2463. 2
  2464.  @ShamanMcLamie  I disagree, that's the narrative americans want, it is in their national interest to keep Russia and Europe divided, Russia long term has more to offer Europe than the USA, which is why the USA needs to keep the rivalry alive, further Russia believes it can still remain a super power on it's own but is failing to do so, more so because of economics than it's impressive military, a EU-Russian alliance or Russia becoming part of the EU is a nightmare for both the USA and China, though more so for the USA since it would then be unable to justify it's NATO alliance and military bases. It is true that the USA is more like western Europe in terms of culture and values but that does not matter in geo-politics. The USA will attempt to block any chance for Russia to westernize and become closer to Europe and will fund seperatist group within Russia to break it apart if it does. I am well aware of how the USA threatens, uses sanctions, trade wars, invasions or covert means to get what they want, which is exactly why it enjoys the status quo and keeping nations divided within NATO frame work, as long as they are apart, disunited and have no greater goals than their national interests, the USA will remain the world's sole super power, the threat of China however has shown that era is slowly coming to an end and as Europe becomes presured by both the USA, China, Russia and the problems in the middle-east and Africa, they will have no choice but to create a European federation and seek complete independence from the USA first, dealing with Russia second and maintaining it's new position between China and the USA third. It's that or cease to exist and be an even more directly vazal playground for Russia, China and the USA, the people know it, the leaders know it, the USA elites know it, China knows it and Russia knows it, we are moving towards a multipolar world, no more sole superpowers anymore.
    2
  2465. 2
  2466. 2
  2467. 2
  2468. 2
  2469. 2
  2470. 2
  2471. 2
  2472. 2
  2473. 2
  2474. 2
  2475. 2
  2476. 2
  2477. 2
  2478. 1
  2479. 1
  2480. 1
  2481. 1
  2482. 1
  2483. 1
  2484. 1
  2485. 1
  2486. 1
  2487. 1
  2488. 1
  2489. 1
  2490. 1
  2491. 1
  2492. 1
  2493. 1
  2494. 1
  2495. 1
  2496. 1
  2497. 1
  2498. 1
  2499. 1
  2500. 1
  2501. 1
  2502. 1
  2503. 1
  2504. 1
  2505. 1
  2506. 1
  2507. 1
  2508. 1
  2509. 1
  2510. 1
  2511. 1
  2512. 1
  2513. 1
  2514. 1
  2515. 1
  2516. 1
  2517. 1
  2518. 1
  2519. 1
  2520. 1
  2521. 1
  2522. 1
  2523. 1
  2524. 1
  2525. 1
  2526. 1
  2527. 1
  2528. 1
  2529. 1
  2530. 1
  2531. 1
  2532. 1
  2533. 1
  2534. 1
  2535. 1
  2536. 1
  2537. 1
  2538. 1
  2539. 1
  2540. 1
  2541. 1
  2542. 1
  2543. 1
  2544. 1
  2545. 1
  2546. 1
  2547. 1
  2548. 1
  2549.  @definitelynotacheater  of course not, the teachers in Turkey talk about how glorieus the Ottoman empire was and how islam is part of their culture, not in France. Turkey has plenty of radicals and islamists only difference is they tend to target minority groups rather than majority groups like in Europe. most of Turkey is islamic and secular that´s their brand so to speak but there are plenty of clashes between the seculare and islamic rules, Erdogan however is also a very militaristic and orderly type of dictator so he does not want any internal problems, the turkish secret service also deals with potential problems far more harshly than we do in the west. I feel like you aren´t being honest and realistic the way things are going in turkey and how more islamic they have become since the days of Attaturk, veils have come back, Erdogan himself is more of a promoter of the traditional family rolls and involved with wars in islamic nations of the middle east and pan-turkish idealism in places like Azerbaijan, Erdogan himself has also said he won't continue trying to get into the EU if Turkey is not in by 2024 I believe, overal the situation has become more hostile towards Turkey and from Turkey and we are now also seeing multiple crackdowns on radicals in places like France and I'm willing to bet Erdogan is not too happy with that. hell here in the Netherlands we even have an islamic party which is mostly funded by Turkey, in the people's tongue it's nicknamed ''the long arm of Erdogan'' and it's easy to see why.
    1
  2550. 1
  2551. 1
  2552. 1
  2553. 1
  2554.  @definitelynotacheater  ''Erdogan said Turkey’s application to EU continues and a few months ago prior to that he said ‘We saw Turkey’s future in Europe’, he is into the West too as I said. But for me, I dont think Turkey will ever get into the EU.'' Turkey getting into the EU has major problems for many reasons, the major problem is not that Turkey is majority muslim, nor that Turkey is somehow less authoritarian compared to other nations that already are in the EU, the major 2 reasons I would say why Turkey can't/won't be allowed into the EU is because of the schengen agreement and because Turkey's economic and demografic influence could change the balans of power within the EU structure. the schengen area or free movement of people within the block is problematic because then many turkish people could move to the west and we would have a border with unstable nations like Syria, Iraq, Georgia and close to other potential conflict zones, right now Turkey is a buffer between those nations and you can see that the EU wants to keep it that way which Erdogan also tries to exploit by threatening to use refugees within Turkey as some sort of biological weapon. the other reason as mention is the EU is currently run by Germany-France-Netherlands-Italy and somewhat Poland, allowing Turkey in would disrupt this balance of power which is already unstable, if turkey were to join the EU, Poland would be upset, Germany and France would be weaker, Italy and Netherlands would also be upset to a degree, overal it would make the EU stronger but internally it would be much more unstable which is something they can't allow right now.
    1
  2555. 1
  2556. ​ @definitelynotacheater  ''8) Lastly, I know you guys have a negative view about us because of Turks in Germany/Netherlands/France etc but majority of them come from the eastern rural regions and even us make of them calling names like ‘alamancı’ . They do not represent us. I know there are many good respectful Turks too but they dont represent us either. Every indivual represent themselves. Kick foreigners who doesnt respect the country’s rules and refuse to adapt. And dont let islamists get power. Seriously if the videos I saw on youtube is real, number of islamists in Europe is really concerning. Just a few days ago Chechens and Kurds in France were killing each other and it looked like a civil warzone from M.E instead of France. Peace ✌🏻'' yes most people have negative views on turks and muslims in general due to terrorism and hostility by Erdogan and saudi organisations, though Turks are more respected than many other groups. the ironic thing is that many nationalists, conservatives faced more hostility from their own native people and from left wing groups than they did from pro islamist groups, we warned them about these groups since early 2000s and 2010s and we were all attacked by the esablishment and media as ''radicals'' and ''far right'' now skip to 2021 and suddenly most things considered ''far right'' in the early 2000s is now mainstream political policy, if they had listened to us along with most of the public a lot of bloodshed and humiliation would not have happened and many of the more hostile policies towards islamist and islamic populations would not have been nessisary, hell I doubt you even would have had Brexit so to say the EU, Merkel and others failed to see this coming would be an understatment. France is one of the worst places right now in Europe, same with Belgium, the UK, Germany and Sweden, we also have many of these types of problems in the Netherlands but not nearly as the same degree as other nations. if I pick the one who is messing up the most I think it would be the UK, since Sweden is very small in terms of population, Germany while bad still has some hardline police, France is openly resisting now but the UK has multiple problems, a totalitarian government i would say and almost no proper resistance towards it, it's fully abandoned it's senses on top of Brexit being problematic for them, I would not be suprised if Scotland and Northern ireland leave the union, that's how bad it's getting there.
    1
  2557. 1
  2558. 1
  2559. 1
  2560. 1
  2561. 1
  2562. 1
  2563. 1
  2564. 1
  2565. 1
  2566. 1
  2567. 1
  2568. 1
  2569. 1
  2570. 1
  2571. 1
  2572. 1
  2573. 1
  2574. 1
  2575. 1
  2576. 1
  2577. 1
  2578. 1
  2579. 1
  2580. 1
  2581. 1
  2582. 1
  2583. 1
  2584. 1
  2585. 1
  2586. 1
  2587. 1
  2588. 1
  2589. 1
  2590. 1
  2591. 1
  2592. 1
  2593. 1
  2594. 1
  2595. 1
  2596. 1
  2597. 1
  2598. 1
  2599. 1
  2600. 1
  2601. 1
  2602. 1
  2603. 1
  2604. 1
  2605. 1
  2606. 1
  2607. 1
  2608. 1
  2609. 1
  2610. 1
  2611. 1
  2612. 1
  2613. 1
  2614. 1
  2615. 1
  2616. 1
  2617. 1
  2618. 1
  2619. 1
  2620. 1
  2621. 1
  2622. 1
  2623. 1
  2624. 1
  2625. 1
  2626. 1
  2627. 1
  2628. 1
  2629. 1
  2630. 1
  2631. 1
  2632. 1
  2633. 1
  2634. 1
  2635. 1
  2636. 1
  2637. 1
  2638. 1
  2639. 1
  2640. 1
  2641. 1
  2642. 1
  2643. 1
  2644. 1
  2645. 1
  2646. 1
  2647. 1
  2648. 1
  2649. 1
  2650. 1
  2651. 1
  2652. 1
  2653. 1
  2654. 1
  2655. 1
  2656. 1
  2657. 1
  2658. 1
  2659. 1
  2660. 1
  2661. 1
  2662. 1
  2663. 1
  2664. 1
  2665. 1
  2666. 1
  2667. 1
  2668. 1
  2669. 1
  2670. 1
  2671. 1
  2672. 1
  2673. 1
  2674. 1
  2675. 1
  2676. 1
  2677. 1
  2678. 1
  2679. 1
  2680. 1
  2681. 1
  2682. 1
  2683. 1
  2684. 1
  2685. 1
  2686. 1
  2687. 1
  2688. 1
  2689. 1
  2690. 1
  2691. 1
  2692. 1
  2693. 1
  2694. 1
  2695. 1
  2696. 1
  2697. 1
  2698. 1
  2699. 1
  2700. 1
  2701. 1
  2702. 1
  2703. 1
  2704. 1
  2705. 1
  2706. 1
  2707. 1
  2708. 1
  2709. 1
  2710. 1
  2711. 1
  2712. 1
  2713. 1
  2714. 1
  2715. 1
  2716. 1
  2717. 1
  2718. 1
  2719. 1
  2720. 1
  2721. 1
  2722. 1
  2723. 1
  2724. 1
  2725. 1
  2726. 1
  2727. 1
  2728. 1
  2729. 1
  2730. 1
  2731. 1
  2732. 1
  2733. 1
  2734. 1
  2735. 1
  2736. I agree war is horrible but it's also inevitable and frankly Russia is trying to reclaim it's position in the world that it's just never going to get back again, same with the British empire, the French empire, the German Empire or any of the other former great empires in Europe and while most nations understand this reality and try and band together to become something different that could actually become as strong if not stronger as those old empires of old, only Russia wants to reclaim it's former glory of the soviet days, they aren't acting out of fear of NATO expansion, they are acting out of a sense of wanting to bring back the good old days, the days when Russia was seen as a powerfull state, a superpower on the world stage, it's exactly the same mentality the nazi's had in Germany after the defeat of the German empire in ww1 and history shows us this has never worked, you might get something back, you might get away with some minor things but on a grand scale it's only hurting your real chances at a better future. right now things are slowly starting to escalate, if/when Ukraine falls to Russia, what then? we all go back to trading oil and gas? no more sanctions? I don't think so, what's Russia going to do then? well if they can't get any economic growth in trade why not go even further and expand elsewhere? why not Kazakstan? why not Finland? why not Sweden? why not Mongolia? why not the Stan nations? a line has been crossed and nothing can uncross it, the best thing that can happen now is Putin geting a heart attack or be shot and any new leader settles with minor gains and tries to make amends with Ukraine, it's not much, it's not a great victory but also not a defeat and perhaps from there these ideas within Russia can calm down and they might realise that what they are doing now just makes them puppets to China.
    1
  2737. 1
  2738. 1
  2739. 1
  2740. 1
  2741. 1
  2742. 1
  2743. 1
  2744. 1
  2745. 1
  2746. 1
  2747. 1
  2748. 1
  2749. 1
  2750. 1
  2751. 1
  2752. 1
  2753. 1
  2754. 1
  2755. 1
  2756. 1
  2757. 1
  2758. 1
  2759. 1
  2760. 1
  2761. 1
  2762. 1
  2763. 1
  2764. 1
  2765. 1
  2766. 1
  2767. 1
  2768. 1
  2769. 1
  2770. 1
  2771. 1
  2772. 1
  2773. I think your wrong stxy, your right on a few things but overal I think this is a poorly analisis of the Chinese economy. First the pandemic has hit the world globaly, everyone is likely to face a downturn in economic growth, which is exactly why the Chinese government has made no growth projection because the damage being global can't be measured properly. Secondly the Chinese government has been buying, bribing and influencing major nations and major economies for decades that influence does not suddenly vanish into thin air, might be reduced but the second biggest economy in the world does not just suddenly become a paper dragon just because it has a bad economic season. Third, the USA like you yourself just sayd has major problems with it's local leadership, the media, the major corporations, basicaly everyone except Trump is distracted, unfocused and being irrational towards global issues which include China, your likely to see 4 more years of Trump fighting the good fight but after that someone has to pick it up, China does not have these instabilities because they have a very strong identity and Unity of purpose. Hell Europe as disfunctional as it is has opened up it's markets largely, those Chinese products will likely come here and if realy cheap, africa, the markets for them will become open. All that being sayd the USA has the oppertunity right now to gain more allies, expose China for the totalitarian dictatorship it is, win over nations like India which Trump has done but it has largely abandoned africa, wants war with Iran and has ignored Russia, it needs to step up it's game internationaly and kill this dragon in it's crib before it can fly, after that there is no stopping it, perhaps it's already to late but you can at least try, don't underestamate China, it's foolish.
    1
  2774. 1
  2775. 1
  2776. 1
  2777. 1
  2778. 1
  2779. 1
  2780. 1
  2781. 1
  2782. 1
  2783. 1
  2784. 1
  2785. 1
  2786. 1
  2787. 1
  2788. 1
  2789. 1
  2790. 1
  2791. 1
  2792. 1
  2793. 1
  2794. 1
  2795. 1
  2796. 1
  2797.  @CaptainGrimes1  well it's funny you would mention after ww2 because after ww2 you had a lot of ethnic cleansing of germans (on wikipedia they call it ''explusion of germans'' but it was clearly ethnic cleansing, about half a million people died) Which in part helped prevent any sort of reunification of those lands to German, that's just how it works, same happened after the Greek - Turkish war, likewise Russia tried to do the same to much of the USSR, esspecially in Ukraine, that's why you see about 90% of russian people/culture in cremea and about 40-60% cultural ties to Russia in eastern Ukraine. as for Ukraine today, many people do seem willing to fight, I believe Caspian report did a good report on the amount of people that would be willing to fight and how much Russian troops would be needed to hold them down it's quite a lot. the thing with insurgencies is you don't really need many of them to cause a lot of trouble and damage for the oppressing forces, just minor things can hurt for a very long time, again with Afghanistan you can see how even after 20 years occupation, from the USA, Billions spend it all fell apart in a few weeks after they left, now the conditions aren't the same for sure, the people aren't the same for sure but there a lot of people who live there, Russia is not that powerfull, it's surounded by other more powerfull nations willing to help Ukraine or give supplies to the insurgencies if it came to that, so in many ways the odds are more in their favour than the Taliban was in Afghanistan.
    1
  2798. 1
  2799. 1
  2800. 1
  2801. 1
  2802. 1
  2803. 1
  2804. I feel like people are resentfull towards the USA exactly because of the americanization of their nations, both western and non-western through it's cultural, economic, political and military organisations and the fact that many nations need to be on the US good side because of the former cold war which divided the world into two sides. both the radical leftist and radical right agree on a few things: - they despise the USA/Western nations because of a personal loss towards them, be it identity, culture or religion - the current world order is grinding the nations of the world down, no economic prospects, while they get exploited or reduced to consumer cultures. - a desire to return/reinvent/destroy the current orders that rule their lives exists in both groups so as to create a new order that would be to their benefit and those they care about - a understanding that the new rising powers are going to replace them or seek to influence their way of life in what little way they still matter to them I personaly dislike the USA not for it's culture or technology but military and economical hegemony which it does defend through military and ideological conformity, any nation or people that seeks to threaten them will be adressed, attacked or get economic sanctions, it makes it that the USA is big enough to survive on it's own, yet connected enough and enforcing it's will that all have to work within it's economic and military system and ironically any nation that seeks to break away from it's current sphere would have to get in league with new rising powers (like China) or attempt to create their own (the EU, AU, Euroasian union) and as we have seen most of these organisations lack a strong unified body to enforce it's collective interest. I think we are moving towards a multipolar world, based on continentalism, all it realy takes is a major disaster (bigger than corona virus though im not sure) to justify it's proper enforcement when the US system no longer can be maintained, we've seen this happen throughout history and the USA is no exception, remember that during the existence of the USA it has not been forced to fight any existential threats to it's power yet, perhaps the USSR but that was more in defence of other nations and their new world order rather than their national existence.
    1
  2805. 1
  2806. 1
  2807. 1
  2808. 1
  2809. 1
  2810. 1
  2811. 1
  2812. 1
  2813. 1
  2814. 1
  2815. 1
  2816. I do think totalitarianism in the future is almost inevitable, the question I think we should ask is "has technology advanced to such a degree to make totalitarianism more or less likely?" From my perspective I would say, yes technology has advanced in such a way that totalitarianism is much more likely now, we can see the example of this in China but go even beyond that and observe it being slowly implemented in western nations, the media also shows us how easy it is to manipulate the masses, we see the corruption of education (a trait very common in totalitarian regimes) and we see the spread of what I would call "proto-totalitarian ideologies" in the form of sjw's, third wave feminism, racial identity politics, radical environmentalism, racial nationalism, neo-fascism, neo-communism, religeus extremism, transhumanism and multicultralism, each of these ideologies have either a utopian vision or a group of fanatical followers, sometimes both. Each has sinners who are meant to be dehumanized, segregated and harmed for the good of the ideology, often turning friends, family and individuals against eachother. The only solution to these movements the way I see it, is the solving of their inherent triggers and an empowering of the individual, since this is not possible to do without compremise I fear the powers that be and people below are going to either supress these movements with no representation of their cases or they are going to ignore them which can then thrive in a moment of crisis and trust me the crisis's are coming, either through global warming, aging, demografic collapse, technology or the spread of mental illness due to things such as social media and incompetent leadership. This is the great filter, we either reinvent our world on a democratic and enlightened manner or the masses and true believers of the world will do it for us.
    1
  2817. 1
  2818. 1
  2819. 1
  2820. 1
  2821. 1
  2822. 1
  2823. 1
  2824. 1
  2825. 1
  2826. 1
  2827. 1
  2828. 1
  2829. 1
  2830. 1
  2831. 1
  2832. 1
  2833. 1
  2834. 1
  2835. 1
  2836. 1
  2837. 1
  2838. 1
  2839. 1
  2840. 1
  2841. 1
  2842. 1
  2843. 1
  2844. 1
  2845. 1
  2846. 1
  2847. 1
  2848. 1
  2849. 1
  2850. 1
  2851. 1
  2852. 1
  2853. 1
  2854. ​ Pan Indo-Europeanist, agnostic, Aryan supremacist  Ataturk did a lot of good for Turkey, tried to turn it into a more western style nation, it's been a while since I've seen his videos (three parts now i think) but I remember Kraut saying how bad militarism was but then praises Turkey's militarism in how they retook a bunch of land they lost while also defeating the Greeks (who they tried to genocide from the rest of Anatolia btw) and ending with the UN doing a population transfer which by today's standards would be considered ethnic cleansing. it's not the actions that bothers me much, it is the hypocrisy of first saying militarism is bad, then the greeks try and expand into turkey after you know what in ww1, then praising the turks for kicking out the greeks that were left over and saying how stupid it was for greeks to try and gain more lands, it's just so weird and dishonest, esspecialy when he then looks down on the nationalism that inspired it but also praising the same additude by the turks. basically when western powers no matter what happened before to them act nationalistic it's bad, barbaric and stupid but when Turkey does it, it's smart, heroic and good and he does this over and over again in all his video's. hell he even takes the time during his video's to make 2 second cut jokes about certain semi nationalistic channels on youtube and reducing their arguments to one sentence ideas which is very dishonest and kinda cowardly, if you don't like a certain channel make a proper video about it and why.
    1
  2855. 1
  2856. 1
  2857. 1
  2858. 1
  2859. 1
  2860. 1
  2861. 1
  2862. 1
  2863. 1
  2864. 1
  2865. 1
  2866. 1
  2867.  @Sibert_  except it´s not richer, has poorer infrastructure and is overal less developed compared to the Netherlands, your splitting hairs talking population density, area of homes being used and other small insignificant details just to act angry and frustrated that someone in the Netherlands thinks it might be a good idea to split Belgium between Wallonia and Flanders and for some reason this makes you very mad for some reason. btw what does my username have to do with anything? you so mad you want to try and intimidate me or something? because it's not realy working. Belgium has a lot of problems and most Dutch people would not even want to take Belgium or even just Flanders so I don't get why you so upset? in fact Flanders joining the Netherlands is more of a benefit to Flanders than it is to the Netherlands, it's only that in terms of housing prices, new ways to invest in and prestige of expanding both territories to be more powerfull as a whole is a good deal in my opinion. I'm sorry that you feel like im looking down on Belgium, im not, it's a nice country but it's also very divided between it's 3 parlements and regions with a pretty unstable government and we already have cross country cooporation so what's so wrong with going further? I don't get the anger, I feel like im just calm and relaxed saying how I''ve experienced the country and what it looks like and you act like I've insulted your mother or something, relax bro no need for this level of anger for an opinion.
    1
  2868. 1
  2869. 1
  2870. 1
  2871. 1
  2872. 1
  2873. 1
  2874. 1
  2875. 1
  2876. 1
  2877. 1
  2878. 1
  2879. 1
  2880. 1
  2881. 1
  2882. 1
  2883. 1
  2884. 1
  2885. 1
  2886. 1
  2887. 1
  2888. 1
  2889. 1
  2890. 1
  2891. 1
  2892. 1
  2893. 1
  2894. 1
  2895. 1
  2896. 1
  2897. 1
  2898. 1
  2899. 1
  2900. 1
  2901. 1
  2902. 1
  2903. 1
  2904. 1
  2905. 1
  2906. 1
  2907. 1
  2908. 1
  2909. 1
  2910. 1
  2911. 1
  2912. 1
  2913. 1
  2914. 1
  2915. 1
  2916. 1
  2917. 1
  2918. 1
  2919. 1
  2920. 1
  2921. 1
  2922. 1
  2923. 1
  2924. 1
  2925. 1
  2926.  @swampdonkey1567  I know Texas and Vermont have some constitutional loophole to have the right to leave the union, most states don't and even those that do have that right would be suicidal if they think the federal government is just going to stand for it, in the case of texas they joined the confederates but after the civil they were kept in the union. with say the EU which is like a semi federal/confederate system, member states have the right to leave the union, not in the USA where a state first has to have that right (few states have it) and then have to be allowed to leave by I believe a majority of the other states, something quite like this happened in the UK during the troubles, when irish nationalists wanted a path to reunification with northern ireland, after a lot of terrorism and a plot to kill the PM of the UK the UK signed the Bellfast agreement meaning they would allow a refurendum on irish unification, likewise if the USA as a whole is corrupt with it's federal government elites, crony actions and culture becomes something hostile to it's state members then seeking independence becomes much more likely and since there is no real path for most states to do so it only really leaves violence as a means of progressing it further. the USA has changed a lot since it's creation and not always for the better, looking at the trends I can't help but feel that people are losing faith in it, it could change of course but I don't think that's likely unless something really gets them fired up.
    1
  2927. 1
  2928. 1
  2929. 1
  2930. 1
  2931. 1
  2932. 1
  2933. 1
  2934. 1
  2935. 1
  2936. 1
  2937. 1
  2938. 1
  2939. 1
  2940. 1
  2941. 1
  2942. 1
  2943. 1
  2944. 1
  2945. 1
  2946. 1
  2947. 1
  2948. 1
  2949. 1
  2950. 1
  2951. 1
  2952. 1
  2953. 1
  2954. 1
  2955. 1
  2956. 1
  2957. 1
  2958. 1
  2959. 1
  2960. 1
  2961. 1
  2962. 1
  2963. 1
  2964. 1
  2965. 1
  2966. 1
  2967. 1
  2968. 1
  2969. 1
  2970. 1
  2971. 1
  2972. 1
  2973. 1
  2974. 1
  2975. 1
  2976. 1
  2977. 1
  2978. 1
  2979. 1
  2980. 1
  2981. 1
  2982. 1
  2983. 1
  2984. 1
  2985. 1
  2986. 1
  2987. 1
  2988.  @b4u334  your not making an honest and objective analisis of a real potential total war set up between the US and China, you are correct in seeing the defensive geopgraphy of the USA but you aren't looking the same way at China's or their level of technological advancement. China has airplanes with the same level of US ones and they are expanding on every front as well, if a war broke out now the USA would win but look at it long term and consider where the USA will be within 10-20 years, China can innovate in ways which are literally illigale in the USA and has the potential to engage in next level forms of warfare of which the USA is not prepared for. Im not saying this as a childish "bro China could kick the USA's ass" but more as a warning that I don't think the USA is fully prepared or able to see the potential outcomes. I do think the USA can't be invaded by China, partly because it's hard but more so because there is nothing to gain through it, there is no land to annex, no spoils to be had, the way China wins is by removing US allies in the region, so Japan, Korea, Vietnam, India, Taiwan and wild card Russia, there realy is no just US vs China and in China's sphere they have the advantage. China would have to make war to costly for the USA while giving the american public an alternative that's way more tempting. The US government under Biden esspecialy is not going to be tough on China and is going to undermine their own position, China is just buying their time and the USA has decided to abandon much of the innovation they had before while China is attempting to build their own high tech development sector and already they dominate upcoming markets, AI, quantum computing, 5g, so on. The biggest thing the USA has got going for them is they have become an oil exporter and have the potential to outgrow the Chinese economy as their population shrinks but it will be the US allies that will help contain China the most, if you lose them, you lose the war or rather you will give what China needs to become the next super power. As for ww2, USA got late into the war and supplied most other nations for the main fighting, they were the ones fighting the jappanese the most, it never realy was a threat to the USA, just to US expansion and jappanese expansionism, same now with China but much worse than during ww2, hell soviet union was not as strong as China is today in my opinion.
    1
  2989.  @b4u334  like I said nobody wants to invade the US mainland because it's not worth investing in, there are nations that can do it like China, the issue is they need to get rid of the US fleet and allies first but if they can land there then they could take over, it's just that no sane nation would try and do it because it's not worth it, the natural barriers and way the USA is positioned as well as their rather weak allies around them means no-one can directly attack them unlike most of the rest of the world's countries. as for Biden, Im not sure what his plans or what the department of treasury, commerce and defence are planning, if you know any sites where i can read up on that I be happy to but so far very little seems to be reported on and most of the ''news'' channels these days aren't exactly trustworthy to report on such things, as for Biden himself he does not seem very hard on China at all and seems dead set on erasing all of Trumps policies so why would I assume he's going to be tough on China? as for Innovation, the USA has been going down on many of it's former great advancements and as a political and cultural entity seems to be going down as well, the reason why the US is an oil exporter is because they have oil and the technology to extract it, that's not proper innovation, innovation is creating new methods of extracting or using new forms of energy which the USA is not investing in at all, while China is. KT ratio for the USA is easy when all your enemies are small nations and aren't that impressive, during the korean war the USA suffered a lot of hardships against the north korean's and chinese some of which had better tanks and more soldiers then the USA had, at one point they were driven back to a small piece of the country and only because of bold strategy of Douglas Mcarther were they able to hold and push back due to continued air strikes and support, those supply lines are easy to maintain when Japan is your ally next to it. if the USA were to go into a ground war with China, Iran or Russia things will be a lot harder for them, if they did not have the allies with supplies to maintain their armies they would shatter over time, it's the US manpower, industrial power and ability to gain allies to maintain those that make them almost impossible to beat, they only realy lost vietnam because the goals of the war were silly and unfocused and the people at home got sick of the war, the whole vietcon strategy was based around terror and injury rather then killing and it worked. I think americans are falling into the arrogance trap of having few enemies to match their power, so they assume China is the same, regardless even of China the rest of the world is changing and the world is moving towards a multipolar world and in the meantime the USA has taken all the steps to ensure and speed up this process, US politics are a joke, their society is polorized (as is the west in general) I don't believe they will maintain their sole super power status the way they continue right now, they are becoming the byzantine empire in a way.
    1
  2990. ​ @b4u334  that seems fair, well yeah if it's a 1 on 1 I don't think any one currently existing country could invade the USA, the USA has so many major benefits that most other nations fought world wars to even get close to and then failing because the USA beat them to it 200 years sooner, combined with the weak other countries in the region, I mean it's kinda amasing how south america is nothing compared to the USA and is just filled with cartels, socialism and instability. and yes nothing unites quite like a common enemy which is why india, south korea and japan are such strong US allies because each of them knows they would be pretty much fucked without either eachothers help and/or the USA's support and this is also what helps the USA maintain their superpower status, before ww1 and ww2 the USA did not have nor desired to march all over the world to maintain a global super power, im just a bit frustrated that they claim they do it for the good of humanity or ''freedom'' while it's realy to maintain their global order and im not saying it's bad that they do when you look at the alternatives, it's just that they forget how they got there and that there are others who would wish to one day replace them in part or in full and that at some point the USA has to realise that and let go of some parts, I for one wish Europe would take a bigger part in world issues rather then sit on our asses getting wellfare programs and limiting our military. as for China, they are realy trying to go back on their pre-communist era glory days, they are basically like national socialist germany, superiority complex, advanced technology, desire to rule and enslave others, the whole genocide thing, where as the USA seems more like the roman republic moving towards the empire or it might already be there and is now transitioning to a more byzantine empire style by abandoning their former places like the middle-east and perhaps Europe at some point. I think the collapse of Russia will be the major turning point in world history as it does not seem likely to be maintained in it's current form and it can't realy intergrate into the west or asia sphere's so it will split, that's what I expect at least and at that point lots of other things will start to move on the world stage, could be wrong but that's how I see things moving forward. I don't like Biden, I don't trust him, I also don't think he's good for the USA as a country, nor good for it's allies but if I see him or the people around him do a good job il complement him I just don't expect it, it looks like the end of the republic.
    1
  2991. 1
  2992. 1
  2993. 1
  2994. 1
  2995. 1
  2996. 1
  2997. 1
  2998. 1
  2999. 1
  3000. 1
  3001. 1
  3002. 1
  3003. 1
  3004. 1
  3005. 1
  3006. 1
  3007. 1
  3008. 1
  3009. 1
  3010. 1
  3011. 1
  3012. 1
  3013. 1
  3014. 1
  3015. 1
  3016. 1
  3017. 1
  3018. 1
  3019. 1
  3020. 1
  3021. 1
  3022. 1
  3023. 1
  3024. 1
  3025. 1
  3026. 1
  3027. 1
  3028. 1
  3029.  k bw  if you have an aging population and declining birthrates the last thing you would consider a solution is immigration, it's not even a solution it's just giving up and allowing others to reap the rewards that were done by said generations. Most of western Europe has not benefited from immigration, the USA has been in decline for many years now partly because of immigration, while nations like Israel, China, South Korea, Turkey, Poland and Ireland have all prospered and developed more economically and technologically, why? Because what makes an economy good is not immigration but the conditions of both capitalism and state regulations of said economy, immigration can be a benefit but only if the economic policies reflect the interests of the nation. Immigrants want to move to nations with good economic prospects because it is good for them not nessisary for the society to take them. Having a large influx of low skilled labor like in the USA is not a major benefit, the influx however of highly skilled labor is a benefit but this is not the majority of immigration nor is it a benefit, there is also the limitations of a nation to even have immigration, a nation like Japan is already very densly populated, immigration to their country would not add to their economy it would simply delay an aging population by presenting bigger problems for the future without solving the general issue, a nation like the USA has a lot of space and wealth to deal with these burdening economic migrants. The ideal country or immigration policy is more like something like China or India where immigration is mostly internally, the growth rates are beyond replacement level and immigration is mostly if not only of high skilled labor that actually benefits the nation. The age of endless population growth via immigration = prosperity is a 20th century view point that no longer works in the modern era, the policy of low immigration, highly skilled immigration, ease to assimulate and stable growth rates and automation are the keys to the future, aging population is not an excuses because this process happens in all industrial economies and those same migrants are going to age as well and destroying native cultures is not going to add to the society, just look at Brazil, high corruption, middle income trap, cartels, that's not the economy of the future.
    1
  3030. ​ k bw  I don't think you have a proper grasp on how economics works and have a very outdated leftwing view of how people assimulate to a culture and how immigration harms and benefits society. job losses due to not having students make very little sense since students have to first set those companies up and many of them will fail, what you most likely mean is capital and intelectual value which is generated by talented workers and students who set up new companies. the free movement of goods and people is not how immigration works, not today and not even in the past, it's also very open to interpretation because do you have no border security? do you let everyone in? do you have any amount of standards? is the amount of people let in calculated within the carrying capacity of the nation? what if a group of people come from third world nations that clash with the native people or other immigrant populations? or criminal organisations? these are all factors that clash with the very idea of free movement of people. what made the USA so strong and a powerfull economy is mostly due to geography, conquest of land, capitalism and stable property rights, also immigration was very controled and motivated by basically giving people land to farm, a demand and a need to fill that demand with controled immigration not open borders. also there was no wellfare state back in the day so people who came had to make it on their own labor a condition no modern economy has today and because they do have it, it means many immigrants are economic migrants and not labor force or skilled labor, you can have skilled labor and immigration of skilled labor is good but that's not the majority of immigration in any western nation and the way you get those talented people is through incentives to draws those people, as in lower taxes, easy of starting new companies. people who are native or assimulated to this type of culture and economic structure is what made the country prosper in the first place, saying that it's build by or reliant on immigration to function is a failure of that society to maintain it which is what has happened in most of the western world, arguing that immigration must go up because aging is a bad argument because it does not solve the issue of that aging in the first place, a better solution would be to try and raise birthrates or have a more export focused market which is also what is going on in China along with automation.
    1
  3031. 1
  3032. 1
  3033.  k bw  like I said, people will use ''studies'' to support their political or ideological agenda without having any or significant scientific methodology. in fact there are fields of science where even experts make wrong calculations or conclusions or what they find or are incomplete, mostly this is in fields of non-exact science, things like math, chemistry, biology (for the most part) phisics are quite clear and exact with easy to prove and disprove methodologies. fields such as social sciences, psychology, economics, law, politics, linqistics are all more fluid and non exact, the treatment of people based on their sexual preference is a non exact field of science but it's easy to understand how Paraphilia and non-hetero sexual behavior would lead to ostracization because from a biological perspective it is maladaptive to the survival of the group, that does not justify chemical castration which is a subset of law used in the past but we can understand why it was enforced and why nothing will ever change such ostracization, except perhaps the total collapse and extiction of humanity because it goes against human nature to pretend it is not maladaptive. this whole argument is about the negative effects on a modern economy due to immigration of low skilled workers and the negative effects of immigration on society all together, of which there are many studies that show a breakdown in social cohesion, trust and overal cultural unity in a society with a high concentration of immigrant populations, over time people are likely to assimulate but even then there can still be problems, when ISIS was formed many muslims living in western nations went to the middle-east to fight, many of whom where 2th or 3th generations with good educations for the most part, the excuse that they weren't treated fairly is a simple one to make, the truth is that a non-compatable culture and non native people clash and feel excluded and isolated due to not fitting in and most likely never will unless their children and children's children become part of and feel connected to the native population, in the USA this is much easier then in old world cultures and people's due to history, language barriers, cultural and religeus identity clashes, so on and so forth. today millions of people are persicuted for wrong think, thinking for themselves, making legitimate studies with ''offending'' conclusions and observations, censorship of free speech, limits on movement and individual freedoms, coming to a concensus that is both accurate, non-offensive or incompatable with globalistic and ideological agenda's is literally impossible and a major reason for western decline and rise of China, they have concensus, a brutal and authoritarian one but one that understands how the world works and human nature, the west needs to catch up and not be stuck in the 20th century or neo-marxist ideology.
    1
  3034. 1
  3035. 1
  3036.  k bw  there are different schools of economics and economics is the study of what people value, a loaf of bread or a computer, the study of currency and economic models on how to distribute wealth or create wealth, all of these things are not exact sciences, the use of mathematics can be accurate because that is an exact science but the theory upon which it is modeled on can be incorrect, in the USSR there were plenty of mathematics and models involved but their theory of how planned economies worked led to shortages and famines due to government policies. Also technology changes and with it changes economic outcomes, crypto currencies are an example where the economy is changing and value is changing despite it not being a part of official economic theory of value another potential problem is automation which would create a need for an economic policy change, in short economics is not an exact science, there are economists who use mathematics to make models to predict economic outcomes and many are correct but others are incorrect and clash with other economists despite using math an exact science to create models, therefor economics is not an exact science, math is which is why it might appear as an exact science. Social sciences these days is more inaccurate then accurate then economics due to it not having an exact science within it or with models, mathematical observations using statistics perhaps but no way of quantifying an exact amount because people are individuals, groups, ideologies and have politics to deal with.
    1
  3037. 1
  3038. 1
  3039. 1
  3040. 1
  3041. 1
  3042. 1
  3043. 1
  3044. 1
  3045. 1
  3046. 1
  3047. 1
  3048. 1
  3049. 1
  3050. 1
  3051. 1
  3052. 1
  3053. 1
  3054. 1
  3055. 1
  3056. 1
  3057. 1
  3058. 1
  3059. 1
  3060. 1
  3061. 1
  3062. 1
  3063. 1
  3064. 1
  3065. 1
  3066. 1
  3067. 1
  3068. 1
  3069. 1
  3070. 1
  3071. 1
  3072. 1
  3073. 1
  3074. 1
  3075. 1
  3076. 1
  3077. 1
  3078. 1
  3079. 1
  3080. 1
  3081. 1
  3082. 1
  3083. 1
  3084. 1
  3085. 1
  3086. 1
  3087. 1
  3088. 1
  3089. 1
  3090. 1
  3091. 1
  3092. 1
  3093. 1
  3094. 1
  3095. 1
  3096. 1
  3097. 1
  3098. 1
  3099. 1
  3100. 1
  3101. 1
  3102. 1
  3103. 1
  3104. 1
  3105. 1
  3106. 1
  3107. 1
  3108. 1
  3109. 1
  3110. 1
  3111. 1
  3112. 1
  3113. 1
  3114. 1
  3115. 1
  3116. 1
  3117. 1
  3118. 1
  3119. 1
  3120. 1
  3121. 1
  3122. 1
  3123. 1
  3124. 1
  3125. 1
  3126. 1
  3127. 1
  3128. 1
  3129. 1
  3130. 1
  3131. 1
  3132. 1
  3133. 1
  3134. 1
  3135. 1
  3136. 1
  3137. 1
  3138. 1
  3139. 1
  3140. 1
  3141. 1
  3142. 1
  3143. 1
  3144. 1
  3145. 1
  3146. 1
  3147. 1
  3148. 1
  3149. 1
  3150. 1
  3151. 1
  3152. 1
  3153. 1
  3154. 1
  3155. 1
  3156. 1
  3157. 1
  3158. 1
  3159. 1
  3160. 1
  3161. 1
  3162. 1
  3163. 1
  3164. 1
  3165.  @breanainnlyness7910  I don't think you understand what ignorant means. It means you don't understand something, like you are doing right here by denying that culture and ethnicity are connected, this is how cultural identity works and you sound like the type of authoritarian who would call others copying other people's culture cultural appropiation, yet deny the existence of a people when it suits you, how can you copy something that's not separate from you? I understand the world and have studied and learned from many diffrent cultures, people's and history that's why I know there are diffrences. Have you ever worked with people from Poland? China? Ghana? Spain? The Netherlands? Would you say they are all the same or that their culture is not linked to their identity? Ask any doctor and they know where people come from, their genetics and therefor their ethnicity matter for medicine. Voting paterns in diffrent demografically and diffrent ethnic groups matter, that's why politicians try to cater to collective populations voting blocks because they are different from others, this is not very hard to understand but it seems like this is some advanced rocket science for you to grasp. I understand how you are ignorant, irrational and dishonest about culture and ethnicity because it's easy to be lazy and it's hard to understand the diffrences between diffrent people, perhaps if you experience the world and other people more you will come to understand my point. No wonder the han Chinese are taking over the world, they have a good understanding of themselves, they have a unified population while here in the west I have to try and explain to you how civilization works.
    1
  3166. 1
  3167. 1
  3168. 1
  3169. 1
  3170. 1
  3171. 1
  3172. 1
  3173. 1
  3174. 1
  3175. 1
  3176. 1
  3177. 1
  3178. 1
  3179. 1
  3180. 1
  3181. 1
  3182. 1
  3183. 1
  3184. 1
  3185. 1
  3186. 1
  3187. 1
  3188. 1
  3189. 1
  3190. 1
  3191. 1
  3192. 1
  3193.  Fecal Matter  dus als partijen als DENK zeggen dat ze de maatschappij willen veranderen voor hun multiculturele ideeën dan moet iedereen ze niet serieus nemen en labelen als ''slachtoffer roleplayen'' noemen? ondanks dat ze wat? 3 zetels hebben in de tweede kamer? beetje rare opmerking zou ik zeggen. oikofobie bestaat dus niet voor jou en is dus zeker niet terug te vinden in bepaald soort partijen? wat mij irriteert is niet je menig die je mag hebben maar de eentonige aanval hoek righting de PVV en FVD als zogenaamde inhoudsloos terwijl andere partijen dezelfde of zelfs ergere standpunten hebben die tegen normen en waarden van Nederland in gaan negeren. dit is hoe democratie werkt, de huidige partijen bieden geen platform voor mensen van nationalistische gedachten, maar omarmen wel zij die daar tegen in gaan en de huidige partijen elite waardoor FVD en PVV juist zo populair zijn geworden. je kan als een struisvogel doen alsof het iets is wat het niet is, of doen alsof hun menig er niet toe doet maar daarmee overtuig je niemand van je menige en laat je daarmee juist zien dat je niet eens open kan staan voor nieuwe ideeën en de bumpersticker slogans van de media die je herhaald vertellen mij dat je niet echt een menig hebt behalve dat wat herhaald wordt door zij die de nieuwe wind van verandering het liefste willen bagatelliseren tot het stof is. zelfs al zou FVD nu ten onder vallen dan nog zijn de ideeën van hun en van de PVV in het bevolking gedachten vervoerd, hell hiervoor was het pim fortuyn en die was om het leven gebracht om de nieuwe gedachten het zwijgen op te leggen. maar goed, dat is je menig, die mag je hebben, ik vind hem alleen nogal laag hangend fruit van de boom zonder echte zelf reflectie en objectieve waarheid.
    1
  3194. 1
  3195. 1
  3196. 1
  3197. 1
  3198. 1
  3199. 1
  3200. 1
  3201. 1
  3202. 1
  3203. 1
  3204. 1
  3205. 1
  3206. 1
  3207. 1
  3208. 1
  3209. 1
  3210. 1
  3211. 1
  3212. 1
  3213. 1
  3214. 1
  3215. 1
  3216. 1
  3217. 1
  3218. 1
  3219. 1
  3220. 1
  3221. 1
  3222. 1
  3223. 1
  3224. 1
  3225. 1
  3226. 1
  3227. 1
  3228. 1
  3229. 1
  3230. 1
  3231. 1
  3232. 1
  3233. 1
  3234. 1
  3235. 1
  3236. 1
  3237. 1
  3238. 1
  3239. 1
  3240. 1
  3241. 1
  3242. 1
  3243. 1
  3244. 1
  3245. 1
  3246. 1
  3247. 1
  3248. 1
  3249. 1
  3250. 1
  3251. 1
  3252. 1
  3253. 1
  3254. 1
  3255. 1
  3256. 1
  3257. 1
  3258. 1
  3259. 1
  3260. 1
  3261. 1
  3262. 1
  3263. 1
  3264. 1
  3265. 1
  3266. 1
  3267. 1
  3268. 1
  3269. 1
  3270. 1
  3271. 1
  3272. 1
  3273. 1
  3274. there was a video from Caspian report saying that the Russia-Chinese alliance is not as strong as people might think and on some issues they are actually in conflict with eachother, of course as long as the USA is trying to undermine them both they commit themselves to mutual beneficial relationships and shared interests to undermine the USA and other potential rivals but im not so sure that will continue within Russia as China continues to surpase them. as for demografics, while I understand and see how this effects Chinese growth, I think your overlooking some major issues that will reveal why aging is not extremely bad for China, because if just birthrates was the sole issue for economic growth, african nations would be the world leaders by now, the thing with China is they have invested a lot in robotic and automation and will continue to out spend the USA on AI technologies and their cultural hegemony within their borders means they won't face any major social revolution like what's going on in the USA and western world right now due to the problems inherent in multiethnic and multicultral societies. yes the chinese economy will slow down a bit but where is China currently investing the most in? africa, which with their booming population will mean they will become a major export market for the Chinese which gives them more time and money to deal with their own demografic issues as will the rest of the world, including the USA though they have the benefit of having lots of land and capital to expand into with or without more immigration. edit : i made this comment before I finished watching the full video, sorry if i repeat things you mentioned later in the video.
    1
  3275. 1
  3276. 1
  3277. 1
  3278. 1
  3279. 1
  3280. 1
  3281. 1
  3282. 1
  3283. 1
  3284. 1
  3285. 1
  3286. 1
  3287. 1
  3288. 1
  3289. 1
  3290. 1
  3291. 1
  3292. 1
  3293. 1
  3294. 1
  3295. 1
  3296. 1
  3297. 1
  3298. 1
  3299. 1
  3300. 1
  3301. 1
  3302. 1
  3303. 1
  3304. 1
  3305. 1
  3306. 1
  3307. 1
  3308. 1
  3309. 1
  3310. 1
  3311. 1
  3312. 1
  3313. 1
  3314. 1
  3315. 1
  3316. 1
  3317. 1
  3318. 1
  3319. 1
  3320. 1
  3321. 1
  3322. 1
  3323. 1
  3324. 1
  3325. 1
  3326. 1
  3327. 1
  3328. 1
  3329. 1
  3330. 1
  3331. 1
  3332. 1
  3333. 1
  3334. 1
  3335. 1
  3336. 1
  3337. 1
  3338. 1
  3339. 1
  3340. 1
  3341. ​ @kingshermanii  idk what your talking about fascism is literaly a form of socialism, as were many military juntas in some form or another, the exception to this is Chille and Brazil during their military junta but communism and communist subting groups existed for quite some time and caused a lot of damage. you don't seem to realy understand what gives rise to those military junta's and dictatorships, they don't just pop out of the ground for nothing or for fun, they rise due to a clash of far left and far right ideology often times feeding off eachother, to give an example, Cuba became communist, Venuzuwela became socialist, other nations see the spread of communism, USA gets involved starts supporting dictatorships to prevent spread of communism, other nations instal their own military junta's out of fear of becoming puppets to the USA or the USSR, communists flee into the jungles, this is not something that's that special for south america btw, this happened in asia, in africa and parts of the middle east too, that's the cold war. after the cold war some of these regimes remained, fell out of power or the socialists became less revolutionary but still corrupt and authoritarian, to say communism and socialism aren't that big a deal in south america is very wrong and is either feigning ignorance or outright lying. socialists and communists had power over large parts of south america, the junta's and dictatorships was just a way to snuff them out and they are still there btw, same in the west only less violent.
    1
  3342. 1
  3343. 1
  3344. 1
  3345. 1
  3346. 1
  3347. 1
  3348. 1
  3349. 1
  3350. 1
  3351. 1
  3352. 1
  3353. 1
  3354. 1
  3355. 1
  3356. 1
  3357. 1
  3358. 1
  3359. 1
  3360. 1
  3361. 1
  3362. 1
  3363. 1
  3364. 1
  3365. 1
  3366. 1
  3367. 1
  3368. 1
  3369. 1
  3370. 1
  3371. 1
  3372. 1
  3373. 1
  3374. 1
  3375. 1
  3376. 1
  3377. 1
  3378. 1
  3379. 1
  3380. 1
  3381. 1
  3382. 1
  3383. 1
  3384. 1
  3385. 1
  3386. 1
  3387. 1
  3388. 1
  3389. 1
  3390. 1
  3391. 1
  3392. 1
  3393. 1
  3394. 1
  3395. 1
  3396. 1
  3397. 1
  3398. 1
  3399. 1
  3400. 1
  3401. 1
  3402. 1
  3403. 1
  3404. 1
  3405. 1
  3406. 1
  3407. 1
  3408. 1
  3409. 1
  3410. 1
  3411. 1
  3412. 1
  3413.  @toddharig8142  clearly you never met a nationalist before, I find your comment very amusing but also sad because the truth is that globalists, corporatists and progressives tend to rely on shunning everyone but the strong (aka the rich), creating pages of pages of dehumanzing propaganda and they are far more ruthless and manipulative then any nationalist alive today which includes actual fascists. There is no capitalism, there is corporatism which means the government must create the Tyrany for them in the first place, it was not capitalism that forced a global lockdown due to a disease, that's the state the same state leftists, socialists and progressives want to empower even more and believe libertarians are the same as fascists. The USA was based on racial nepotism and expansion through war, that's how they became a superpower in the first place, China today the second largest economy in the world is 99% han Chinese, India wants to be the same kind of country with a strong hindu identity. Meanwhile in the west we allow rape gangs to run free because our police don't want to be called racist, can't have any promotion of our own population growth without being labeled nazi's, how els would you preserve and create a new pan European identity without using the identities of the European nations and people's that exist in the first place? Seems very irrational and illogical to me, almost anti white and racist to presume otherwise. But from your use of language I don't think you are intrested in any logical, rational, mature conversation, more likely trying to convince your own ideology of being somehow superior while ignoring reality, well as long as you don't wish to censor me or use violence to defend your corporations I don't mind, I just hope we can stop the mass migration waves before democracy is destroyed from within which it already has to a large degree.
    1
  3414. 1
  3415. 1
  3416. 1
  3417. 1
  3418.  @toddharig8142  sorry did not read all, I don't think you are realy worth talking to since you are kinda stuck in a leftist loop mindset of thinking im somehow a "white supreemist" while ignoring the effects of demografics and actualy policies made by the EU and it's goal as a organisation, how pretending ethni-city does not matter in a collection of nation states based on ethno-cultural identities is beyond me. I feel like your stuck in a loop where if someone mentions say nationalism, you automatically respond with certain defence mechanisms, try to change the subject or make assumptions and then believe your assumptions are true. If I mention the ra-pe cases by isl-amic groo-ming gangs in the UK, you say that does not matter or X is a bigger deal or you believe X matters so you must be a na-zi, how would anyone be able to make you doubt your own authoritarian believes and anti whi-te rac-ism if anything someone says can be warped into somehow being w-hite supreemism? Regardless if you think it does not matter or whatever assumptions you think are true, in real politic and in power politics, demografics matter, that's how Russia was able to get a vote in one cremea, why the state of israel exists, how peace came to Europe after a series of population exchanges after ww1 and ww2, why the british government needs to censor people's opinions if they offend certain people, why terrorism happens on all sides in western nations, why certain political parties like pro migrant parties in Europe exist, due to immigration in the first place. I don't understand why you pretend like these things don't exist, don't matter or why you would write pages of pages of word for word responses rather then adressing the overal message of the comment, idk how I would be able to convince you nor would it realy matter since what actualy influences society is demografics, education, censorship, media, government action and immigration policy more so then rational debate which we aren't realy having right now because I can't seem to break through your ideological bubble your in.
    1
  3419. 1
  3420. 1
  3421. 1
  3422. 1
  3423. 1
  3424. 1
  3425. 1
  3426. 1
  3427. 1
  3428. 1
  3429. 1
  3430. 1
  3431. 1
  3432. 1
  3433. 1
  3434. 1
  3435. 1
  3436. 1
  3437. 1
  3438. 1
  3439. 1
  3440. 1
  3441. 1
  3442. 1
  3443. 1
  3444. 1
  3445. 1
  3446. 1
  3447. 1
  3448. 1
  3449. 1
  3450. 1
  3451. 1
  3452. 1
  3453. 1
  3454. 1
  3455. 1
  3456. 1
  3457. 1
  3458. 1
  3459. 1
  3460. 1
  3461. 1
  3462. 1
  3463. 1
  3464. 1
  3465. 1
  3466. 1
  3467. 1
  3468. 1
  3469. 1
  3470. 1
  3471. 1
  3472. 1
  3473. 1
  3474. 1
  3475. 1
  3476. 1
  3477. 1
  3478. I love this video. on the issue of evil though, while real evil does exist it also matters to the perception of the person who sees it and ask the question if they think it's worth it to realise their goal/dream. for example, take the nazi's who wanted to created their utopian vision but to do so they believed they needed to do horrible things, many of their focus points ironically are somewhat in line with what Tolkin wrote being good, like the preservation of nature (animal rights, environmentalism, vegitarianism) and trying to be in line with biological realities (social darwinism, Eugenics, birthrates) and expansionism to secure what they need long term. Thus for many both back then and people today they view what happened as either nessisary or unfortunate but would not consider it evil just for being evil but as a nessisary evil, same with Communism, social justice and other ideologies which also include religions like Christianity, Islam or the Jewish faith. evil does exist in the sense that sadistic people with desires to see the world or civilization destroyed exist but that most of what we consider evil are just normal people who believe in their own visions of the future that they are willing in full or in part to give up their humanity or come to view certain people as being evil (aka given up their humanity) to justify their own cruelty, it can also be that hatred of your enemies can make it easier to destroy them, which is why you can see soldiers being very cruel to their enemies because viewing them as less then human makes it easier for yourself to destroy them and thus survive, there is a evolutionary benefit in doing so, it's not always ideal or justified and often driven by fear but it is there. evil is both subjective and very real but most people are just normal that can become forced or possed by ideas that drives them towards violence because they see it as nessisary, almost nobody wakes up thinking ''ohhh boy here I go killing again'' most people simply follow orders or convince themselves what they are doing is nessisary and sometimes even good to justify giving up part of their humanity.
    1
  3479. 1
  3480. 1
  3481. 1
  3482. 1
  3483. 1
  3484. 1
  3485. 1
  3486. 1
  3487. 1
  3488. 1
  3489. 1
  3490. 1
  3491. 1
  3492. 1
  3493. 1
  3494. 1
  3495. 1
  3496. 1
  3497. 1
  3498. 1
  3499.  @kaetamine  I find it intresting that poland is able to annex lands supposedly ethnically cleansed by sovjets yet given to poland, yet Russia had already annex parts of poland, so tell me why would they do that mmmmm? Out of the goodness of their heart? Or does it not count if the polish leaders and military do so with approval of the allies and the sovjets? If that's the case why is Germany held responsable for the war? After all the nazi's did it not the germans? Also funny how supposedly the polish military had nothing to do with it "it was not the polish people! Or military! It were the sovjets, I mean the polish people annex the land, gave the former german towns polish names and became settled by polish people but clearly they had nothing to do with it" right.... Because that makes sense right? And who am I to Believe? Some west-german puppet goverment set up by the allies? The records from the nazi's? The sovjets? Or the polish? What if there are no records? Did it realy happen then? I think it's fairly clean that the polish people and their military pushed for this out of revenge and to ensure that old wounds aren't reopened they reduce the numbers after all it's not genocide, nor is is ethnic cleansing but "population transfer" anyone with a basic understanding of linqistics can see that these terms and these excuses are used for national intrest by the polish state, blame the sovjets, blame the allies but not the innocent polish, they can do no wrong because ww2 is a creation myth more than anything els, each side just makes shit up as they go allong and it's easy to see way. But like I sayd your boring me, we can go back and forth but I can see who benefited and I can see through this bullshit.
    1
  3500.  @kaetamine  At the Potsdam Conference (17 July–2 August 1945), the territory to the east of the Oder–Neisse line was assigned to Polish and Soviet Union administration pending the final peace treaty. All Germans had their property confiscated and were placed under restrictive jurisdiction.[148][154] The Silesian voivode Aleksander Zawadzki in part had already expropriated the property of the German Silesians on 26 January 1945, another decree of 2 March expropriated that of all Germans east of the Oder and Neisse, and a subsequent decree of 6 May declared all "abandoned" property as belonging to the Polish state.[155] Germans were also not permitted to hold Polish currency, the only legal currency since July, other than earnings from work assigned to them.[156] The remaining population faced theft and looting, and also in some instances rape and murder by the criminal elements, crimes that were rarely prevented nor prosecuted by the Polish Militia Forces and newly installed communist judiciary. The German Federal Archives estimated in 1974 that more than 200,000 German civilians were interned in Polish camps; they put the death rate at 20–50% and estimated that over 60,000 probably died.[158] Polish historians Witold Sienkiewicz and Grzegorz Hryciuk maintain that the internment: resulted in numerous deaths, which cannot be accurately determined because of lack of statistics or falsification. At certain periods, they could be in the tens of percent of the inmate numbers. Those interned are estimated at 200–250,000 German nationals and the indigenous population and deaths might range from 15,000 to 60,000 persons.
    1
  3501. 1
  3502. 1
  3503. 1
  3504. 1
  3505. 1
  3506. 1
  3507. 1
  3508. 1
  3509. 1
  3510. 1
  3511. 1
  3512. 1
  3513. 1
  3514. 1
  3515. 1
  3516. 1
  3517. 1
  3518. 1
  3519. 1
  3520. 1
  3521. 1
  3522. 1
  3523. 1
  3524. 1
  3525. 1
  3526. 1
  3527. 1
  3528. 1
  3529. 1
  3530. 1
  3531. 1
  3532. 1
  3533. 1
  3534. 1
  3535. 1
  3536. 1
  3537. 1
  3538. 1
  3539. 1
  3540. 1
  3541. 1
  3542. 1
  3543. 1
  3544. 1
  3545. 1
  3546. 1
  3547. 1
  3548. 1
  3549. 1
  3550. 1
  3551. 1
  3552. 1
  3553. 1
  3554. 1
  3555. 1
  3556. 1
  3557. 1
  3558. 1
  3559. 1
  3560. 1
  3561. 1
  3562. 1
  3563. 1
  3564. 1
  3565. 1
  3566. 1
  3567. 1
  3568. 1
  3569. 1
  3570. 1
  3571. 1
  3572. 1
  3573. 1
  3574. 1
  3575. 1
  3576. 1
  3577. 1
  3578. 1
  3579. 1
  3580. 1
  3581. 1
  3582. 1
  3583. 1
  3584. 1
  3585. 1
  3586. 1
  3587. 1
  3588. 1
  3589. 1
  3590. 1
  3591. 1
  3592. 1
  3593. 1
  3594. 1
  3595. 1
  3596. 1
  3597. 1
  3598. 1
  3599. 1
  3600. 1
  3601. 1
  3602. 1
  3603. 1
  3604. 1
  3605. 1
  3606. 1
  3607. 1
  3608. 1
  3609. 1
  3610. 1
  3611. 1
  3612. 1
  3613. 1
  3614. 1
  3615. 1
  3616. 1
  3617. 1
  3618. 1
  3619. 1
  3620. 1
  3621. 1
  3622. 1
  3623. 1
  3624. 1
  3625. 1
  3626. 1
  3627. 1
  3628. I did not expect these guys would talk about IQ or IQ statistics, so a little introduction. IQ tests were used by the US military since ww1 to determine if someone has the general intelligence to perform basic tasks and remember their training properly, if they did not pass the minimal nessisary IQ they would not be allowed to serve the military because it would have been a waste of time, money and human resources to train that person. IQ tests are not biased or catered to a specific demografic, it's simply a tool used to measure and quantify Intelligence. now for the spicy part some people for some reason have issue with IQ tests, not all human population groups have the same general intelligence and there seems to be a gap between specific demografic groups that indicates a lower IQ and therefor lower Intelligence than others, which makes sense if you understand evolution, evolutionary pressures and sexual selection. people who are smart have a higher IQ compared to people who are generaly less Inteligent, due note that IQ is not an indication of success, many people who are very smart are also autistic and have trouble socializing and getting ahead in human societies, not only that but from a evolutionary perspective, less intelligent people tend to have more children so they are evolutionary more successfull compared to smart people who tend to have few children if at all also many smart people have mental disorders. IQ is not an indication of someone's superiority, it's a measure of someone's potential to perform and advance specific fields of science, art, education, technology or other ventures. I would hope most people here are open minded enough towards this concept and not shout people down or demand their opinions to be silenced which happens way to often these days.
    1
  3629. 1
  3630. 1
  3631. 1
  3632. 1
  3633. 1
  3634. 1
  3635. 1
  3636. 1
  3637. 1
  3638. 1
  3639. 1
  3640. 1
  3641. 1
  3642. 1
  3643. 1
  3644. 1
  3645. 1
  3646. 1
  3647. 1
  3648. 1
  3649. 1
  3650. 1
  3651. 1
  3652. 1
  3653. 1
  3654. 1
  3655. 1
  3656. 1
  3657. 1
  3658. 1
  3659. 1
  3660. 1
  3661. 1
  3662. 1
  3663. 1
  3664. 1
  3665. 1
  3666. 1
  3667. 1
  3668. 1
  3669. 1
  3670. 1
  3671. 1
  3672. 1
  3673. 1
  3674. 1
  3675. 1
  3676. 1
  3677. 1
  3678. 1
  3679. 1
  3680. 1
  3681. 1
  3682. 1
  3683. 1
  3684. 1
  3685. 1
  3686. 1
  3687. 1
  3688. 1
  3689. 1
  3690. 1
  3691. 1
  3692. 1
  3693. 1
  3694. 1
  3695. 1
  3696. 1
  3697. 1
  3698. 1
  3699. 1
  3700. 1
  3701. 1
  3702. 1
  3703. 1
  3704. 1
  3705. 1
  3706. 1
  3707. 1
  3708. 1
  3709. 1
  3710. 1
  3711. 1
  3712. 1
  3713. 1
  3714. 1
  3715. 1
  3716. 1
  3717. 1
  3718. 1
  3719. 1
  3720. 1
  3721. 1
  3722. 1
  3723. 1
  3724. 1
  3725. 1
  3726. 1
  3727. 1
  3728. 1
  3729. 1
  3730. 1
  3731. 1
  3732. 1
  3733. 1
  3734. 1
  3735. 1
  3736. 1
  3737. 1
  3738. 1
  3739. 1
  3740. 1
  3741. 1
  3742. 1
  3743. 1
  3744. 1
  3745. 1
  3746. 1
  3747. 1
  3748. 1
  3749. 1
  3750. 1
  3751. 1
  3752. 1
  3753. 1
  3754. 1
  3755. 1
  3756. 1
  3757. 1
  3758. 1
  3759. 1
  3760. 1
  3761. 1
  3762. 1
  3763. 1
  3764. 1
  3765. 1
  3766. 1
  3767. 1
  3768. 1
  3769. 1
  3770. 1
  3771. 1
  3772. 1
  3773. 1
  3774.  @RandomGuy010  in my country "the Netherlands" it's also legal, prostitutes are able to sell their bodies in certain districts behind windows, the police can help them if they are forced into it (not all of them call the cops because of pimp or language barriers, foreign woman do get used into it), they can do their work with basic hygiëne and security from customers and it's more regulated. Prostitution is always going to be happening, I've seen how it goes in places like the USA where it's illigale, prostitutes beaten by pimps, selling on the streets, sometimes murdered by customers and can't go to the cops because it's a crime, it's much worse compared to it being legal. I don't quite get how prostitution erodes trust between man and woman, it's just a service, isolated in specific parts of the city, people who want it have to go on their own to get it and everyone knows how that industry works, most aren't there because they realy want to but they need the money and it pays pretty well, I've heard stories of some college girls working in it part time and making more money in a day than most guys with 20+ hours part time jobs flipping burgers to pay college do. So why should you allow prostitution? Because it's safer for the prostitutes and it gives them more rights and easier means of getting out, it's always going to be there just in what way do you prefer, in the streets, at night, everywhere with no protection from cops, or one specific place, safer and with more means of getting out if they want to? For me the choice is pretty easy.
    1
  3775. 1
  3776. 1
  3777. 1
  3778. 1
  3779. 1
  3780. 1
  3781.  @currymunch6097  the right to bare arms has two specific purposes, one to give the citizens power both against their own government and their own safety the arguments made by people on the left that it's useless against the military is propaganda to hide the reality that it's a big amount of power that the government very much fears, which is why their main goal is to try and abolish or limit it via law and not by taking away people's guns by force. second is the national defence of the country, a country that has citizens that know how to use weapons and have many of them is a country few nations would want to invade, the jappanese army during ww2 even commented on it ''a gun behind every blade of grass'', if say Europe had a more gun heavy culture and knew how to use them properly (we have guns just not many people that know how to use them or in citizens hands) then nations like Russia would feel much more threatened against such a population to invade. the reason why the USA is divided is because it abandoned it's early american culture, it's laws and have due to becoming a global super power more international and globalistic identity, this is both a good and a bad thing, it's good for the USA to be well liked by most of the rest of the world and people enjoying it's culture and bad because it destabalizes the USA internally and makes people think the USA is not in their own interest anymore. combine this with the ever inflating currency, the corruption in government, the many wars in the middle-east, the economic crashes, race relations, the polorization within government parties and you can see why the USA seems so messed up these days. the USA overal is still doing great and many nations are going through hard times right now, not just the USA but the USA's bad policies and ideologies can and do spread to other nations which hurts them as well.
    1
  3782. 1
  3783. 1
  3784. 1
  3785. 1
  3786. 1
  3787. 1
  3788. 1
  3789. 1
  3790. 1
  3791. 1
  3792. 1
  3793. 1
  3794. 1
  3795. 1
  3796. 1
  3797. 1
  3798. 1
  3799. 1
  3800. 1
  3801. 1
  3802. 1
  3803. 1
  3804. 1
  3805. 1
  3806. 1
  3807. 1
  3808. 1
  3809. 1
  3810. 1
  3811. 1
  3812. 1
  3813. 1
  3814. 1
  3815. 1
  3816. 1
  3817. 1
  3818. 1
  3819. 1
  3820. 1
  3821. 1
  3822. 1
  3823. 1
  3824. 1
  3825. 1
  3826. 1
  3827. 1
  3828. 1
  3829. 1
  3830. 1
  3831. 1
  3832. 1
  3833. 1
  3834. 1
  3835. 1
  3836. 1
  3837. 1
  3838. 1
  3839. 1
  3840. 1
  3841. 1
  3842. 1
  3843. 1
  3844. 1
  3845. 1
  3846. 1
  3847. 1
  3848. 1
  3849. 1
  3850. 1
  3851. 1
  3852. 1
  3853. 1
  3854. 1
  3855. 1
  3856. 1
  3857. 1
  3858. 1
  3859. 1
  3860. 1
  3861. 1
  3862. 1
  3863. 1
  3864. 1
  3865. 1
  3866. 1
  3867. 1
  3868. 1
  3869. 1
  3870. 1
  3871. 1
  3872. 1
  3873. 1
  3874. 1
  3875. 1
  3876. 1
  3877. 1
  3878. 1
  3879. 1
  3880. 1
  3881. 1
  3882. 1
  3883. 1
  3884. 1
  3885. 1
  3886. 1
  3887. 1
  3888. 1
  3889. 1
  3890. 1
  3891. 1
  3892. 1
  3893. 1
  3894. 1
  3895. 1
  3896. 1
  3897. 1
  3898. 1
  3899. 1
  3900. 1
  3901. 1
  3902. 1
  3903. 1
  3904. 1
  3905. 1
  3906. 1
  3907. 1
  3908. 1
  3909. 1
  3910. 1
  3911. 1
  3912. 1
  3913. 1
  3914. 1
  3915. 1
  3916. 1
  3917. 1
  3918. 1
  3919. 1
  3920. 1
  3921. 1
  3922. 1
  3923. 1
  3924. 1
  3925. 1
  3926. 1
  3927. 1
  3928. 1
  3929. 1
  3930. 1
  3931.  @vojislavl6665  the first wellfare state was made by Bismarck a conservative, the wellfare state is more of a nationalistic and community based system of a distribution of wealth, Socialism aka unions, labor groups and nationalisation of the economy are means to controle and distribute the means of production, in communism the state has direct controle, in national socialism the state rules it's economy through corporations, called corporatism, current day China is a lot like national socialism. Take unions for instance, unions aren't realy mean't to give workers beter pay, unions are mean't to get benefits and protectionist policies, in the UK the metro networks are controled by the unions, they influence the government to enforce licence for their specific job and they controle who gets such a licence, so they are almost never fired, they don't grow the economy, they ensure the economy stagnates. In venuzuwela they nationalized the oil industry and the government gave out all kinds of goodies like mircowaves, cheap housing, consuming products because oil prices were high, they did not diversify their economy which as a result when oil prices collapsed so too did the economy of venuzuwela. Socialist movements are less about the people or providing benefits to citizens and more about controling the economy, it always needs authoritarian means to enforce it's policies and long term the economy always stagnates. In sweden the so called "socialist" ideal state, the economy is largely free market with a rather large wellfare state and the biggest problem there is mostly progressives and socialists that want more and more immigration to replace workers rather then support their intrests. The only some what socialist I have seen in Europe at least that cares about workers is the current PM of dennmark that also wants protectionist policies but in terms of migration laws and benefits to it's citizens. Idk what your idea of Socialism is but I don't think you understand how historically socialism had failed, you could argue because of how large multinational corporations have become that some form of government intervention aka neo-liberalism is nessisary but this has led to corporatism. And on a short note of healthcare, the USA has such a expensive healthcare system because 1. It's people are largely unhealthy and fat, 2. The government is highly involved with medicade and medicare programs, 3 private healthcare providers compete with eachother, get to enjoy pricefixing while the government takes their share of the profits, in Germany and in the Netherlands we have a mixed model where we have private healthcare but all of the corporations are partly backed by the government, not socialist healthcare unlike the UK which is currently failing and can't provide healthcare to most of it's citizens anymore, esspecialy elderly.
    1
  3932. 1
  3933. 1
  3934. 1
  3935. 1
  3936. 1
  3937. 1
  3938. 1
  3939. 1
  3940. 1
  3941. 1
  3942. 1
  3943. 1
  3944. 1
  3945. 1
  3946. 1
  3947. 1
  3948. 1
  3949. 1
  3950. 1
  3951. 1
  3952. 1
  3953. 1
  3954.  @adamnesico  interesting theory, only im not realy seeing much evidence of it. the last part though is more true for western and northern europe on a lot of issues, why or how it came to be, I don´t know for sure but I don´t realy see it as something permanent or something that can´t be overcome, it´s more of cycle of history you see constantly, great powers, rise and fall and then a new power emerges from the ashes to take it´s place, in the past this was mostly fueled by the desires and wishes of kinds and queens and then in the 20th century it was force by iron and blood through nationalism and in the 21th century i think it will be forged by technology, will and desperation, as the world goes into a new era and the old idealism of a bygone generation die out, what will be left? my believe is not the soft and shamefull state you see today. if you look at it from a global, geopolitical perspective, Europe as of right now is 3rd on the global power scale but lacks the focus to grow further, likewise other powers are much less powerfull but have more momentum, the question is how will those path's clash? I predict a great series of wars on the continent of africa, I predicts stagnation for nations like Russia but also Germany and the UK, I believe the USA will become more and more divided and will want to move towards revolution of some kind, at which point it's enemies will try and secure their futures, as for Europe, it stand on the crossroads between it, does it wither away in the fires or does it fight back and regain that lost piece of identity they used to have, both can happen, I just don't know for sure.
    1
  3955. 1
  3956. 1
  3957. you know it's both upsetting and silly that corporations do this and it does seem to be deliberate and specifically towards both historical and iconic European stories, historal figures and old fairy tales that go way back to give them this treatment. At first I thought they do this because of some huge anti white conspiracy and while some might have that agenda for sure that does not explain why a corporation would not pull the plug on an idea or policy that does not make them money and to be clear this does hurt their bottom line, it's bad to insult your customers, it's bad to offend people, it's bad to rub it in your customers faces that you changed the type of product that they would enjoy. then why do they do it? well because they are lazy and can't think of new ideas, that would take talent, that would take time, while by doing this they can create controversy, they can get free publicity, they can put customers against eachother and they can make money off that. even though they will lose money in the long run, in the short term they gain some attention, I for example don't care about these types of movies anymore but since they want to change it like this, they seem to want to piss me off and piss other viewers off and that gets them clicks and attention. if they want to continue down this bullshit path, meh, go ahead, im not going to watch any of this crap, il just watch some anime or other shows that don't do this type of bullshit, let Holyweird crash and burn for all I care.
    1
  3958. 1
  3959. 1
  3960. 1
  3961. 1
  3962. 1
  3963. 1
  3964. 1
  3965. 1
  3966. 1
  3967. 1
  3968. 1
  3969. 1
  3970. 1
  3971. 1
  3972. 1
  3973. 1
  3974. 1
  3975. 1
  3976. 1
  3977. 1
  3978. 1
  3979. 1
  3980. 1
  3981. 1
  3982. 1
  3983. 1
  3984. 1
  3985. 1
  3986. 1
  3987. 1
  3988. 1
  3989. 1
  3990. 1
  3991. 1
  3992. 1
  3993. 1
  3994. 1
  3995. 1
  3996. 1
  3997. 1
  3998. 1
  3999. 1
  4000. 1
  4001. 1
  4002. 1
  4003. 1
  4004. 1
  4005. 1
  4006. 1
  4007. 1
  4008. 1
  4009. 1
  4010. 1
  4011. 1
  4012. 1
  4013. 1
  4014. 1
  4015. 1
  4016. 1
  4017. 1
  4018. 1
  4019. 1
  4020. 1
  4021. 1
  4022. 1
  4023. 1
  4024. 1
  4025. 1
  4026. 1
  4027. 1
  4028. 1
  4029. 1
  4030. 1
  4031. 1
  4032. 1
  4033. 1
  4034. 1
  4035. 1
  4036. 1
  4037. 1
  4038. 1
  4039. 1
  4040. 1
  4041. 1
  4042. man this does hit hard, im not sure if it sounds like depression or just dealing with the reality of like being autistic, there is a major difference between not enjoying change and being unable to change, I for example don't enjoy change, because my experience is that change brings hardships and loss of something and it's not always replaced with something that's better, also today's world is just damn insane, you can't just wake up anymore, do your job, come home and have a normal life, there is so much noise and insanity both in the world, your own life, your relationships, your family going on. Sometimes we feel haunted by our past or fear the future, sometimes both, we also don't know if we can overcome or change for the better. myself, I had a pretty shitty childhood, teenage years weren't too kind as well, graduated college and could not keep a job, then got a pretty nasty injury which took away other parts of my life I enjoyed, I felt pretty lost. then I decided to change, quit smoking, quit doing any types of drugs, little alcohol and found a new job where I work full time now, slowly bit by bit, piece by piece we try and improve and overcome but we can't always change everything or even the things that make us sad the most. but we can't give up, we have to keep going, stay positive, don't think of what could go wrong and be greatfull for the blessings we have in life, we won't ever be perfect or fine but we can endure and be better than we were yesterday, that's good enough for now.
    1
  4043. 1
  4044. 1
  4045. 1
  4046. 1
  4047. 1
  4048. 1
  4049. 1
  4050. 1
  4051. 1
  4052. 1
  4053. 1
  4054. 1
  4055. 1
  4056. 1
  4057. 1
  4058. 1
  4059. 1
  4060. 1
  4061. 1
  4062. 1
  4063. 1
  4064. 1
  4065. 1
  4066. 1
  4067. 1
  4068. 1
  4069. 1
  4070. 1
  4071. 1
  4072. 1
  4073. 1
  4074. 1
  4075. 1
  4076. 1
  4077. 1
  4078. 1
  4079. 1
  4080. 1
  4081. 1
  4082. 1
  4083. 1
  4084. 1
  4085. 1
  4086. 1
  4087. 1
  4088. 1
  4089. 1
  4090. 1
  4091. 1
  4092. 1
  4093. 1
  4094. 1
  4095. 1
  4096. 1
  4097. 1
  4098. 1
  4099. 1
  4100. 1
  4101. 1
  4102. 1
  4103. 1
  4104. 1
  4105. 1
  4106. 1
  4107. 1
  4108. 1
  4109. 1
  4110. 1
  4111. 1
  4112. 1
  4113. 1
  4114. 1
  4115. 1
  4116. 1
  4117. 1
  4118. 1
  4119. 1
  4120. 1
  4121. 1
  4122. 1
  4123. 1
  4124. 1
  4125. 1
  4126. 1
  4127. 1
  4128. 1
  4129. 1
  4130. 1
  4131. 1
  4132. 1
  4133. 1
  4134. 1
  4135. 1
  4136. 1
  4137. 1
  4138. 1
  4139. 1
  4140. 1
  4141. 1
  4142. 1
  4143. 1
  4144. 1
  4145. 1
  4146. 1
  4147. 1
  4148. 1
  4149. 1
  4150. 1
  4151.  @zanitzeuken  hahaha thanks for the laughs, again more ranting and raving and childish defence mechanism, notice how I keeo saying israel and zionism and you just keep using jews as if anti zionism = anti semitism, it's a great tool to keep you plebs confused and irrational. Very amusing but real adult talk now, the USA did once act in it's own self intrest, ww2 was the most profitable war for the USA and during the coldwar they also got suckered into other useless conflicts like vietname but again im talking about the past 40 years which you just can't seem to comprehend no matter how much i repeat it. Israeli intrest is why the USA is warmongering after Iran, the mossad lied to you which got you into iraq war, while not attacking saudi-arabia, the USA does not act in it's own self intrest and after the cold war it has declined greatly, hell the USA has to force sanctions on Russia and the EU just to keep the NATO "alliance" together, meanwhile China has profited immensly from these useless wars and NATO is destined to be replaced. The USA has gotten itself into massive debts, wars, alienated their "allies", lost all credabillity as a "peace keeping" force, all the regions you are in you are unwelcome and it's made clear "might makes right" and everyone is a terrorist in the USA's eyes. But just keep ignoring the problem, keep up the rants and delusions of self intrest, while the US empire collapses all around you both domestic and abroad. Hahahaha please make me laugh some more.
    1
  4152. 1
  4153.  @zanitzeuken  why? Because the US military backs it's claim and economic value, the USA spends the most of any nation on the planet on it's military, nobody denies the military Supremacy the USA enforces on the world and a long time the USA got away with it because of the coldwar, however the cold war is over, culturaly, technologically and esspecialy in terms of prestige the USA has lost on all grounds, even demografically the USA is falling behind. Economically the USA will be surpassed by China before 2030, our your "allies" in Europe they already understand they need to beef up their own military if they want to get rid of NATO for further economic growth, something only the USA opposes and for easy to see reasons. In terms of trade you don't have much left to offer the world, likewise the rest of the world does not offer much the USA could not produce on it's own. We already live in a multipolar world, China's belt and road, Europe's single market, Africa's african union, the south america union that just passed a trade deal with the EU, the world allows the USA to dominate the seas because the USA used to promise protection and ensured free trade, these days the USA rules more with threats, sanctions and corporate controle over communications, all these things clash with a new multipolar world that already exists and will continue to develop. As for US education it's one of the worst in the the world, close to third world nations, the universities aren't even that good anymore, lowered test scores and racist policies, the only reason people go there is for the corporate contracts and prestige which is in decline as well. China is trading with more than just the USA, hell for sanctions to work the whole world would have to obey the USA which they don't.
    1
  4154.  @zanitzeuken  what even is a superpower? The USA likes to pretend it still is one, the USA can't even controle their own borders, their own goverment, their infrastructure is that of third world countries, most movies from the USA suck, perhaps gaming and military grade weapons you might have something to offer and the 3rd world needs your grains but again your being, angry, emotional and delusional to think the USA is still the sole superpower, it's clearly not, barely able to hang on, can't compete with other countries without sancrions, wasting away trillions on useless wars that mostly benefit israel. Israel wants to dominate the middle-east and you have given them Just that, the GCC, with saudi arabia and the rest of the arab nations are allowed to fund terrorism while you defend them! If you fear losing your power so much, if you hate competition so much, if you want to remain top dog like you wish to be, then you have to understand the changing times. The USA has only been around for so long, benefited the most from ww2, cold war you won mostly because communism is stupid as hell but now? The whole world is against you, the Europeans are plotting, the Chinese are taking over right under your noses, while you play in the sand! Hell and india might even surpas China one day too, your spread to thin, why els would you need more support from NATO members? Which I highly promote by the way, make more demands, put more sanctions, more warmongering after Russia, hell raise more sanctions on them, let the whole world see the USA is in decline and is a unreliable ally hanging on to a dying glory they pissed away for nothing. Hell Europe is doing bad on many fronts exactly because they copied the USA, big mistake they will have to correct soon enough.
    1
  4155. 1
  4156.  @zanitzeuken  well your right about one thing, might makes right but the USA has never seemed this weak, hated and despised than ever before. The Europeans don't want the USA to stay, hell the USA has to force us to buy US natural gas because you hate economic competition and good relations between Europe and Russia. Btw why are you so angry and emotional? Are you afraid or something? Did I struck a nerve by educating you on the changing world? The multipolar world you so fear? Seems so. The USA is acting out of weakness, trying to project an image it no longer has, I don't see a strong USA, I see a weak, corrupt, unlawfull, narcisistic, delusional and cowardly nation that hates the rest of the world and envies other nations more than anything. Nobody here in the Netherlands wants to be like the USA, nobody wants your education, hell I don't want your media or armies here but the USA does not allow nations like Germany to build up their military to compete against US warmongering, of course that's slowly changing despite the USA'S best efforts to stop it. Trump launched sanctions on Russia and Germany for Nordstream 1 and 2 and will they back down and stop their projectd and bend over backwards for US "protection"? Hahahaha fuck no, hell this will only further promote distance between the US and European intrests. As for the UK, the UK was always more cucked and like the USA (that's why they are so full of muslims and are so weak as a people) brexit will likely happen but will it last? Will the UK survive? Will scotland or northern ireland break off? Idk, could be but I doubt it. I do find your rants and delusional ravings and childish insults amusing, it's a perfect example of american ignorance, narcisme and delusions of grandure.
    1
  4157.  @zanitzeuken  yes Europe has problems, it's very amusing for you to not take any responsability for your wars and humanitarian crisis that we (once again) had to solve and clean up the mess, I do wonder what the american perception is and how it's so screwed and delusional, our perception is the USA caused a lot of wars and we are the ones who have to deal with the fallout, perhaps that was your goverment plans all allong? Get Europe flooded by migrants, refugies, going into debt to fix your problems for you, sanctions on Russia to deny us further growth while trying to bend China to your will through tarriefs and hoping it would all come together, seems to have backfired greatly except for the UK, where the fear of refugies and lies by every media company to get them to leave the EU, if so good job on that project. Russia is our ally, more so than the USA, hell if we wanted to stop the islamization of Europe we first have to get rid of NATO, the one who fears that most is not Europe, it's the USA, you might not realise this but we are kinda in the way to all your wars in the middle-east, without NATO here you could not operate for long and most likely would have to declare war on us if we tried to stop your future wars in the middle-east. Im sure the USA is going to attack us when nukes are pointed your way, ohhhh joy. Im glad though that your sick of NATO, lets get rid of NATO! Yes kick us out! Kick Turkey out, another fun little problem you left for us to clean up, no doubt you would side with the turks than the west. Lets get rid of NATO, I fully support this, I know the USA won't let us leave and we do need to build up our military to force you out but it seems inevitable.
    1
  4158. 1
  4159.  @zanitzeuken  dude stop ranting and being delusional and look at the fact, Russia sells natural gas to Germany, Nordstream 1 and 2 are binding the two countries together, only one nations hates that, fears that and puts sanctions on both, the USA. Now why would the USA do that if they have nothing to fear? The Russian goverment and the Russian economy has been under economic sanctions by the USA for decades. Russia is not a threat, I repeat Russia is not a threat to Europe, the USA hates economy competition, fears good relations with Europe and that's why they hate these economic policies which are good for Russia, good for Europe but bad for the USA. The USA threatend European nations that imported Russian gas and has threatend sanctions unless we buy shitty US gas just to spite Russia. Why do I care that the USA likes to pretend it's a superpower? Because the USA is a burden, the USA caused the refugie crisis, the USA sends most of the propaganda we have to deal with, the USA funded and armed most of the terrorists we deal with, the USA destroyed seculare goverments that cause mass migration that you don't care about because you don't have to deal with the fallout. The USA for decades has forced us to pretend like you are our "greatest ally" and how you "liberated us from ww2" even though you profited the most from it and played both sides and left half of Europe to rot to communism. You might have a fleet but good luck defending against ICBM'S you idiot. The USA is hated and you just can't stop making things worse, you won't leave yet pretend we want you here, you cause problems that your too childish to try and fix and thus for our own national intrest we have to fix it for you. Stop with this fearmongering about Russia, Russia has an economy the size of italy, Russia is almost as much as a joke as you are but more of a reliable and economic beneficial ally than the USA. But no matter how hard we try to point that out to you, no matter how hard we try to break free, no matter how much problems you cause you still want to pretend that we need you. Why the hell do you think the EU even exists? Why do you think Europeans are in favor of an EU army? Why do you think Russia is in support of an EU army? The only one who fears our future growth, our deals with Iran and China is the USA. But I think untill we get our own army, force you idiots out, point all our nukes at you and ally with China and Russia are you going to learn how the world works. You can make your petty threats and pretend to have a big dick but your weak, your nation is weak, your goverment is corrupt and the world is changing, so cling to your ideas of "being allies" and that your still a superpower while China and the rest of the world move on without you.
    1
  4160. 1
  4161. 1
  4162. 1
  4163. 1
  4164. 1
  4165. 1
  4166. 1
  4167. 1
  4168. 1
  4169. 1
  4170. 1
  4171. 1
  4172. 1
  4173. 1
  4174. 1
  4175. 1
  4176. 1
  4177. 1
  4178. 1
  4179. 1
  4180. 1
  4181. 1
  4182. 1
  4183. 1
  4184. 1
  4185. 1
  4186. 1
  4187. 1
  4188. 1
  4189. 1
  4190. 1
  4191. 1
  4192. 1
  4193. 1
  4194. 1
  4195. 1
  4196. there is so much wrong with your take that it's actually a sign that supports his argument, your ''logic'' is the decadence in motion and not understanding of reality that actual people of the lower classes have to deal with. there is nothing alt-right about this take, it's simply accurate which is why you have to pretend it's ''alt-right'' to not take it into account. most lower class people don't want more low skilled workers, why? because letting them in lowers wages, now highly skilled labor and educated people are a huge benefit to your nation since you basically steal years of upbringing and education costs from another nation to benefit your own, while taking in violent, aggresive, criminal and huge families from third world countries who's only skills are low skilled labour jobs aren't going to benefit your nation at all and in fact will be a net drain on few resources. you are wrong and simply repeating the establishment lines who live in their own bubbles, harm the lower classes and actually fuel the ''far right'' side of politics and the reason why is because you prove them wrong, all politics in Europe from 2000-2022 has slowly moved to more acceptance of so called ''far right'' views becoming mainstream, politicans of today would be considered far right in the early 2000s and they come from both the leftwing and rightwing. you are out of touch and not part of the working class or lower classes, otherwise you would not think these elitist, ideological things that don't match reality.
    1
  4197. 1
  4198. 1
  4199. 1
  4200. 1
  4201. 1
  4202. 1
  4203. 1
  4204. 1
  4205.  @nosoulnoproblem3368  that's sexist nonsense and you know it, plenty of woman with hard work and sacrifice made it to the top position in corporate life but here is the punchline, it's bloody awful and miserable to be there for most people and for woman it's even worse because they have to give up much more than men. men can have kids while in these positions because they don't have to take 9 months off due to being pregnant and can simply exist as a provider for the family. Most woman consider themselves to be more emotional compared to men, knowing this why would woman want to be in a position in which they have to be cold, calculating and fire people if nessisary to keep a massive company going? men do it for the status and the wealth it brings which in turn attracts woman, that's the type of men that want those things that are attracted to those positions, woman don't get the same benefits because most men don't want a woman who is working 15 hours a day, earns more than them and can't help them raise their kids and spoiler alert most woman don't want men who earn less than them, so it's a lose/lose situation for woman in these positions. you know who demands these quota's to begin with? woman who can't reach those positions on their own merit so instead of accepting that, they demand the government to force themselves into those positions, where they will earn more than most men below the corporate structure and at the same time devalue the woman who actually did work their way to those positions, you just reduced a successfull woman to a mere ''quota hire'' this quota system is disfunctional, sexist, anti meritocratic and is only going to see more sexist and gender based discrimination laws going into force, the only ones who benefit from this are oppertunistic woman who don't care about gender equality and just want money, they fill their pockets, the company suffers, woman are worse off as a whole and men will look at woman in positions of power and say ''ohhh look another quota hire, how cute'' it's insulting towards woman, discriminating towards men, lowers quality and makes feminism look like a joke. any system that is not meritocratic in nature will always, always, sooner or later find itself being replace by a competitor that is, this goes for anything in nature, as well as human systems regardless of class, colour, gender or system of economics.
    1
  4206. 1
  4207. 1
  4208. 1
  4209. 1
  4210. 1
  4211. 1
  4212. 1
  4213. 1
  4214. 1
  4215. 1
  4216. 1
  4217. 1
  4218. 1
  4219. 1
  4220. 1
  4221. 1
  4222. 1
  4223. 1
  4224. 1
  4225. 1
  4226. 1
  4227. 1
  4228. 1
  4229. 1
  4230. 1
  4231. 1
  4232. 1
  4233. 1
  4234. 1
  4235. 1
  4236. 1
  4237. 1
  4238. 1
  4239. 1
  4240. 1
  4241. 1
  4242. 1
  4243. 1
  4244. 1
  4245. 1
  4246. 1
  4247. 1
  4248. 1
  4249. 1
  4250. 1
  4251. 1
  4252. 1
  4253. 1
  4254. 1
  4255. 1
  4256. 1
  4257. 1
  4258. 1
  4259. 1
  4260. 1
  4261. 1
  4262. 1
  4263. 1
  4264. 1
  4265. 1
  4266. 1
  4267. 1
  4268. 1
  4269. 1
  4270. 1
  4271.  @henkpost3379  Dat is Kraut die ken ik wel ja, hij is een beetje ....mmmmm hoe kan ik dit goed zeggen, hij is een beetje controversiële, lang verhaal waar ik liever niet in ga maar in het kort was hij erg links qua politiek, maakte vaak video's over de "far right" en "alt right" en vervolgens maakte hij een aantal vergissingen maar weigerde die toe te geven en vervolgens ging ie andere mensen in zijn eigen vrienden groep de schuld geven van zijn fouten, toen had hij zijn kanaal verwijderd en ging hij weg voor iets van 2 jaar, nu maakt hij video's over geschiedenis, vooral over Turkije, niet heel slecht maar nog steeds erg linkse oogpunt in mijn mening. Ik hou zelf niet van socialisme en haat communism maar snap ook wel dat er vele versies van zijn, in Zweden bijvoorbeeld hebben ze een erg sterke vrije markt maar vele sociale programma's, zelf zou ik meer dat soort programma's en geld gebruiken voor steun aan families en het leger (Zweden heeft vrijwel geen leger) maar dat soort socialism is nog soort van acceptabel. Helaas zoals je zelf zegt leven we in het tijdperk van progressive socialism, wat eerlijk gezegd het meeste op fascism lijkt, met knokploegen om mensen te intimideren, zaken in de fik zetten, normalizeren van "white privilage" en mensen verdelen over ras, culture, geslacht, derde golf feminisme en cencuurschap via big tech corporaties, het is echt verschrikkelijk allemaal. Ik was zelf in mijn tienerjaren links maar ben door dit soort zaken meer en meer naar extreem rechts gegaan en meer liberterisch geworden over dingen zoals vrijheid van meningsuiting, wapen wetten, identiteit, markten en versterken van familie waardes en militaire zaken, het enige waar ik met progressiven en linkse mensen in het algemeen eens mee ben is klimaat verandering, bescherming van dieren, natuur en Kern energie, maar helaas focussen vele nog op dingen zoals wind energie waar ik niet echt voorstander van ben. Hou ook niet van schuld naratief van onze verleden, ja het was niet altijd goed maar was ook niet altijd slecht, beste is om het achter ons te laten en kijken naar de toekomst, we kunnen vooreeuwig schuldig voelen en onze zondes omkopen door geld te geven maar dat lost niks op en worden beiden zwak en zielig van, het moet op een gegeven moment ophouden, hoe sneller hoe beter.
    1
  4272. 1
  4273. 1
  4274.  @henkpost3379  Trump deed het eigenlijk heel goed, geen nieuwe oorlogen, vrijheid van meningsuiting beschermen, was tegenstander van de media voor 4 jaar, zijn staat schuld is pas erg omhoog gegaan door covid lockdowns, belasting verlaging van elke klassen rjjk of arm, deregulatie, veel meer mensen aan het werk gekregen en over Biden, Biden heeft niks veranderd van Trumps buitenlandse beleid richting China, betere relaties met Europa is ook niet echt verbeterd. Eerlijk gezegd de enige reden waarom Trump verloren had was door covid-19, 4 jaar lang media heksen jacht en verdere radicalisering van de linkse mensen daar, die politici daar waren pas schandelijk, oproepen tot geweld en intimidatie, hele zaken en huizen in de fik gegooid hele jaar door, de bestorming van congres was niks, sterker nog burgers die geen wapens hadden waren om het leven gebracht, mensen zitten nu voor lange tijd in de cel en de linkse hooligans en media gebruiken het als justificatie voor nog meer mensen onderdrukking, als je denkt dat Trump erg was ben ik bang dat in de VS je nog veel erger gaat krijgen als dit de norm is van linkse partijen zijn, de rechtse partijen lopen eigenlijk achter op radicalisering. Heb zelf ook weinig vertrouwen in de verkiezingen juist door de covid-19 verandering van stem gelding plus de media en big tech die zich inmengde met de verkiezingen, Rusland deed niks in 2016 maar deze andere groepen, verbittered door hun verlies in 2016 hebben alles op alles gezet om Trump te ondermijnen, zelfs zijn Twitter stop gezet, van de president! Dat is pas schandelijk en reden voor anti trust rechtszaken. Ik vind Biden echt een idiot, die weinig zal waar maken en hoogst waarschijnlijk een 1 term president zal worden, Trump kan nog terug komen in 2024 of iemand aanwijzen als zijn vervanging met een andere soort visie. De VS is sowieso een zooitje, Trump is eerder een gevolg daarvan dan de oorzaak en dat zal zeker nog terug komen als de innerlijke corruptie en incompetentie binnen de regering niet opgelost zal worden.
    1
  4275. 1
  4276. 1
  4277. 1
  4278. 1
  4279. 1
  4280. 1
  4281. 1
  4282. 1
  4283. 1
  4284. 1
  4285. 1
  4286. 1
  4287. 1
  4288. 1
  4289. 1
  4290. 1
  4291. 1
  4292. 1
  4293. 1
  4294. 1
  4295. 1
  4296. 1
  4297. 1
  4298. 1
  4299. 1
  4300. 1
  4301. 1
  4302. 1
  4303. 1
  4304. 1
  4305. 1
  4306. 1
  4307. 1
  4308. 1
  4309. 1
  4310. 1
  4311. 1
  4312. 1
  4313. 1
  4314. 1
  4315. 1
  4316. 1
  4317. 1
  4318. 1
  4319. 1
  4320. 1
  4321. 1
  4322. 1
  4323. 1
  4324. 1
  4325. 1
  4326. 1
  4327. 1
  4328. the only way I can see Europe becoming something of an independent and stronger force in the world is if the EU somehow becomes a proper federation but also embraces more of the values that would sustain itself and refocus their efforts on both native reproduction, capitalism and return to actual western values like free speech, liberal values and some kind of collective ideology or religion. sadly I don't think that's going to happen as these values have been eroding for decades, nations still cling to the desires of national identity (while ironically ignoring the demographic issues and mass migration problems) and religion has been on the decline for decades as well with the only new religions taking shape are either Islam, Wokeism and communism/socialism while firmly rejecting anything close to fascism, extreme nationalism or even some secular, competitive, hyper environmentalism. it is rather depressing to see how far we've fallen and how both the USA, Russia, China, the middle-east and Africa seem posed to take advantage of it or even if we somehow turned this all around would team up and kick us down again. there was some hope that maybe slowly getting Russia into the EU or at least some kind of economic alliance would benefit us both to remain competitive and then the war started in 2022 which is not only hurting us and Russia, it's also throwing away many young people's lives and potentially risks nuclear war and drives us further apart from where we could have gone. what little hope is left is that people know things are bad, there are some signs of political disruption of the elites that helped caused all this, pushback against immigration and woke ideology but it will get worse before it starts to get any better and in the meantime we will have to endure being the humiliated third place between the world powers of the USA and China and risk falling yet further behind others. what a mess.
    1
  4329. 1
  4330. 1
  4331. 1
  4332. 1
  4333. 1
  4334. 1
  4335. 1
  4336. 1
  4337. 1
  4338. 1
  4339. 1
  4340. 1
  4341. 1
  4342. 1
  4343. 1
  4344. 1
  4345. 1
  4346. 1
  4347. 1
  4348. 1
  4349. 1
  4350. 1
  4351. 1
  4352. 1
  4353. 1
  4354. 1
  4355. 1
  4356. 1
  4357. 1
  4358. 1
  4359. 1
  4360. 1
  4361. 1
  4362. 1
  4363. 1
  4364. 1
  4365. 1
  4366. 1
  4367. 1
  4368. 1
  4369. 1
  4370. 1
  4371. 1
  4372. 1
  4373. 1
  4374. 1
  4375. 1
  4376. 1
  4377. 1
  4378. 1
  4379. 1
  4380. 1
  4381. 1
  4382. 1
  4383. 1
  4384. 1
  4385. 1
  4386. 1
  4387. 1
  4388. 1
  4389. 1
  4390. 1
  4391. 1
  4392. ​ @sidibill  I never claimed that fascism is about ethnicity it clearly is not, the main issue is that people aren't assimulating and becoming a open threat to the stability and social cohesion of the nations in the western world, therefor I would argue the main focus point would be the carrot and the stick of rewarding people who assimulate and removing elements that don't, which in essence will promote the same results as nat soc only less extreme. the issue is not that the whole of Europe has to be prepared to do anything, in fact the whole process is reliant on them looking the other way and not getting involved at all or at least for the most part, the main reasons why it does not happen already is because of the USA and political elites within our own societies which terrorize and indoctrinate the people to not fight for their own self intrest. as the EU becomes more independent from the USA they will start to bring more and more presure on the people who don't intergrate we see this process right now in France and it will spread, it's not a very unpopular policy for the majority of people and leaders will notice that the voters and support gained by enforcing such policies is worth more than the condemnation from other nations with perhaps the exception of the USA (esspecialy if Biden becomes president) there is no ''final solution'' at least not now, it's just an enforcement of assimulation, in fact these kind of policies ensures the unlikey event of actual fascism taking root in the west but if these policies are reversed, if they are ignored in say the UK or Germany, then the idea of an actual fascistic state or even nat soc state in the modern sense will become more likely. remember, resentment, alienation and loss of cultural and self respect of nationhood was what led to both fascism and nat soc as it eroded the trust in liberal ideology, which we see in full today, was it not for entertainment and technologies used for enforcement of government ideology these things would have erupted much sooner and much more violently.
    1
  4393. 1
  4394. 1
  4395. 1
  4396. 1
  4397. 1
  4398. 1
  4399. 1
  4400. 1
  4401. 1
  4402. 1
  4403. 1
  4404. 1
  4405. 1
  4406. 1
  4407. 1
  4408. 1
  4409. 1
  4410. 1
  4411. 1
  4412. 1
  4413. 1
  4414. 1
  4415. 1
  4416. 1
  4417. 1
  4418. 1
  4419. 1
  4420. 1
  4421. 1
  4422. 1
  4423. 1
  4424.  @CupcakeDeity  ''TBH....i dont see how this poster is sexual at all. The twerking part, eh. Maybe. Its a dance move these days, i don't think anything of it. I feel people who are bitching about it are the ones who see it in a sexual light, and THOSE people are who we have to watch out for. Cuz yall looking at little girls and thinking, "yo what's up with this, them girls ain't got no business bein' that damn sexy"'' first you deny that the poses they are making are not intented for sexualizing their bodies, even though the poses they are taking have been in explicitly sexual music video's like Nikki Minaj anaconda video, whole strip clubs have twerking specializations, then you proclaim that people who bitch about it being sexual sould be the ones looked out for because according to you the fact that people are discusted because of their poses and imitation of adult poses means they are secretly the ones who are attracted to children, I return this accusation to you by saying there is something wrong with you with having this additude and pretending like this is not the case. TBH idk how this is so hard for you to understand and why you feel the need to do these mental gymnastics, if you mispoke, fine, if you don't consider these poses to be of a sexual nature (even though they imitate sexual poses from adults) then whatever but don't acuse those who point it out as being the ones who need to be watched because that makes it seem like your defending this, it's realy that simple.
    1
  4425. 1
  4426. 1
  4427. 1
  4428. 1
  4429. 1
  4430. 1
  4431. 1
  4432. 1
  4433. 1
  4434. 1
  4435. 1
  4436. 1
  4437. 1
  4438. 1
  4439. 1
  4440. 1
  4441. 1
  4442. 1
  4443. 1
  4444. 1
  4445. 1
  4446. 1
  4447. 1
  4448. 1
  4449. 1
  4450. 1
  4451. 1
  4452. 1
  4453. 1
  4454. 1
  4455. 1
  4456. 1
  4457. 1
  4458. 1
  4459. 1
  4460. 1
  4461. 1
  4462. 1
  4463. 1
  4464. 1
  4465. 1
  4466. 1
  4467. 1
  4468. 1
  4469. 1
  4470. 1
  4471. 1
  4472. perhaps 15 years ago i might have agreed with this statement but having seen the devolution of most atheists channels and people in that community, I've seen far more deeper and wiser introspection within christianity or even islam compared to these groups and recall how in the 20th century the structure of religion was pretty much abolished in full throught the hardships and suffering in ww1 that led to the bloodiest wars in human history. the modern scientific method is a scientific tool which was codified around the 17th and 18th century in the Enlightenment but that very idea of finding the truth or it even having meaning comes from christianity and the idea that god created the world and humans should study it. some of the fathers of secularism and thinkers like Spinoza reflected on the concept of religion, the founding fathers of the USA which made a secular government with no state religion were still christians and this looking for truth, individualism and secular values has only come from the west while most of the rest of the world did not find it on their own, even with religions thousands of times older than christianity, even with some religions and ideologies being based on rationalism and with no divine being to speak of. you could argue that the west is special due to find america and developing different from most of the world as a result and that religions like christianity just were around when it happened but that would not explain why the church remained so powerfull and was so involved within this development when other religions and new ones were being formed to compete against it that all have failed for the most part.
    1
  4473. 1
  4474. 1
  4475. 1
  4476. 1
  4477. 1
  4478. 1
  4479. 1
  4480. 1
  4481. 1
  4482. 1
  4483. 1
  4484. 1
  4485. 1
  4486. 1
  4487. 1
  4488. 1
  4489. 1
  4490. 1
  4491. 1
  4492. 1
  4493. 1
  4494. 1
  4495. 1
  4496. 1
  4497. 1
  4498. 1
  4499. 1
  4500. 1
  4501. 1
  4502. 1
  4503. 1
  4504. 1
  4505. 1
  4506. 1
  4507. 1
  4508. 1
  4509. 1
  4510. 1
  4511. 1
  4512. 1
  4513. 1
  4514. 1
  4515. 1
  4516. 1
  4517. 1
  4518. 1
  4519. 1
  4520. 1
  4521. 1
  4522. 1
  4523. 1
  4524. 1
  4525. 1
  4526. 1
  4527. 1
  4528. 1
  4529. 1
  4530. 1
  4531. 1
  4532. 1
  4533. 1
  4534. 1
  4535. 1
  4536. 1
  4537. 1
  4538. 1
  4539. 1
  4540. 1
  4541. 1
  4542. 1
  4543. 1
  4544. 1
  4545. 1
  4546. 1
  4547. 1
  4548. 1
  4549. 1
  4550. 1
  4551. 1
  4552. 1
  4553. 1
  4554. 1
  4555. 1
  4556. 1
  4557. 1
  4558. 1
  4559. 1
  4560. 1
  4561. 1
  4562. 1
  4563. 1
  4564. 1
  4565. 1
  4566. 1
  4567. 1
  4568. 1
  4569. 1
  4570. 1
  4571. 1
  4572. 1
  4573. 1
  4574. 1
  4575. 1
  4576. 1
  4577. 1
  4578. 1
  4579. 1
  4580. 1
  4581. 1
  4582. 1
  4583. 1
  4584. 1
  4585. 1
  4586. 1
  4587. 1
  4588. 1
  4589. 1
  4590. 1
  4591. 1
  4592. 1
  4593. 1
  4594. 1
  4595. 1
  4596. 1
  4597. 1
  4598. 1
  4599. 1
  4600. 1
  4601. 1
  4602. 1
  4603. 1
  4604. 1
  4605. 1
  4606. 1
  4607. 1
  4608. 1
  4609. 1
  4610. 1
  4611. 1
  4612. 1
  4613. 1
  4614. 1
  4615. 1
  4616. 1
  4617. 1
  4618. 1
  4619. 1
  4620. 1
  4621. 1
  4622. 1
  4623. 1
  4624. 1
  4625. 1
  4626. 1
  4627. 1
  4628. 1
  4629. 1
  4630. 1
  4631. 1
  4632. 1
  4633. 1
  4634. 1
  4635. 1
  4636. 1
  4637. 1
  4638. 1
  4639. 1
  4640. 1
  4641.  @lynn4062  this is simply not true, the Europeans could barely survive in Africa due to the enviroment and diseases there, the continent is vast beyond any other continent, it has barely any shore or deep water shoreline that go into it, the Europeans were only able to supply themselves somewhat due to railroads which were the main investment to try and link african colonies together, there was no mass migration from Europe to africa, only minor settlers went to south africa, most went to north america or australia. as for the genocide and slavery subject, this simply did not happen at all, slaves were bought by europeans from other local african warlords, the slave trade was not as massive as the ottoman slave trade in the same region and was ended on a global scale by the british, something barely even attempted in most of human history. In fact many other african tribes like the Bantu commited genocide against the Koisam people's, the populations in africa exploded during colonialism and the entire concept of a nation like south africa only exists due to western style education and institutions that set it up. that being said there was widespread racism and often times resistances were brutally shut down but nothing like we saw in ww2. I think you like many other people in the west just can't accept that the african populations are as aggresive and unstable like Europe was centuries before, remember the west is the exception to most of human history and it's a miracle it even happened, most of the world is very brutal, unforgiving and harsh and their histories reflect this, this does not excuse any abuse or exploitation the Europeans did inflict on the local people but if you judge them on their bad actions you have to contemplate their positive actions as well which far outweigh their rule of africa, in fact all leaders during that time would have said ''we have to rule these lands or else another european nation might do it and that would make us look weak'' nobody was focused on exploitation or profits in this part of their empires, it was all about prestige and having a huge empire, at best the french, british and germans used colonial troops to add more manpower to their military but that's basically it and their use were very limited and often costed more than they were worth, this is why Germany is such a rich and powerfull nation both at that time and today, it has massive industry and non of these colonies that took resources, manpower and logistics for barely anything worth having. I don't blame you for not knowing, our educational systems don't paint a fair or deep understanding of history or the people there, the media we consume only ever speak of exploitation or racism instead of things like the abolision of slavery or the population explosion, they also don't focus on african history, they don't know anything about the rich and powerfull west and east african kingdoms, nubians, the Bantu people or how the communist Mugabe destroyed Zimbabwe or how Nelson Mandela was a terrorist or how south africa is falling apart due to racism from the majority african populations against the white minority populations. it's so much more complex than you think it is, it's not good or bad, it just is what it is.
    1
  4642. 1
  4643. 1
  4644. 1
  4645.  @rey_nemaattori  which parts? Eastern Europe are some of the biggest supporters of an EU army, while the UK (which left) and only a few southern European and northern European nations are somewhat against it. Germany and France dominate the EU economically so regardless on which way things go, no army? yes army? that won't change unless nations leave the EU which at that point might cause more nationalist movements in all nations, there realy is no way around it. As for a Grand battle plan, it's rather simple, protect, share, innovate and produce military grade weapons and organise European nations into a cohesive and shared army, it's not that hard to do, what's hard is to decide who gets what, where are the tanks produced? What types? What airplanes? Which air force command will lead said army? Which soldiers? Should it be poorer nations that get conscripted? Or just individuals from member states? What language should they use? What barriers could exist? What missions should they be used for? Would NATO be involved or not? These are some of the real questions about how it should be created. Many EU nations are members of NATO so that commanding army mostly protects European nations, to change that many nations would have to lose trust in NATO and the USA, which has already happened to a degree but it's unclear where we wish or can go as a continent. Only time will tell how things will go but I expect as the situation with China, Russia, the USA and third world nations start to heat up the move to ever closer union or even EU army will become more nessisary.
    1
  4646. 1
  4647.  @hatchxable  don't you know anything about the history of socialism and communism? The first thing they do is abolish capitalism, yes most nations today don't have completly free markets and I agree it's impossible to have a completly free market simply because every government needs checks against competition from corporations getting too powerfull, we see this in the USA with the robber barons during reconstruction period where they could bribe government officials that's when the government and part of the middle class and progressive intelectuals started to demand changes and anti trust laws (which ironically enough they should realy use on big tech companies today, yet they don't even while not under actual capitalism) However that does not mean capitalism is bad or that socialism is therefor good, in fact the richest nations today are those with free market capitalism but who also have big wellfare programs, that does not make them socialist however, wellfare is not socialism, socialism is the controle of and manipulation of market forces by the government, no exception, was the case with communists, the fascists, the nazi's they all implemented policies of this nature, rent controles, price controles, nationalizing of key industries (like in Venezuela also real socialism) Paying taxes is also not socialism because taxes have existed before socialism and will continue untill another form of wealth creation valued by humans is found, the USA however does have some socialist policies and does not rank that high anymore on free market index and that's also why the USA is in decline, some leaders and the american people themselves try to keep it running as best they can and with such a large land mass and population with continued immigration it can sustain itself for quite a long time but the corruption and inefficiënt government policies will continue to grind economic progress down. In communist China they were one of the poorest nations on earth when Mao died, after economic minster Dong started opening up the country, bringing in investment from the west and basic market forces did it's economy skyrocket and even now they have a mixed economy with little actual socialism but still the cultural and government structure of a totalitarian dictatorship, it's almost a more capitalistic form of national socialism held together with modern technology for censorship and controle but it will most likely not last, already we see some creeping of modern and western style of thinking which will speed up with each generation. Socialists don't care about workers, they care about power and about controle, they don't work for the people but against it and any government regulation or anti trust is put in place because capitalism works so well that it threatens the power structure of most governments, that's why in most nations there is a balans or rather attempt at it between corporations and the government, nobody realy represents the people or the workers anymore because truth is if workers in one country are being difficult then corporations simply export their factories to nations that aren't difficult, the market needs consumers so they do have some interest in keeping people fed but only as long as some workers and essential industries keep running, there is no easy solution, socialism however is not the solution and never will be, people have to adapt or they will be used by those that do.
    1
  4648. 1
  4649. 1
  4650. 1
  4651. 1
  4652. 1
  4653. 1
  4654. 1
  4655. 1
  4656. 1
  4657. 1
  4658.  @dogzebra2708  you do realise that without NATO that's an end to US global power projection, yes thanks for arming all our enemies, thanks for destroying our economies, thanks for spreading so much propaganda, thanks for waging war on seculare muslim countries, thanks for stealing our technology, citizens and wealth. Thanks for helping the commies win half the world, thanks for endless wars, thanks for forcing us to not be able to invest in our own military, thanks for proping up Turkey our next great war (gees I wonder who the americunts are going to side with then, probably the muslims) But im glad most americunts like you want to get rid of NATO, I mean I know beter and your generals know beter, only way to get rid of NATO is to build up our military and force them out like any other occupation army. No more multi billion US military contracts for the US military to European nation, a booming European military economy is good for us, yes lets end the US set up corrupt UN too. Im glad to see that you want to be weaker and less in controle of other countries, less influential on the world stage, I wished you guys did that during ww2 but then you never would have been a superpower. Ohhhh yes let us "fend for ourselfs" no more muslims being armed by the USA, no more wars for israel, no more global US hegemony, Russia would no longer have sanctions, no more forcing us to play allong too, no more shitty US gas instead of cheaper Russian gas. Funny how the nation that's "not threatend by anyone" is scared of Iran, EU, Russia, China and every other country in the world. Don't worry we will put an end to NATO and hopefully send you cowards back in bodybags, then it's going to be a few decades cleaning up the mess you left behind. God i hooe your generals are as stupid and retarded as you are, great benefit to us, just too bad you propped up all our enemies for so long, you don't protect shit, your all a bunch of leaches, parasites, muslim loving, globalist cocksucking, commie loving americunts.
    1
  4659. 1
  4660. 1
  4661. 1
  4662.  @UpperEchelon8  I found the arguments presented and while I agree there is a lot of truth in the arguments presented and things I did not know about the jappanese economy, there is some things that caught my attention or rather that felt left out in this situation. For starters it does not realy explain what the koreans have done that's so diffrent from what the jappanese are doing, if I remember correctly the birthrates in korea are almost as bad as that of japan with just as much restrictions on immigration as Japan, remember after ww2 japan was rapidly rebuild, now they are even more densely populated then ever before, esspecialy in urban area's, this tends to reduce birthrates, korea had the korean war and after that period they had to rebuild but also adapt to the rest of the world, back then China was barely becoming part of the world economic, untill mao died and China started to become the powerhouse it is today. What's intresting is that the youth in japan seem to have jobs because older generations are entering retirement, they all seemed to have saved up money for themselves and while the youth probably have to work harder and harder for the older generations to basicaly die off, as they die off they will reduce the social presure on their economy, lowering housing prices, healthcare costs, so on. But with so much competition in AI and mobile phones, robotics sould be their focus, I saw a prototype of civil purpose cybersuits to help individuals move and work in their old age. The Neet problem is a more depressing kind of problem that does need fixing but how? Well why not kill two birds with one stone? If japan needs people and it had a sizeable population that can't do much, why not offer them a way to work outside of japan?, Im sure they can do something, they work abroad, they meet new people, they perhaps find someone there, potentialy offer them an easy way to immigrate back to Japan when they find a mate to start a family, it might sound a bit odd if they are just useless at home or in the jappanese economy, they be more usefull elswhere and thus at least change to some degree, idk just a thought, just leaving them to die seem useless, depressing and a burden for the state.
    1
  4663. 1
  4664. 1
  4665. 1
  4666. 1
  4667. 1
  4668. 1
  4669. 1
  4670. 1
  4671. 1
  4672. 1
  4673. 1
  4674. 1
  4675. 1
  4676. 1
  4677. 1
  4678. 1
  4679. 1
  4680. 1
  4681. 1
  4682. 1
  4683. 1
  4684. 1
  4685. 1
  4686. 1
  4687. 1
  4688. 1
  4689. 1
  4690. 1
  4691. 1
  4692. 1
  4693. 1
  4694. 1
  4695. 1
  4696. 1
  4697. 1
  4698. 1
  4699. 1
  4700. 1
  4701. ​ @TheProjectVoid  I could not watch because i was at my job, I did watch it now and it's very poorly made, it's the same pro socialist cope argument made without actually going into the source of what the nazi's did or what facists said they believed in, you can look at speeches gives by both Hitler, Mussolini, the works of Ginovani Gentile (seen by many as the father of fascism) and many of the social wellfare programs and work programs funded by both the nazi's, the fascists and even FDR's new deal which Adolf Hitler and Mussolini praised before the start of ww2. every real intelectual who delves into socialism and national socialism/fascism can see how they are quite the same, the only exception which puts both fascism and national socialism slighty to the right/left of center authoritarianism is their focus on certain traditional focuses, family values and a replacement of the chruch with the state as a form of worship which makes them appear more rightwing compared to say communism or marxism but they are still socialist, the only ones who make the argument that they aren't socialist is made by well... socialists supporters who don't want to be associated with the nazi's or the fascists but their ideologies are almost exactly the same, Mussolini was a socialist before he set up the fascist party, most of nazi elites were socialists before the nazi's took power, their controle and regulation of economics is a common act of socialist policies, like price controles, there is a video by razorfist that goes into proving that nazi's were socialists as well as fascists. the argument that they weren't socialist is laughable and often based on bad comparisons between say the democratic republic of North korea, everyone knows it's not democratic because you can only vote for one person and that's always the great leader or else, this is has nothing to do with economic policies or social policies which are much more complex. the ''work through joy'' social program by the nazi's for example was a means of both propaganda, work creation (based on debt spending for the most part) and cementing nazi controle on more everyday lives. I could go on but second Thought is not a very good channel, the bias is clear and they don't know what they are talking about.
    1
  4702. 1
  4703. 1
  4704. 1
  4705. 1
  4706. 1
  4707. 1
  4708. 1
  4709. 1
  4710. 1
  4711. 1
  4712. 1
  4713. 1
  4714. 1
  4715.  @LegendNinja41  the problem however is that it was russian territory and was given to ukraine in the 1980s i believe, what was given can be taken back and many nations have annexed and ethnically cleansed lands that were not theirs, latest of which is golan hights by israel so the idea that this is some huge threat is kinda overblown. This is however how geopolitics works and Gets messy when both sides have arguments and secret agenda's for proxy conflicts. Population transfer are a bloody and messy affaire, people resist, people die, need to be relocated, start over, lose their homes, some become terrorists, having Russia annex cremea might not have been the best but might also have prevented further bloodshed. As for sanctions you are correct the sanctions hurt Russia more then they do the US or the EU but that does not make it oke, it creates conflicts, it hurts people and those who enforce order which is the whole purpose of them, divide the nation of Russia, weaken it to the benefit of the USA, Europe does not benefit, Russia is not closer in our sphere, we can't influence their society in isolation, they get stronger ties with China, much beter plan would have been to lift sanctions on Russia and demand sanctions or limits on Chinese intrest in Russia, divide and rule, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I don't consider Russia a threat, they are paranoid and surely must be matched in greater or equal force in case of a military conflict but trade and diplomatic solutions are beter.
    1
  4716. 1
  4717. 1
  4718. 1
  4719. 1
  4720. 1
  4721. 1
  4722. 1
  4723. 1
  4724. 1
  4725. 1
  4726.  @MadM0nte  ohhhh cute you actualy try to seem clever, how refreshing. Well duh they Just lost their top general in an act of war by the USA, from what I gathered the air defence saw a plane, thought it was an american plane and shot it out of the sky's, they even apologized for it. I tend not to try and go into too deep on these kinds of channels rarely do I see any civil or well educated people worth engaging, so I try and keep it simple so they can keep up and don't fall in the typical media traps they like to pretend matters. As for geo politics, demografics matter because they determine the actions of goverments, which influence geo-politics as im sure you would understand, take brexit for instance, in terms of geo-politics, the british will likely seek closer ties with the USA, as the british have left mostly because of the threat of immigration, caused by geopolitical instability caused by the USA and with the actions of Merkel, again, demografics matters, as we need the rise of nationalist parties all over Europe, largely due to demografically shifts, so too will geopolitical agenda's change. I happen to agree with you though I would add that the democratic party is less wellfare oriented and more warfare and insanity oriented, the whole democratic debate was a heap of trash and insanity from what little I cared to listen to, only Andrew Yang seemed to have any new intresting ideas at all but you wanted more about geopolitical changes and less about my observations around political and demografic changes. Most of the world just wants to trade with Iran and Europe wants to trade with Russia, as we see with Nordstream 1 and 2, the only one getting pissed off about that is the USA and some eastern European countries, so this will create a geopolitical issue for the USA, while China continues to buy ports and gains more influence in Europe and Africa, their one belt one road project will continue to expand, while Russia will strugle to get by, potentialy facing implosion if something were to happen with Putin. You seem rather angry and emotional, please when you respond can you talk like a civilized person? If you wish to learn more you sould just ask, not yell and act like a todler, it makes you look unhinged.
    1
  4727. 1
  4728. 1
  4729. 1
  4730. 1
  4731. 1
  4732. 1
  4733. 1
  4734. 1
  4735. 1
  4736. 1
  4737. 1
  4738. 1
  4739. 1
  4740. 1
  4741. 1
  4742. 1
  4743. 1
  4744. 1
  4745. 1
  4746. 1
  4747. 1
  4748. 1
  4749. 1
  4750. 1
  4751. 1
  4752. 1
  4753. 1
  4754. 1
  4755. 1
  4756. 1
  4757. 1
  4758. 1
  4759. 1
  4760. 1
  4761. 1
  4762. 1
  4763. 1
  4764. 1
  4765. 1
  4766. 1
  4767. 1
  4768. 1
  4769. 1
  4770. 1
  4771. 1
  4772. 1
  4773. 1
  4774. 1
  4775. 1
  4776. 1
  4777. 1
  4778. 1
  4779. 1
  4780. 1
  4781. 1
  4782. 1
  4783. 1
  4784. 1
  4785. 1
  4786. 1
  4787. 1
  4788. 1
  4789. 1
  4790. 1
  4791. 1
  4792. 1
  4793. 1
  4794. 1
  4795. 1
  4796. 1
  4797. 1
  4798. 1
  4799. 1
  4800. 1
  4801. 1
  4802. 1
  4803. 1
  4804. 1
  4805. 1
  4806. 1
  4807. 1
  4808. 1
  4809. 1
  4810. 1
  4811. 1
  4812. 1
  4813. 1
  4814. 1
  4815. 1
  4816. 1
  4817. 1
  4818. 1
  4819. 1
  4820. 1
  4821. 1
  4822. 1
  4823. 1
  4824. 1
  4825. 1
  4826. 1
  4827. 1
  4828. 1
  4829. 1
  4830. 1
  4831. 1
  4832. 1
  4833. 1
  4834. 1
  4835. 1
  4836. 1
  4837. 1
  4838. 1
  4839. 1
  4840. 1
  4841. 1
  4842. 1
  4843. 1
  4844. 1
  4845. 1
  4846. 1
  4847. 1
  4848. 1
  4849. 1
  4850. 1
  4851. 1
  4852. 1
  4853. 1
  4854. 1
  4855. 1
  4856. 1
  4857. 1
  4858. 1
  4859. 1
  4860. 1
  4861. 1
  4862. 1
  4863. 1
  4864. 1
  4865. 1
  4866. 1
  4867. 1
  4868. 1
  4869. 1
  4870. 1
  4871. 1
  4872. 1
  4873. 1
  4874. 1
  4875. 1
  4876. 1
  4877. 1
  4878. 1
  4879. 1
  4880. 1
  4881. 1
  4882. 1
  4883. 1
  4884. 1
  4885. 1
  4886. 1
  4887. 1
  4888. 1
  4889. 1
  4890. 1
  4891. 1
  4892. 1
  4893. 1
  4894. 1
  4895. 1
  4896. 1
  4897. 1
  4898. 1
  4899. 1
  4900. 1
  4901. 1
  4902. 1
  4903. 1
  4904. 1
  4905. 1
  4906. 1
  4907. 1
  4908. I think this is a very poorly made video for a number of reasons. The first reason is that the current rightwing is not actually that rightwing, the republican party consists of many factions that aren't that willing to see eye to eye because they don't agree on many issues, the left also suffers from this but is more conformist to the elitist class so they appear stronger, while in reality their alliance is very fragile and growing more fragile by the day which will likely be reflected in the midterms. The second thing is that it's jot just about raw fire power which the rightwing still has plenty of and many democratic states aren't trying to catch up to, groups like Antifa might but they are a very small group and pose more of a threat to themselves and their political ideology, the scale of potential is realy small for them while the rightwing in the USA consists of Veterans, gun fanatics, patriots and the military itself. The third thing is that Trump while a leader, is not a warlord nor is he trying to become one, he mostly lost due a temporary chain reactions of bad luck, democratic policy changes and a very powerfull alliance of elites within big tech and within the deep state these are the truly powerfull forces that pose a major threat to the rightwing and controle narratives, major corporations and universities, these forces would be much harder to defeat then the actual voter base or army forces of the democratic party. And fourth is the USA as a super power has a vested interest of the rest of the world to remain stable, even if it's breaking down from the inside and having major problems the rest of the world would support the side that benefits them the most, these are also a powerfull group that influence public opinion and is what makes rightwing people not risk a civil war because unlike the leftwing, they realise just how important the USA is and their image to project power. As China grows stronger under the current regime more and more nations will prefer Trumps policies and pro americanism over the weak and anti americanism of the democratic party but this also depends on Trump or his replacement, there is a real probability that someone from the democratic party might even become tempted to switch sides to symbolise the change of hearts and mind due to power Trump has it will grow stronger as Biden fails to rule things properly, it would not be someone well known, it would be someone from the lower ranks but who sees where the democratic party is going. To win is not to crush your enemies, to win is to make them switch sides without having to fight at all, a civil was is just not beneficial for the USA for now but that might change.
    1
  4909. 1
  4910. 1
  4911. 1
  4912. 1
  4913. 1
  4914. 1
  4915. 1
  4916. 1
  4917. 1
  4918. 1
  4919. 1
  4920. 1
  4921. 1
  4922. 1
  4923. 1
  4924. 1
  4925. 1
  4926. 1
  4927. 1
  4928. 1
  4929. 1
  4930. 1
  4931. 1
  4932. 1
  4933. 1
  4934. 1
  4935. 1
  4936. 1
  4937. 1
  4938. 1
  4939. 1
  4940. 1
  4941. 1
  4942. 1
  4943. 1
  4944. 1
  4945. 1
  4946. 1
  4947. 1
  4948. 1
  4949. 1
  4950. 1
  4951. 1
  4952. 1
  4953. 1
  4954. 1
  4955. 1
  4956. 1
  4957. 1
  4958. 1
  4959. 1
  4960. 1
  4961. 1
  4962. 1
  4963. 1
  4964. 1
  4965. 1
  4966. 1
  4967. 1
  4968. 1
  4969. 1
  4970. 1
  4971. 1
  4972. 1
  4973.  Drew 38  you do realise the rest of the world trades and shit? Your saying a bit contredictory things, of the Chinese sell to the USA that means US consumers benefit from trade with China, if the USA put sanctions on China that means the USA hurts their own economy as well, you could argue they would just deal with it which they can but you honestly think China is just going to starve? It's not like they can sell or produce their own goods and sell them to other nations. If you guys had done this in the early 90s it probably could have worked but now? China can just lend money and trade essencials which they were already getting from Europe and other countries. The sanctions will slow growth down for sure but it's not something existenial threatning to China. The british don't have much to offer, the USA does not have much to offer. The USA by being so isolationist and focused on their own market means they don't suffer from sanctions put on other nations, however if other nations who rely on trade more then the USA means they will put trade ahead of politics, you can't have it both ways. Now if the USA convinced all western allies to sanction China and blocked the Chinese sea trade routes (which China has tried to avoid with one belt one road) then it might be more effective but seeing as China is still here it seems to not be working out as you planned, just my observation. The USA would probably lose a lot of power projection if it gave up it's military dominance, people play allong because it's cheaper for them, for now but not anymore in the near future.
    1
  4974. 1
  4975. 1
  4976. 1
  4977. 1
  4978. 1
  4979. 1
  4980. 1
  4981. 1
  4982. 1
  4983. 1
  4984. 1
  4985. 1
  4986. 1
  4987. 1
  4988. 1
  4989. 1
  4990. 1
  4991. 1
  4992. 1
  4993. 1
  4994. 1
  4995. 1
  4996. 1
  4997. 1
  4998. 1
  4999. 1
  5000. 1
  5001. 1
  5002. 1
  5003. 1
  5004. 1
  5005. 1
  5006. 1
  5007. 1
  5008. 1
  5009. if there is one aspect of modern western society I think is the most pathetic and disappointing it would be woman's rights and woman in positions of power, since as a child and teenager I supported womans right and thought they were as smart if not smarter than most men but as I've grown older, I've mostly seen a lot of failings on their part, being put into positions of power due to quota's by the government, having society cater to their every whim, while at the same time demanding men comply to their demands both in wealth distribution, time and equality in terms of power while at the same time getting advantages by the government, Feminism being so widespread and promoted and any criticism being censored or attacked as being unfair while at the same time promoting ideas and policies that openly harm those same woman while pretending like men still rule over them and ''holding them back'' or nonsense such as the gender pay gap being seen as true. it's honestly very sad to see the state of the western world and even more insulting and silly are the counter arguments people present to this if they even allow such things to be said to them. you could argue that men lost because they did not maintain gender rolls and so it's their fault for being in this current state to begin with but seeing as the whole point was equality for it then to be thrown away and wasted by woman themselves seems like more their loss than for men. if your a female who works hard, wants to be seen as equal and not above and don't support radical feminism then you are the exception but for the majority of both men and females this is not the reality the western world lives in and it's only in the western world where this current aberration seems to exist.
    1
  5010. 1
  5011. 1
  5012. 1
  5013. 1
  5014. 1
  5015. 1
  5016. 1
  5017. 1
  5018. 1
  5019. 1
  5020. 1
  5021. 1
  5022. 1
  5023. 1
  5024. 1
  5025. 1
  5026. 1
  5027. 1
  5028. 1
  5029. 1
  5030. 1
  5031. 1
  5032. 1
  5033. 1
  5034. 1
  5035. 1
  5036. 1
  5037. 1
  5038. 1
  5039. 1
  5040. 1
  5041. 1
  5042. 1
  5043. 1
  5044. 1
  5045. 1
  5046. 1
  5047. 1
  5048. 1
  5049. 1
  5050. 1
  5051. 1
  5052. 1
  5053. 1
  5054. 1
  5055. 1
  5056. 1
  5057. 1
  5058. 1
  5059. 1
  5060. 1
  5061. 1
  5062. 1
  5063. 1
  5064. 1
  5065. 1
  5066. 1
  5067. 1
  5068. 1
  5069. 1
  5070. 1
  5071. 1
  5072. 1
  5073. 1
  5074. 1
  5075. 1
  5076. 1
  5077. 1
  5078. 1
  5079. 1
  5080. 1
  5081. 1
  5082. 1
  5083. 1
  5084. 1
  5085. 1
  5086. 1
  5087. 1
  5088. 1
  5089. 1
  5090. 1
  5091. 1
  5092. 1
  5093. 1
  5094. 1
  5095. 1
  5096. 1
  5097. 1
  5098. 1
  5099. 1
  5100. 1
  5101. 1
  5102. 1
  5103. 1
  5104. 1
  5105. 1
  5106. 1
  5107. 1
  5108. 1
  5109. 1
  5110. 1
  5111. 1
  5112. 1
  5113. 1
  5114. 1
  5115. 1
  5116. 1
  5117. 1
  5118. 1
  5119. 1
  5120. 1
  5121. 1
  5122. 1
  5123. 1
  5124. 1
  5125. 1
  5126. 1
  5127. 1
  5128. 1
  5129. 1
  5130. 1
  5131. 1
  5132. 1
  5133. 1
  5134. 1
  5135. 1
  5136. 1
  5137. 1
  5138. 1
  5139. 1
  5140. 1
  5141. 1
  5142. 1
  5143. 1
  5144. 1
  5145. 1
  5146. 1
  5147. 1
  5148. 1
  5149. 1
  5150. 1
  5151. 1
  5152. 1
  5153. 1
  5154. 1
  5155. 1
  5156. 1
  5157. 1
  5158. 1
  5159. 1
  5160. 1
  5161. 1
  5162. 1
  5163. 1
  5164. 1
  5165. 1
  5166. 1
  5167. 1
  5168. 1
  5169. 1
  5170. 1
  5171. 1
  5172. 1
  5173. 1
  5174. 1
  5175. 1
  5176. 1
  5177. 1
  5178. 1
  5179.    I agree, the more we reject who we are as a people the more we move towards this sad and miserable state of being, I however would add that since we are animals under darwinistic presures, there is the inevitable that those people who are weak and bend over backwards for the outsider groups and bow to their desires will cease to exist while those who reject it and embrace more ''far right'' views will likely grow in size, power or seen as nessisary, we already have seen this and continue to see this in Europe, with populism and nationalism taking center stage while centrist parties are forced to resort to desperate measures, adopt those same populsit policies they reject to get relected or forced to face the truth that assimulation is not happening and there are issues we need to solve. I would say Europe right now is a lot like weimar germany, lots of conflicting ideologies, problems in the right wing and left wing, minority groups seen as problems (real or imagined) diseases, economic depressions, crisis, incompetent leadership, it's all there. im not saying or hoping the nazi's come back or the commies but I think from this will most likely come a new type of ideological which will be seen as radical and will most likely attempt to unify Europe into a single state in order to give it new purpose and to reject elements within society that it sees as threats or burdens to reach that goal, I'm already seeing it in many of the youth, even if they are far left or far right they both have some form of pan European idealism some out of a sense of culture others out of pragmatism others still more racially or enviromentally focused.
    1
  5180. 1
  5181. 1
  5182. 1
  5183. 1
  5184. 1
  5185.  @PlatosGooncave  plz watch this romanian who speaks russian on the subject of Russia https://youtu.be/Kesrrj450JI Not sure who this blogger is so can't give my take on him but your partly right, Russia has lots of resources, food, land to grow food on and is likely to benefit from climate change in the long run, all of these things are true, Russia also has one of the most abortions in the world, highest alcoholism, most m.......s and mosques in all of Europe, their demografics are terrible but at least their government is trying to do something about it, which is not always the case with most of Europe like Germany. As for Putin's regime, it's realy not that popular and has many problems that makes a stable Russian government difficult, esspecialy when Putin can no longer rule which is likely to be pretty soon since he has Parkinson's disease. Russia does have a lot of potential if it could solve it's problems within and solidify positive relations with China and Europe and no those relationships, even with China are not great, you can look up Caspian Report on that geo-political relationship. As for Europe many of Russia's former USSR nations dislike Russia, even Belarus has issues with Russia, Ukraine might even join NATO and the EU over time. Russia like most of Europe for that matter is in a difficult spot, it can try and cling to it's former empire and try and maintain it with a strong military while everything else falls apart, pray that climate change will give a massive boom to their economy or it can try and improve it's relations with the west and be a stronger block against China or become a second junior partner with China against the west but this might not be in their interest. Russia is not in a very good spot right now but it might if it plays it's cards right and benefits from climate change but even then I doubt they will be able to maintain their current power forever, they aren't weak but they are stagnating the same as everyone else.
    1
  5186. 1
  5187. 1
  5188. 1
  5189. 1
  5190. 1
  5191. 1
  5192. 1
  5193. 1
  5194. 1
  5195. 1
  5196. 1
  5197. 1
  5198. 1
  5199. 1
  5200. 1
  5201. 1
  5202. 1
  5203. 1
  5204. 1
  5205. 1
  5206. 1
  5207. 1
  5208. 1
  5209. 1
  5210. 1
  5211. 1
  5212. 1
  5213. 1
  5214. 1
  5215. 1
  5216. 1
  5217. 1
  5218. 1
  5219. 1
  5220. 1
  5221. 1
  5222. 1
  5223. 1
  5224. 1
  5225. 1
  5226. 1
  5227. 1
  5228. 1
  5229.  @dadsonworldwide3238  the germans got pretty far with what little they had, I find it very hard to believe they negotiated an end to collonialism, since every European power wanted to enforce their collonial rule but was stopped by the USA, you even had opperation unthinkable that would have liberated the rest of Europe which was supposedly the whole point of the war to begin with but the USA sayd no. The USA is hypocritical because it's propagandized this image of "freedom loving, americans, liberating Europe from the evil nazi's" but in reality the nazi's were the closest to manifest destiny of the USA, the USA was what inspired Hitler to begin with, there is reason why they banned his books for so long, you read worst things on youtube comments everyday. But the issue i have is not on any moral grounds, it's the lies, the fabrication and theft of European culture, citizens, media and history for the gain of the USA, while communism was left to ravage the world. The USSR was largely incompetent, ruled by an even more totalitarian leader than Hitler, the whole of ww2 is a giant joke to me, of lying self intrested people and nations on all sides and nobody has learned anything from the war. But I don't care about all that much since it"s not going to change, the USA has enforced it's will, tricked the british, betrayed the west and took what they wanted, what my issue is that NATO sould not exist, the USA sould not be in any other country besides their own region and perhaps Japan and south korea, yet they expanded more and more, use sanctions to kill millions and use wars and arming of terrorists to finish the rest, the USA loves the current order because they benefit the most from it. The USA hates peace and loves war, they love "free trade" but only if they benefit most, they hate theocratic goverments but ally with saudi arabia and israel, they say they respect nations but ignore problems that makes that a delusional fantasy. What future is there with the USA? Non, worse than non, as long as nations buy US military goodies they are happy, if they want independence and self determination they will make threats and sanctions.
    1
  5230.  @dadsonworldwide3238  yes I read all about the middle-east and those treaties, typical people say read more on history when they lack an understanding of it, I don't realy have that, I read all the history books, most of the banned books and books on power and goverment institutions. Not very important in the Grand scheme of things, much more important would be the partition of british mandate of palestine into the state of israel and palestine, which is the flashpoint for most wars in the middle-east today. WW2 was mostly a unessisary war that destroyed Germany because of the poor decisions made by the british, the americans and the french, not having population transfers after ww1, blaming the war on Germany (while austria-hungary caused it by threatning serbia with their insane ultimatum), combine that with the stab in the back myth by german generals and the monarch elites and the rise of communism partly led by jewish intelectuals like Rosa Luxemburg and Leon Trotsky (see spartacus rebellion, Bavaria) stoked the fires for a wave of anti semitism. Something most history books will fail to mention. As for India, the british raj was quite brutal in it's crackdown of protests, starvation caused by Winston Churchill actions to ensure food rations were filled for the war made India rebel again. But it was the americans and their involvement because of the Zimmermann telegraf that "forced them" into the war that was the most stupid act by the USA, the USA for decades wanted isolation and denied any attempt by European empires to gain influence on the two continents while the USA could just get involved with European affairs. The true irony is that Germany in ww2 basicaly tried to copy the USA's manifest destiny, just a few centuries to late to be tolorated by the other powers, the UK lost the most while they could have kept their empire they decided war was the beter alternative then sharing influence with Germany. Im not here to make excuses for what the germans did in ww2, simply saying the Actions by the british and americans contributed more to the german reactions during the war then they like to admit and in the end, they simply traded one despotic tyrant in for an even worse one Stalin. And now we live in the shadow of the fiction that largely is ww2, not because it did not happen but because history is not remembered at all, every year we repeat the same puppet show while we ignore what caused it, dooming humanity to repeat it again. Fdr was praised by Hitler and Stalin for his new deal, he was basicaly the third dictator in the making, though as they say, the victor writes the history books.
    1
  5231. 1
  5232. 1
  5233. 1
  5234. 1
  5235. 1
  5236. 1
  5237. 1
  5238. I think this is a rather incoherent pipe dream if im honest. Like I understand and agree that France and Germany have weak, putinist leaders who don't have the brains or will to see the big picture and are still pretending like this won't end any other way than the collapse of Russia as a state or a complete replacement of the Russian leadership with a weakened and humiliated Russia. But the idea that the UK of all nations is going to lead some economic and military block/alliance is just a very bad joke, they can barely controle their own borders, aren't economically that connected to any other nation besides the EU and would have to replace the EU which has decades upon decades of further evolved laws, regulations, trade deals, cultural projects and joint military projects all because the current leadership of France and Germany are somewhat out of touch in a conflict between Russia and Ukraine? Really? France and Germany have already send some heavy weapons, Ukrainian soldiers are getting training with some modern weapons systems in Germany, as well as old weapons systems for Ukraine to use, now is this great? Not really but it's not nothing and sooner or later these nations leaders will have to come to terms that their big investments into Russia and with Putin have failed and were a huge mistake which some people warned about for years and now they have to really come to terms that they need to step up or lose faith on a big scale. What's shamefull is that it's taking them so long, they should have seen the writing on the walls at least 2-3 months ago, though they might be able to redeem themselves by making Ukraine a potential EU member and esspecialy providing funds for a kind of Ukrainian marshall plan, EU membership within 5-8 years is a bit too fast but within 10 years with proper effort by both the EU and Ukraine should be reasonable.
    1
  5239. 1
  5240. 1
  5241. 1
  5242. 1
  5243. 1
  5244.  @mistermyself1128  you are kinda contradicting yourself because you said that they are traitors and were trying to overthrow the government, I said they were fighting for their independence just like the USA did to the british, your reply is that they are traitors because they lost but if they had won they would not be traitors but revolutionairs? how are the founding fathers not trying to overthrow the british government if in that case they aren't rebels? last time i checked the british crown still existed and the USA does not rule the UK but by your logic they are still traitors and therefor rebels and trying to overthrow the british government even though they won, which then does not make them traitors in your word? im sorry but your not making a lot of sense here, perhaps your logic is that the victor writes the history books and that this whole notion of treason or revolution only depends on who wins? is it not that they are both the same thing but you are simply unwilling to admit it because otherwise how els can you depict the losing side as being not exactly the same as your side? sure seems like it. if your states declare independence then you are a seperate state, former part of the USA if the other state does not recognize the newly created state then they send in the army which the US did, aka they invaded the south, your strange attempt at logic by saying they aren't independent because they aren't recognized rather then saying they aren't recognized because they aren't seen as legitimate so you can therefor not invade them seems silly but again you seem very biased and unable to wrap your mind around simple concepts such as an invading army attempting to stop another nations independence because treason, idk you aren't making a lot of sense in what your trying to say. what do you mean you guys? im not american and it's the federal and state government and teachers unions that regulate public eduction no? your using emoticons, seem very emotional and can't communicate properly what your trying to argue for while making childish assumptions, so I don't quite value your opinion on anything realy even less so now but I just find it amusing how you think logic and words work and laugh at how emotional and clearly frustrated you are about this specific topic for some reason. im not american so perhaps that's why, it's less of a personal issue for me then it seems to be for you, again not quite sure why.
    1
  5245.  @mistermyself1128  what do you define as US property? how is forming your own government with people who represent the states overthrowing the government? it's at best questioning the legitmacy of the federal government's authority over the states that are trying to form it's own government. a coup is defined as wanting to remove the esteblished government and it's rulers and replace them with your own often via the use of the military but that's not what the civil war was about, because the confederate states weren't trying to take over the US government they wanted independence from the US government. now you can say ''well the government of the USA does not recognize that and therefor pretends like they are commiting treason against the USA and should be treated as traitors and not as simply a new nation that formed out of their borders'' but from the confederate perspective they weren't traitors they were fighting for independence. I think your additude is rather divisive and kinda proves the point of people in the south picking up arms and still continue to remember the strugle for independence in a more positive light then many in the north do, if the US government is this tyranical and does not allow states to become nations again or get the freedom and self government that they desire if they desire it then how els are they suppose to gain their freedom? are they just suppose to abandon the USA and look for other countries to migrate to because the USA is just so authoritarian and considers it's citizens to be mere resources and not people that fighting it means death? is that what the USA stands for? if that's the case then civil war seems inevitable because many americans love the country and seem willing to fight for it to defend it's ideals upon which it is based rather then bend over for the government, esspecially now with the new administration and next one after it being more and more tyranical and many people being so divided.
    1
  5246. 1
  5247. 1
  5248. 1
  5249. 1
  5250. 1
  5251.  @mistermyself1128  actualy we are, we get censored on all major platforms, we get attacked by the media, we get racially discriminated against by the state and publically funded institutions and typically face more crime and police brutality while also being denied equal treatment by both the government and the media companies that contole most of the global forms of communication. The truth is you don't care about that because you are a pro authoritarian who likes the power and the silencing and oppresion of others who you disagree with but will likely realise your mistake when it's you that get censored, attacked or discriminated against. The USA is an oligarchy in all but name, the rich and the corporations rule most of the government, political parties and get the most favor and even public support via subsidies paid for by tax payer money. YouTube is a company under Google and Google is a group under alphabet and with other groups they controle most of global communication and dictate who gets to have a voice and who does not, not only do they controle most forms of communication and work with political groups to maintain and direct that power and influence but they also work together with other companies and media corporations to attack potential competition and seek to remove their presence off the internet, sometimes attacking payment processors or writing hit pieces with the specific purpose to get them censored, it's why most US citizens don't trust the corporate media and why anti trust lawsuits are being made to remove Facebook, Twitter and Google off 230 protection. Now you can just pretend like non of this matters and that people like me aren't being oppressed, alienated or discriminated against or are "snowflakes" but in the real world these things matter, this is real power, and more oppresive and threatening to both the west and the world then groups like ISIS, Iran or Russia can ever be, the only one close to it is China and that's because they have their own system of controle and censorship, theirs is even more oppresive and they use the same systems as Google and Youtube they just don't use a proxy like the USA has right now. Just remember next time you get censored, attacked or discriminated against just know that some people warned you about it for years before you caught on, your welcome.
    1
  5252. 1
  5253. 1
  5254. 1
  5255. 1
  5256. 1
  5257. 1
  5258. 1
  5259. 1
  5260. 1
  5261. 1
  5262. 1
  5263. 1
  5264. 1
  5265. 1
  5266. 1
  5267. 1
  5268. 1
  5269. 1
  5270. 1
  5271. 1
  5272. 1
  5273. 1
  5274. 1
  5275. 1
  5276. 1
  5277. 1
  5278. 1
  5279. 1
  5280. 1
  5281. 1
  5282. 1
  5283. 1
  5284. 1
  5285. 1
  5286. 1
  5287. 1
  5288. 1
  5289. 1
  5290. 1
  5291. 1
  5292. 1
  5293. 1
  5294. 1
  5295. I kinda dislike both sides ultimate goal of what they consider to be ''good'' while at the same time viewing some of their views to be correct or noble to a certain degree. I don't realy understand religion, it's something I've never been able to feel or understand so I can't say religion is that great, however i do notice that people need religion in one form or another, if not christianity then they will devolve into social justice insanity, so no matter what people need some sort of believe structure, though I don't know which one is ideal, I have some views in mind but I also understand that most people don't believe in them or consider them morally correct. as for the perfection of humanity, I sorta understand this mindset, the progress made by technology has given western civlization immense power over the world and thus believe that humans could be perfected can give those that do so immense power, perhaps by gene editing, advanced AI, quantum computing, robotic warfare, automation or cybernetic implants are a real engines of change that will shape our future in one way or another at least for those who will grasp it correctly. humanity's nature is that of conflict and wanting to dominate others in one form or another, this does not mean that people born low can't rise to the top, the very idea is that those that earn it deserve it and that the system that creates those that reach the top are there because they earned it and it shows the fairness and competitive nature that leads to improvement of society, sadly our western society today looks almost nothing like this, those that are weak are rewarded for their weakness, people who are parasites on society get rewarded and those who rig and manipulate the system via government, big tech monopolies, media manipulation or social justice are seen as powefull while they live off the labor, works and effort of better people, this is why western civlization is in decline, if you aren't rewarded for noble acts or powerfull action then why would you believe in the system? why would you want things to continue? for many people the collapse is seen as salvation because it would mean the collapse of this house of cards. as for what could save the western world? honestly a pandemic (a real one), war or total economic collapse might do the trick, it's not something I look forward to but I can't think of anything that would shake up the system or lets people question the next move, also since nations are aging rapidly, a pandemic would remove those currently in power and their main voter bases that are stuck in old lines of thinking, giving way for radical new political movements, religions or ideologies. enough ranting for today but this issue is something I see pop up everyday, on the radio, going to work, online, in the family and friends, it be nice if it could be solved and have some more stability in the west.
    1
  5296. 1
  5297. 1
  5298. 1
  5299. 1
  5300. 1
  5301. 1
  5302. 1
  5303.  @frankthetank5708  that's not actually true, the membership process is not dependent on time, it's dependent on the situation, the value of the nation and the amount of democratic, values and economic development the nation in question has, Turkey was making strong headways into becoming part of the EU, there were a lot of voices within the EU, mostly eastern europe but also some western european nations that did not want Turkey in the EU but progress was made, that all stopped when Erdogan started issueing purges of the army, his parlement, the judges and imposing himself as being able to be relected forever, since then the membership progress has been on hold. as for north macedonia, Serbia or albania, the main issue stopping them is their low levels of economic development, high rate of corruption and the issues around Kosovo. the UK has non of these downsides, it already was a member not so long ago, it was one of it's founding member even, the UK has a strong economy, democratic values, nobody would oppose them joining the EU, if the UK today decided we want a new refurendum, they hold it somewhere in mid 2022, they vote majority yes on joining, then starts the joining process but since the UK already has all the major boxes ticked it would probably only take 1/2 years to be complete, perhaps sooner if all sides can agree on certain issues. Scotland could break off the UK and have an even shorter time in joining the EU since their issues are less severe compared to the UK as a whole, esspecialy with the northern ireland issue.
    1
  5304. 1
  5305. 1
  5306. 1
  5307. 1
  5308. 1
  5309. 1
  5310. 1
  5311. 1
  5312. 1
  5313. 1
  5314. 1
  5315. 1
  5316. 1
  5317. 1
  5318. 1
  5319. 1
  5320. 1
  5321. 1
  5322. 1
  5323. 1
  5324. 1
  5325. 1
  5326. 1
  5327. 1
  5328. 1
  5329. 1
  5330. 1
  5331. 1
  5332. 1
  5333. 1
  5334. 1
  5335. 1
  5336. 1
  5337. 1
  5338. 1
  5339. 1
  5340. 1
  5341. 1
  5342. 1
  5343. 1
  5344. 1
  5345. 1
  5346. 1
  5347. 1
  5348. 1
  5349. 1
  5350. 1
  5351. 1
  5352. 1
  5353. 1
  5354. 1
  5355. 1
  5356. 1
  5357. 1
  5358. 1
  5359. 1
  5360. 1
  5361. 1
  5362. 1
  5363. 1
  5364. 1
  5365. 1
  5366. 1
  5367. 1
  5368. 1
  5369. 1
  5370. 1
  5371. 1
  5372. 1
  5373. 1
  5374. 1
  5375. 1
  5376. 1
  5377. 1
  5378. 1
  5379. 1
  5380. 1
  5381. 1
  5382. 1
  5383. 1
  5384. 1
  5385. 1
  5386. 1
  5387. 1
  5388. 1
  5389. 1
  5390. 1
  5391. 1
  5392. 1
  5393. 1
  5394. 1
  5395. 1
  5396. 1
  5397. 1
  5398. 1
  5399. 1
  5400. 1
  5401. 1
  5402. 1
  5403. 1
  5404. 1
  5405. 1
  5406. 1
  5407. 1
  5408. 1
  5409. 1
  5410. 1
  5411. 1
  5412. 1
  5413. 1
  5414. 1
  5415. 1
  5416. 1
  5417. 1
  5418. 1
  5419. 1
  5420. 1
  5421. 1
  5422. 1
  5423. 1
  5424. 1
  5425. 1
  5426. 1
  5427. 1
  5428. 1
  5429. 1
  5430. 1
  5431. 1
  5432. 1
  5433. 1
  5434. 1
  5435. 1
  5436. 1
  5437. 1
  5438. 1
  5439. 1
  5440. 1
  5441. 1
  5442. 1
  5443. 1
  5444. 1
  5445. 1
  5446. 1
  5447. 1
  5448. 1
  5449. 1
  5450. 1
  5451. 1
  5452. 1
  5453. 1
  5454. 1
  5455. 1
  5456. 1
  5457. 1
  5458. 1
  5459. 1
  5460. 1
  5461. 1
  5462. 1
  5463. 1
  5464. 1
  5465. 1
  5466. 1
  5467. 1
  5468. 1
  5469. 1
  5470. 1
  5471. 1
  5472. 1
  5473. 1
  5474. 1
  5475. 1
  5476. 1
  5477. 1
  5478. 1
  5479. 1
  5480. 1
  5481. 1
  5482. 1
  5483. 1
  5484. 1
  5485. 1
  5486. 1
  5487. 1
  5488. 1
  5489. 1
  5490. 1
  5491. 1
  5492. 1
  5493. 1
  5494. 1
  5495. 1
  5496. 1
  5497. 1
  5498. 1
  5499. 1
  5500. 1
  5501. 1
  5502. 1
  5503. 1
  5504. 1
  5505. 1
  5506. 1
  5507. 1
  5508. 1
  5509. 1
  5510. 1
  5511. 1
  5512. 1
  5513. 1
  5514. 1
  5515. 1
  5516. 1
  5517. 1
  5518. 1
  5519. 1
  5520. 1
  5521. 1
  5522. 1
  5523. 1
  5524. 1
  5525. 1
  5526. 1
  5527. I don't want to be defeatist, I like to see myself as a realist and il be honest, I'm just not seeing the resistance towards China, many elites and companies still sell out to china, most goods still come from China, the EU and others are acting in ways that benefits china or their allies. The Chinese have a lot of influence in our politics, educational systems, they are projecting force in a way the USA and others don't seem to keen to match or act upon and we aren't stepping up our game to match them and China's technology and military development is becoming on par to that of the USA in many but not all fields, I would say it's scary but really it's all very predictable we aren't focusing on the long term future or making plans for the future, China as authoritarian and totalitarian as it is, is doing that. the only thing we (we as in the west and our allies) have going for us is that nobody wants China to be the next superpower, that does not mean they won't become one anyways or become desperate and start acting irrationally but if we can maintain and improve our alliance around the world and match China's military and economic might as well as dare to stand up to allies of China and China does nothing to help them, the world would then view China as a paper dragon, however right now they aren't a paper dragon and despite what your seeing and people being angry against China at the end of the day as long as the CCP is around and we keep stagnating and China keeps improving however slowly at some point they will catch up and erode the alliance we have against them, the best thing you can do today is don't support or vote for people who support China's agenda and weakens your own nation or it's military, to enforce one must first have force, otherwise all you have are angry letters which did nothing to stop Hitler or Stalin.
    1
  5528. 1
  5529. 1
  5530. 1
  5531. 1
  5532. 1
  5533. 1
  5534. 1
  5535. 1
  5536. 1
  5537. 1
  5538. 1
  5539. 1
  5540. 1
  5541. 1
  5542. 1
  5543. 1
  5544. 1
  5545. 1
  5546. 1
  5547. 1
  5548. 1
  5549. 1
  5550. 1
  5551. 1
  5552. 1
  5553. 1
  5554. 1
  5555. 1
  5556. 1
  5557. 1
  5558. 1
  5559. 1
  5560. 1
  5561. 1
  5562. 1
  5563. 1
  5564. 1
  5565. 1
  5566. 1
  5567. 1
  5568. 1
  5569. 1
  5570. 1
  5571. 1
  5572. 1
  5573. 1
  5574. 1
  5575. 1
  5576. 1
  5577. 1
  5578. 1
  5579. 1
  5580. 1
  5581. 1
  5582.  @nightprowler6336  I'm not so sure about that, while it is true that a christian society had more morals, more self restraint, was more negative ethnocentric, had higher birthrates, stronger sense of community, it also inspired the pathways to terrible wars, very nationalistic and self destructive behavior which ended up becoming the downfall of Europe to begin with. Furthermore, the ironically aspect of this decline is that after ww2 Europe was divided between the godless and atheist east in the USSR and the capitalistic, christian west by the USA, what's ironic is that western Europe is more atheistic today than eastern europe, yet at the same time western Europe is richer, more technologically advanced yet has equal or less worse demografic crisis compared to the east and Russia. what to me is at the core of European decline is more to do with americanism and a lack of a proper enemy to bind these nations together, along with the changes with technology, globalism and the nature of society, the ironic part of your comment is also that many christian groups in Europe and christian political groups are in favor of all the things which have brought about our decline, just look at the behavior of the current pope. I do think some form of ideology or religion has to take the place of the current decline society we see but I doubt it will be christianity, islam or any of the old religions that are in decline and can't lead into the future, it's going to have to be something else or a new way from the older religions, like idk a christianity focused on recreating a eden on earth with technology, I could see that happening.
    1
  5583. 1
  5584. 1
  5585. 1
  5586. 1
  5587. 1
  5588. 1
  5589. 1
  5590. 1
  5591. 1
  5592. 1
  5593. 1
  5594. 1
  5595. 1
  5596. 1
  5597. 1
  5598. 1
  5599. 1
  5600. 1
  5601. 1
  5602. 1
  5603. 1
  5604. 1
  5605. 1
  5606. 1
  5607. 1
  5608. 1
  5609. ​ @hopeintruth5119  I don't consider myself a racist, I consider myself just sane and wanting to support my own self interest, I have no problems with other people's if they intergrate and become part of the majority, to me that's just pragmatic not racist. unless you think racism is being pragmatic, I don't quite see it that way but if that's how you view it then that's how you view it, in that case lots of things become racist without it actually being racist. not supporting minority victimhood complex becomes racist, defending cultural identity becomes racist, human rights become racist, nationalism becomes racist, having a strong military becomes racist, family values becomes racist, so on and so forth, so I reject this myth of racism and simply view it as nationalistic pragmatism, if people aren't usefull or pose a threat to society, wanting them removed or reduce in presence is not racism, it's just self interest and I''m much more focused on our own mistakes and rejecting people of my own ethnic group for supporting outsider groups that cause problems, so would that then make me racist towards my own ethnic group? i just don't get this labeling stuff it makes no sense to me. if people don't intergrate the country becomes unstable, you will get a balkanization of society and will end in civil wars and internal conflicts, not the basis of a stable, modern and technologically advanced society, in fact the USA seems to be in decline largely due to this conflict internally which they did not have before same with Europe. in places like India with a lot of diversity of cultures and people's they are trying to create a single cultural and hemogenic society centered around hindu identity which will put them at odds with islam, you see the same going on in France now.
    1
  5610. 1
  5611. 1
  5612. 1
  5613. 1
  5614. 1
  5615. 1
  5616. 1
  5617. 1
  5618. 1
  5619. 1
  5620. 1
  5621. 1
  5622. 1
  5623. 1
  5624. 1
  5625. 1
  5626. 1
  5627. 1
  5628. 1
  5629. 1
  5630. 1
  5631. 1
  5632. 1
  5633. 1
  5634. 1
  5635. 1
  5636. 1
  5637. 1
  5638. 1
  5639. 1
  5640. 1
  5641. 1
  5642. 1
  5643. 1
  5644. 1
  5645. 1
  5646. 1
  5647. 1
  5648. 1
  5649. 1
  5650. 1
  5651. 1
  5652. 1
  5653. 1
  5654. 1
  5655. 1
  5656. 1
  5657. 1
  5658. 1
  5659. 1
  5660. 1
  5661. 1
  5662. 1
  5663. 1
  5664. 1
  5665. 1
  5666. 1
  5667. 1
  5668. 1
  5669. 1
  5670. 1
  5671. 1
  5672. 1
  5673. 1
  5674. 1
  5675. 1
  5676. 1
  5677. 1
  5678. 1
  5679. 1
  5680. 1
  5681. 1
  5682. 1
  5683. 1
  5684. 1
  5685. 1
  5686. 1
  5687. 1
  5688. 1
  5689. 1
  5690. 1
  5691. 1
  5692. 1
  5693. 1
  5694. 1
  5695. 1
  5696. 1
  5697. 1
  5698. 1
  5699. 1
  5700. 1
  5701. 1
  5702. 1
  5703. 1
  5704. 1
  5705. 1
  5706. 1
  5707. 1
  5708. 1
  5709. 1
  5710. 1
  5711. 1
  5712. 1
  5713. 1
  5714. 1
  5715. 1
  5716. 1
  5717. 1
  5718. 1
  5719. 1
  5720. 1
  5721. 1
  5722. 1
  5723. 1
  5724. 1
  5725. 1
  5726. 1
  5727. 1
  5728. 1
  5729. 1
  5730. 1
  5731. 1
  5732. 1
  5733. 1
  5734. 1
  5735. 1
  5736. 1
  5737. 1
  5738. 1
  5739. 1
  5740. 1
  5741. 1
  5742. 1
  5743. 1
  5744. 1
  5745. 1
  5746. 1
  5747.  @lif3andthings763  your opinion means very little to me and you don't know how the colonial system worked. it basically works like this, resources go from colonies to Europe, used to produce products and are then sold back to colonies and a few products are sold to other western countries but basically they are enclosed economies, it's very disfunctional compared to the global economy we have today, on top of that many of these colonies had to get massive investment in order to create the conditions for products to be sold to. European powers wanted to keep their colonies because they managed and had invested into it greatly and many knew that without their policies and support those nations would collapse which is what happened in many places where decolonisation happened, the smart natives who lived there moved out before they got decolonised, the nations that were better off were those with high number of settlers or had strong educational investment like in india. the USA did not wish for these colonies to fall into communism so they rather have them collapse then be ruled by colonial powers, ironically many fell into communism after decolonisation anyways. many europeans no longer supported the colonial system because after ww2 many had no interest to keep investing into them for minor profits and rather wanted to invest into their own economies, combined with the marshal plan had the largest growth in their economies since the industrial revolution, no colonies needed.
    1
  5748. 1
  5749. 1
  5750. 1
  5751. 1
  5752. 1
  5753. 1
  5754. 1
  5755. 1
  5756. 1
  5757. 1
  5758. 1
  5759. 1
  5760. 1
  5761. 1
  5762. 1
  5763. 1
  5764. 1
  5765. 1
  5766. 1
  5767. 1
  5768. 1
  5769. 1
  5770. 1
  5771. 1
  5772. 1
  5773. 1
  5774.  @user-to2jw7nb8v  what does it matter if it's the biggest industry if that industry can't provide for the huge number of people that live there? I bet farming is a big part of north Korea's economy but that still means they have food shortages and famines which they get aid from the west from to not starve to death. There are parts of Africa in terms of soil, enviroment and industry to support industrial scale farming and most of those places are in the southern parts of Africa, though even there some are dependent on fertilizer imports from the west and they can't grow enough food for the whole continent, also don't forget that most of Africa is very hot but not very humid except for certain parts, most of Africa are arid, supporting safe drinking water while also providing enough food is difficult, let alone if climate change continues, pretending like they are food secured is going to backfire very badly, however with the right investments and proper farming technieks, along side GMO's and industrial farming they might be able to better sustain themselves long term. As for Europe, we export a lot of food and farming tools to the rest of the world, we are very food secured but import a lot of exotic foods and sweets which yes are farmed in parts of Africa but they are mostly luxury goods, we also export a lot of dairy and animal products, unless your talking about very small states in western Europe or the colder climates in northern Europe we produce more than enough to sustain ourselfs and if need be we could switch to more productive methodes to overproduce more than we currently do, most of Africa can't do that, same for the middle-east.
    1
  5775. 1
  5776. 1
  5777. 1
  5778. 1
  5779. 1
  5780. 1
  5781. 1
  5782. 1
  5783. 1
  5784. 1
  5785. 1
  5786. 1
  5787. 1
  5788. 1
  5789. 1
  5790. 1
  5791. 1
  5792. 1
  5793. 1
  5794. 1
  5795. 1
  5796. 1
  5797. 1
  5798. ​ @theliato3809  I disagree, you can basically divide periodes of US-EU relations as thus 1. ww1 + ww2 era 2. coldwar era 3. post cold war era in part 1 there was a moment of equal footing to a degree, Europe was the center and the USA was a sleeping giant, after ww2 this relationship changed with a focus on the USA, decolonisation and reconstruction of Europe. in part 2 the cold war era was focused on rebuilding Europe, controling the spread of communism and the USSR and the creation of NATO, at this point the USA was more advanced, ahead and had more people while Europe stagnated and slowly recovered. in part 3 after the cold war we see an expansion of NATO and with that came also an expansion of the EU, i remember the early 2000s as a periode of optimism and sense of pan-European identity slowly being formed, most books about a united Europe started to appear in this periode and we got the Euro and other changes that made the EU parlement more representative to it's citizens, lots of changes. though at this point we also started to see more of a shift and divide between the USA and Europe, due to refugees, wars, terrorisme and the rise of a more modern Russia that still packed a punch, we are here now and we are somewhat at a stalemate and uncertain of where to go now, the USA is still far ahead of us but also becoming more hostile while China has catched up and appears more on equal footing to the USA or at least getting there. I think Europe stands at the crossroads of where to go to now, collapse, unifying, war with Russia or friendship, conflict with China or perhaps being neutral and being influenced by both the USA and China, idk, We understand we are not on equal footing and many want to change that to be more equal but to do that would mean to oppose the USA on subjects like Russia, while also breaking certain treaties to create and use a potential pan-european army, the USA for the most part does not seem to want this but might be forced to bend due to presure from China which is a competitor and threat to both the USA and Europe.
    1
  5799. 1
  5800. 1
  5801. 1
  5802. 1
  5803. 1
  5804. 1
  5805. 1
  5806. 1
  5807. 1
  5808. 1
  5809. 1
  5810. 1
  5811. 1
  5812. 1
  5813. 1
  5814. 1
  5815. 1
  5816. 1
  5817. 1
  5818. 1
  5819. 1
  5820. 1
  5821. 1
  5822. 1
  5823. 1
  5824. 1
  5825. 1
  5826. 1
  5827. 1
  5828. 1
  5829. 1
  5830. 1
  5831. 1
  5832. 1
  5833. 1
  5834. 1
  5835. 1
  5836. 1
  5837. 1
  5838. 1
  5839. 1
  5840. 1
  5841. 1
  5842. 1
  5843. 1
  5844. 1
  5845. 1
  5846. 1
  5847. 1
  5848. 1
  5849. 1
  5850. 1
  5851. 1
  5852. 1
  5853. 1
  5854. 1
  5855. 1
  5856. 1
  5857. 1
  5858. 1
  5859. 1
  5860. 1
  5861. 1
  5862. 1
  5863. 1
  5864. 1
  5865. 1
  5866. 1
  5867. 1
  5868. 1
  5869. 1
  5870. 1
  5871. 1
  5872. 1
  5873. 1
  5874. 1
  5875. 1
  5876. 1
  5877. 1
  5878. 1
  5879. 1
  5880. 1
  5881. 1
  5882. 1
  5883. 1
  5884. 1
  5885. 1
  5886. 1
  5887. 1
  5888. 1
  5889. 1
  5890. 1
  5891. 1
  5892. 1
  5893. 1
  5894. 1
  5895. 1
  5896. 1
  5897. 1
  5898. 1
  5899. 1
  5900. 1
  5901.  @TrumpyBear_Armageddon  I'm a bit confused with your argument, im not talking about how were they defeated and I even agree that most of the work was done through disease and due to inability to form long term forms of government due to a lack of technology and cultural differences, the European settlers were just far beyond what they could get together, though it should be said that many of them did form confederate alliances that gave the early american settlers a hard time but the american settlers could always get more immigrants, their populations would always keep growing and would continue pushing west, the best they could hope for would be some power taking pitty on them or use them as puppet state/people for their own benefits, the French did this a lot as well as the British to a lesser extend. the issue now of self determination is of little significance to the native americans, their numbers are so low and they still don't have a single identity, language or culture that could ever hope to be an independent nation, let alone a nation that could carve it's own state within the USA, so their struggle is pretty much a lost cause. it's pretty sad though and it did not need to be like this. self determination is a funny concept because some people/nations have it while not being free as a people, other nations are puppets by stronger powers and are more wealthy and more free, some nations give up some forms of self determination but in the process get more power and influence than they would have otherwise, it's an idealistic idea that every people deserves a state but in reality it's mostly artifical and true power still comes through the barrel of a gun, no matter which way you slice it, it's inevitable.
    1
  5902. 1
  5903. 1
  5904. 1
  5905. 1
  5906. 1
  5907. 1
  5908. 1
  5909. 1
  5910. 1
  5911. 1
  5912. 1
  5913.  @tomasvrabec1845  in the case of the USA, it is very much a bad thing since it had lead to certain dividing and polorizing ideologies being formed, which is tearing apart the fabric of american life, rule of law, culture and identity, it's not even so much about people being of a different color or background but the lack of intergration, assimulation and americanisation of people coming to the USA and this is by design by the government and policies enforced by the government, the USA has to realy force adoption of american values on people somehow and reduce immigration to a certain degree if it wants to remain stable. as for Europe, Europe is much worse and the very idea of assimulation is a rather new and imported american value which does not realy match these cultures. lets try and wind back time a little, Europe the continent that went into multiple world wars over nationalism and different ethnic groups fighting for their national right to rule, are now allowing million of people to come from all over the world, to settle and change the nature of those countries, who thinks this is going to have a good ending? if the EU can't even agree for the most part on policies made between Europeans, how bad are things going to be once migrant populations settle in for multiple generations? it's just silly to think this is going to work. what's likely going to happen is a series of stagnating and humiliating decline of european nations as well as doubts in it's institutions and a disinterested USA is going to lead to major unstable governments, add to it financial crisis and humanitarian and refugee crisis that makes 2015 look like a joke and you will likely see the rise of extreme political parties, both left and right with radical solutions. it's not pretty or great but it's very predictable to expect that to happen, the best outcome I see going forward is new technologies and rise in wealth in 3rd world countries, limits waves of migrants, and reverses some migrant waves and a more sane and revival of older nationalist and pan-european nationalist ideas will rise and hopefully restore some order and sense of self in a civilized manner, otherwise well we know how nasty history can be, now imagine that with robots and nukes just to add to the spice.
    1
  5914. ​ @unnanointedonesufi  that's silly, esspecially in this age, nationalism is different for each country around the world, some forms of nationalism is against tyrany from an oppresive government, others are expressed with a focus on individual rights and a strong sense of community and connection to the land, family, culture, religion and identity. the only thing that would lead to war within Europe right now, is if Russia invades eastern Europe, at that point you would want nationalists willing to fight to defend the nation. likewise the EU is not against nationalism, in fact it is nationalistic to a degree but it's rules, policies and mechanism for rule does not represent the majority of the people and so you have a democratic, nationalistic and populistic backlash, ironically the fact that those people are often oppressed, makes nationalism stronger and more radical. if the EU wants to curb the potential of nationalism leading to war of any kind be it civil or foreign, then it needs to act and be seen as legitimate in fixing and having solid long term policies that people can believe in and not sow doubt, distrust and resentment, because those things actually lead to nationalism and so called ''far right'' politics. how did fascism and national socialism and communism rise to power? because a lack of unity with the people, a loss of legitimacy and a rising sense of dispear and resentment which then empowers authoritarian leaders with the promise of ''returning to the good old days and making it better than ever'' even if the EU fell apart their main enemies would likely not be eachother but more so minority groups and factions they consider their enemies, mostly the elites, corporations and those deemed to be hostile forces for way of life and/or existence. as someone who knows a lot of nationalists, non of them want to wage war between other europeans but almost all of them hate the current EU leadership, the heads of state, corporations, the media and outsiders of their native countries.
    1
  5915. 1
  5916. 1
  5917. 1
  5918. 1
  5919. 1
  5920. 1
  5921. 1
  5922. 1
  5923. 1
  5924. 1
  5925. 1
  5926. 1
  5927. 1
  5928. 1
  5929. 1
  5930. 1
  5931. 1
  5932. 1
  5933.  @af8828  you just sayd Bernie Sanders who is an open socialist, many of the green parties in Europe are socialists, often we call them water melons because they are green on the outside but red on the inside. I don't understand why you think the western nations are more to blame when India, China polute the environment more then all of the western world combined, Partly that's due to enviromentalist policies in the west and lack of those policies in asia. Idk if you know your history of enviromentalism but the nazi's were enviromentalists and if you want a global effort or want other nations like say Brazil, developing nations like in Africa to stop contributing to climate change you would have to force them to stop having so many kids, block their economic growth and force enviromentalist policies on them, how are you going to do that without use of force and authoritarianism? Idk why you are being so illogical, naive and judgmental for what I see as a logical observation based on historic and objective facts of politics and human nature, seems rather easy to understand. Idk seems like you just hate the western world while pretending to care about the environment. I used to be on the leftwing, even somewhat of a progressive and this lack of objective argumentation and emotional arguing is why I left the leftwing and became more rightwing and nationalistic, I don't want imperialism but how are you going to enforce your ideas without use of force? People are just going to vote for the environment? On a global scale? You realy believe that's realistic?
    1
  5934. 1
  5935. 1
  5936. 1
  5937. 1
  5938. 1
  5939. 1
  5940. 1
  5941. 1
  5942. 1
  5943. 1
  5944. 1
  5945. 1
  5946. 1
  5947. 1
  5948. 1
  5949. 1
  5950. 1
  5951. 1
  5952.  @oremfrien  ''Lack of confidence in institutions existed before Trump; lack of confidence in voting being free and fair did not exist before Trump. He is responsible for his voter base's distrust of voting. Their belief, notwithstanding how strongly they feel it, is not based on evidence. It's based on a lie that has been repeated.'' wrong, this subject has come on multiple times in almost every election since bush vs al gore at least, the reason in sprung up in 2020 was not simply due to Trump but the actual fact that some of the states changed voter laws in april of 2020 due to the corona virus, expanding mail in voting and lowering standards for admition, in 2020 there was a decline in declining votes counted due to mail in voting errors, how this happened is unknown but it is often mentioned as evidence of vote rigging though it's not that big of a deal, just an observation. there is also the issue of counties having absurdly high votes for joe biden in democratically controle counties while the rest of the counties were mostly red, there has been very little update on this and no denial or rejection of the mail in votes coming in at 4 am as cited by most Trump supporters, either this did not happen and it's all nonsense or it was simply thrown under the rug and ignored by all mainstream media platforms which also happened to not mention the Hunter Biden laptop scandal which if people were informed would have changed their vote, think some figures are in the 1/8 voters in some states would have changed their vote, this paints the picture as we have seen for the last 4 years that the media is working with politicians and big tech to influence the election against Trump and in favor of Joe Biden which is why so many don't listen to the media to begin with.
    1
  5953. 1
  5954.  @oremfrien  ''Because the voter ID laws are enforced without providing a free ID for all legal voters, this is effectively a poll tax on the urban poor.'' I don't understand this issue quite well, perhaps you can clear it up for me. In the Netherlands we also have voter ID's which cost about 100-120 Euro's and need to be replaced once every 10 years I believe, these are needed for everyone to vote, though our election system works in a way that allows expired ID cards below 5 years expiration date to still be allowed, the issue of ''minorities or poor people not being able to afford this'' is unknown to me and never seen as a legitimate issue in the Netherlands, now perhaps the Netherlands has more equality in terms of income to render this a mute point, im not sure but if you can't afford an ID card how do you buy alcohol? how do you have a citizen's ID number? how do you get a drivers licence? how do police check who you are if they pull you over? if you are so poor you can't buy an ID card once every 10 years (assuming it's the same time frame as ours) then how are you going to be able to vote properly if you have to live day by day? such a voting block would be easily bribed or manipulated, now if you favored a democratic government system then yes, this might be in your interest to allow but the USA is a republic, so is the very nature of it's government not to allow people who can afford the minimum costs needed to be a citizen to be allowed to vote not in the US constitutional interests? I know this might sound harsh but from an outsider perspective like mine this whole concept seems alien, esspecialy the narrative some people have of it being racist when it's at best against just the poor regardless of color.
    1
  5955. 1
  5956. 1
  5957. 1
  5958. 1
  5959. 1
  5960. 1
  5961. 1
  5962. 1
  5963. 1
  5964.  @sahhaf1234  well yes and no, most Europeans are aware of the USA's involvement in the middle-east and some are aware that the major nations, aka UK, France and to a lesser degree Russia, Italy and Germany have a hand in the development there, it's largely been a US led effort so it's easy to just focus on the USA and not see the influence we had in the matter. That being sayd we suffered the most compared to the USA from the fallout of these wars but are unable due to NATO the current issues with Turkey and Russia to deal with the matter effectively, we just don't have the military, the willpower or the influence to change course set by bigger players. The refugees have been largely focused on Turkey, Jordan, Italy and Greece and for a long time the EU had resorted to allowing refugees to come to Europe by influence from Merkel, however after the brexit vote which was largely fueled by fears of migrants and refugees they are now (slowly) realising they need a more direct and militaristic solution to the conflict and the US in these regions. As for why they attacked iraq, Libya, Syria and others is difficult to say, some say the military industrial complex, others to counter Russia, other because of israeli influence through APAC and other lobbies including the saudi lobby, perhaps a combination of all of them? Idk for sure anymore. As for the USA, it's change a lot from it's roots and became very corrupt through banking and corporate power, some of which now have more power then most western nations, which is what fuels anti americanism and anti globalism around the world, that's why you had Donald Trump to begin with he presented himself as an outsider and it got voters, it won't be the first time and seeing their current state, it would not surpise me if they somehow make it so he can run again in 4 years, breaking the 2 limit termship rule in the USA or just becomes a new political dynasty like the bushes and the Clintons.
    1
  5965.  @SilvesterBathroomStallone  that's pretty interesting because from what I've seen that type of behavior is most common with people either suffering from depression, autism, lacking social skills and attractiveness. The acting out towards woman, feeling resentfull, anger at both their rejection from woman and experiences of societal gender rolls, the ironic thing is these types of behaviors are extremely common in feminist movements, black activist groups, fundamentalist islamic groups, certain types of men going their own way type of behavior. But it's realy only incels that get hated on freely, so it becomes a self premoting cycle, person gets rejected by woman (not just once, constantly) abandoned by society, told to man up, unable to do so either at school, personal life, family, media, becomes resentfull, needs to express that resentment and despise woman for their privilaged roll in western society, finds other men who experienced the same thing, fuel eachothers resentment and frustration as a means of finding some form of community and attention, society reacts to their existence and community, labels them hatefull, spitefull, losers and what not, gets more resentment and repeat. Now I understand that for these people to change they need to both change their outlook but also find some path of redemption and frankly non exist in society, the churches are empty, family structures have collapsed, the media is a shitshow, governments are abusive and stupid, western society is dominated by feminist movements that actually want more wealth and privilages towards woman (you got a woman quota for top end jobs in the Netherlands forced through by the government for example) with ironically less responsability for either their potential husbands, children and society. It's all just such a mess right now and it's also worrysome because these types of men and this type of society is ripe for political, ideological or religeus extremism. To me incels are just another symptom of a deranged and disfunctional society and I pitty them.
    1
  5966. 1
  5967. 1
  5968. 1
  5969. 1
  5970. 1
  5971. 1
  5972. 1
  5973. 1
  5974. 1
  5975. 1
  5976. 1
  5977. 1
  5978. 1
  5979. 1
  5980. 1
  5981. 1
  5982. 1
  5983. 1
  5984. 1
  5985. 1
  5986. 1
  5987. 1
  5988. 1
  5989. 1
  5990. 1
  5991. 1
  5992. 1
  5993. 1
  5994. 1
  5995. 1
  5996. 1
  5997. 1
  5998. 1
  5999. 1
  6000. 1
  6001. 1
  6002. 1
  6003. 1
  6004. 1
  6005. 1
  6006. 1
  6007. 1
  6008. 1
  6009. 1
  6010. 1
  6011. 1
  6012. 1
  6013. 1
  6014. 1
  6015. 1
  6016. 1
  6017.  @jeffdemongo5678  im saying your ideology is magical thinking, that it has been objectively proven not to work and has failed many times in many different forms, yet you like all communists continue to pretend like communism/socialism is a legit economic policy or ideology, while in reality it's more like a religion, fundamentalist religion, it's blind faith and violent radicalism, combined with magical thinking that "this time it will be different!" I know exactly how your mind works because it's the mindset of a "true believer" and you (like a religeus person) will continue to make excuses, not adress all the times communism has failed and instead will pretend like I don't know what im talking about, focusing on a mundane little detail or pretend like pretending capitalism is evil is somehow evidence that communism and socialism is somehow good. But lets go into specifics and see how you will react? tell me what was the Holodomor? Is aggrarian communism like in combodia true communism? Has the prediction of karl marx that communism will rise from wealthy capitalist states correct or did it happen elsewhere? Do nations that call themselves communist, follow communistic policies of collectivisation and take controle of key industries with the specific purpose of distribution of wealth like karl marx said is the path to communism, true communism? Good luck, im sure you won't try and change the subject or will start talking about the evils of capitalism because you are a sane individual and not a fanatical ideolog, right?
    1
  6018.  @jeffdemongo5678  like a religeus fundamentalist. Good luck making those golags and killing more millions for your Utopia hellhole, meanwhile the actual workers of the world will try and return to capitalism and reject your ideology of exploitation. You are literally spreading propaganda and brainwashed and don't know anything about modern economics, that's basicaly the only way communists continue to exist, by avoiding basic economics and trying to subvert institutions to promote communism. The USA is not even that pro capitalism anymore and the only propaganda that's being produced today is anti capitalist propaganda by communists and corporations, you live in a fantasy and are promoting an ideology that's a danger to society. The irony is that it's better to have a dictatorship with capitalism like in Chille than a socialist state like Venezuela, even with loads of oil the people continue to live in poverty and starve only due to socialism and no the USA did not sanction them that caused that, if you want to look for the effects of US sanctions when it realy hurts try Iraq after the first golf war. Socialism is evil and has to be fought the best way to right it is by showing the superiority of capitalism to produce wealth and prosperity which it already has, all you can do is burn all the history books, silence the people and send the army to do your dirty work to make everyone poor again, it might have worked in the 20th century but today most people know better, the only people who continue to promote it are moronic old socialists and soy latte sipping starbucks marxists.
    1
  6019. 1
  6020. 1
  6021. 1
  6022. 1
  6023. 1
  6024. 1
  6025. 1
  6026. 1
  6027. 1
  6028. 1
  6029. 1
  6030. 1
  6031. 1
  6032. 1
  6033. 1
  6034. 1
  6035. 1
  6036. 1
  6037. 1
  6038. 1
  6039. 1
  6040. 1
  6041. 1
  6042. 1
  6043. 1
  6044. 1
  6045. 1
  6046. 1
  6047. 1
  6048. 1
  6049. 1
  6050. 1
  6051. 1
  6052. 1
  6053. 1
  6054. 1
  6055. 1
  6056. 1
  6057. 1
  6058. 1
  6059. 1
  6060. 1
  6061. 1
  6062. 1
  6063. 1
  6064. 1
  6065. 1
  6066. 1
  6067. 1
  6068. 1
  6069. 1
  6070. 1
  6071. 1
  6072. 1
  6073. 1
  6074. 1
  6075. 1
  6076. 1
  6077. 1
  6078. 1
  6079. 1
  6080. 1
  6081. 1
  6082. 1
  6083. 1
  6084. 1
  6085. 1
  6086. 1
  6087. 1
  6088. 1
  6089. 1
  6090. 1
  6091. 1
  6092. 1
  6093. 1
  6094. 1
  6095. 1
  6096. 1
  6097.  @lordbuckethead9768  I know a lot about US history more than most Europeans or most americans, the USA has not been isolationist for a very long time and has both engaged and funded both sides in many a conflict or rise of new conflicts, the USA was already strongly involved in ww1 selling arms to the UK with civilian ship, got involved directly due to a telegram from a German diplomat which basicaly was wondering if Mexico could help out if USA got directly involved in ww1 (it was already selling arms and food to the UK long before this) The USA was also strongly involved in ww2 and set itself up to be attacked by Japan with it's oil embargo, the USA is not an isolationist nation it was even involved in aggresive foreign policy and expansion both in north america, asia and Europe almost from it's creation. The current world order is the US order, Globalization has been it's creed for a very long time, from an american citizen perspective it looks bad but from the perspective of the rich and corporate class as well as political elites things have never been better which also explains the wealth gap in the USA between rich and poor and the need for the USA to be involved with wars even if they don't pose any threat to the USA, the irony is the USA has wasted a huge amount of time, trust and resources in the middle-east while China grew rich in the background. The EU does not really need the USA, the European nations are more than able to fund and keep their own militaries for defence, we done so for centuries, the current weakening is due to the USA world system and denial of European involvement in wars or military spending, if the USA wants to leave the rest of the world it could do so and all it's allies would need is a few years to make up the difference but it be a huge shock for the rest of the world "why would the USA give up it's super power status and major economic reach in the rest of the world to return to the illusion of isolationism?" Russia and China would be overjoyed as well as many European elites, in public they be disapointed but behind closed doors they cheer for the oppertunity to gain more power, though they might worry about other European powers causing conflicts it's not something that's really new. Let the old world burn? More like the new world order burn the old world will be doing just fine.
    1
  6098. 1
  6099.  @Qrt45  I don't expect the middle east to be a bastion of love and freedom without the USA but without a doubt the actions of the USA made things much, much worse, if the USA just went in like it did in Iraq and overthrew the regime there and replaced it with a monarchy, a new dictatorships or even a silly democracy (silly as in silly trying to make a western style democracy in that region) then that would have been better than what they actually did do, which was put sanctions on the regime in charge of syria and fund terrorists groups in the region, all of them, they called them ''moderate rebels'' as well as the whole ''assad attacked his own people'' trope that was going around, this became the basis and breeding ground for ISIS which was basically the islamic version of the nazi's in our era, this would not have spiraled out of controle had the USA not given arms and funding to these groups, if the USA had left the situation alone Assad would probably have crushed the rebels or been defeated by one side or the other, by funding the terrorists it made the assad regime look like a force of stability and sanity in the region (he's still a cruel and ruthless dictator but one that has some respect for the rule of law and is a sane actor) israel does complicate things and has acted very poorly as well in the region, though with the USA has also allowed Iran to get more influence in the region, again the USA has been funding terrorists and helping their enemies like Iran gain ground, that's not just bad that's the exact opposite of what the US had to do. Saudi arabia and Israel aren't exactly enemies, Turkey is a relatively new player in the region and that's mostly due to the fallout from Syria with presure from the EU. but how to move forward now? well for starters the USA has finally stopped (at least as far as I know) with funding terrorists groups in the region, it could also help with rebuilding the damage it helped cause with supporting the assad regime or not openly support the regime but give funds to help stabalize the region, the USA could also take some refugees from Turkey and house them somewhere (something Europe had to deal with since 2015 but the USA has done little to nothing to help, Trump at least stopped the funding of terrorists and attacked ISIS for the most part) the middle east is a mess but it's made worse by the USA and it's agenda does not work to counter China, in fact China has grown powerfull while the USA was dicking around here, overal it's been a disaster for everyone, the USA, Europe and the middle-east.
    1
  6100.  @stephenjenkins7971  the USA funded multiple groups, pretty much everyone, not sure why you think they only funded the SDF, most of the early weapons of ISIS were given to them by the USA or taken from other "moderate rebels" there were multiple scandals of warcrimes being commited by some of groups supported by the USA. Assad did not start the syrian civil war, you can actually watch the timeline of multiple places during the arab spring and how they devolved. The arab spring happened in multiple nations and some groups in Syria started protesting, those protests started turning violent and there were a number of terrorist attacks, at that point the assad regime started cracking down on the protests and terrorists, at this point most of the civilians had no major weapons or much organisation, then the USA started arming many of the rebels in the hope they would overthrow the assad regime, Obama even threatened to invade Syria, meanwhile groups from Iran as well as Iraq started pouring in to add fuel to the fire. The reality is today (which is why the media does not report on it anymore) is that Assad is the only form of stability in the region, everyone else are either foreign fighters, proxy groups or islamic rebels, the civil war became a proxy war for Israeli, US, Turkish, Kurdish, islamic radical and Iranian interest, the only ally left of Assad is Russia and it started due to the USA's actions, it's funding of rebels and sanctions on Syria, sanctions are a tool of war which in this region can kill thousands, when the USA imposed sanctions on Iraq after the first golf war 500.000+ children starved to death, likewise it turned a minor rebellion into a civil war within a proxy war but somehow Assad is the one to blame? Not the super power, proxy groups or foreign governments getting involved? The dude ran Syria for decades without much opposition, with economic growth and some form of rule of law but suddenly he's the cause of everything going to shit? Not the rebels or USA? Im not buying it, the media Lies all the time as does the USA why should I trust their words over what I can see for myself to be the case?
    1
  6101. 1
  6102. 1
  6103. 1
  6104. 1
  6105. 1
  6106. 1
  6107. 1
  6108. 1
  6109.  @stephenjenkins7971  the USA does secret opperations, uses sanctions and picks which ever side to support long before any civil war starts and the USA has been giving weapons and arms to terrorist groups in the region as well as outside of it for years, the USA does this all the time, pick a nation, start looking for radicals there, send them arms and money to start causing chaos, government reacts to shut it down, use the media as propaganda to demonize the regime, put sanctions in place, economy collapses, causes more chaos, say that regime X has got to go and threaten to use troops or fund more rebel groups to do your fighting for you, in the case of Syria last minute the Obama regime backed down but kept funding the terrorists, only till Trump came along did things start to cool down and the media stopped reporting on it, there are still people who report on it but nothing like before, even though the situation has only improved slightly but no mention of Assad's regime, the people or the situation, you have to look for it to find any info and what you find is barely any real information. There is a huge information gap between the media around the 1990s and early 2000s and today, even though technology and the internet should have made more information easier to find, the reality is the opposite, less information, more secrets, censorship and open propaganda networks both the west, China and Russia engage in. Idk what sources you have, all my sources from the past few years have been censored and kicked off most platforms, I think only Caspian Report still does some reporting though little with Syria, Google is perhaps the most censored and all you get is reporting from CNN or other three letter networks not worth a damn and are deeply untrustworthy.
    1
  6110.  @stephenjenkins7971  I really don´t understand how you think the world or NATO works, NATO is the USA and if a nation acts or has a government the USA does not like be it democratic, authoritarian or totalitarian it could just kick that country out of NATO and make justifications to justify attack it if it wanted to. but on the issue of EU federalization, help me to understand why the USA would be in favor of it? if doing so makes the US alliance weaker and the presence of US bases uncertain? NATO command itself has always been picked by the USA and does not want EU to become more federal since that would mean a federal army which would mean less reason for NATO alliance existing but you say ''NATO is not part of the USA'' except the fact that NATO is leaders are picked by the USA, is mostly funded by the USA and opposes other nations from forming blocks to replace NATO so in what universe would the USA be in favor doing something that would limit it's ability to project power and maintain it's global alliance!? btw just because the USA does not want further independence and federalization of the EU does not mean it can do anything against it, if one nation goes against US interest that nation would be isolated and crushed if all of the EU suddenly say ''yes lets make a proper federation'' the USA can't wage war or subvert the whole of Europe, while also being in conflict with Russia and China that would be really stupid. this is the issue with NATO, NATO is from the cold war era and worked really well back then, after the collapse of the USSR, NATO has just kept expanding yet has not updated it's mission statement, after 2001 the alliance has mostly been about engaging in foreign wars in the middle east which has been a disaster for US credibility, that on top of the fallout of said wars and covert activity is what helps drive the push for further EU federalization, geopolitics are in action here with multiple conflicts of interests, the USA has not had a leader that is able or willing to change it's mission objective and structure or expand further to solidify it's legitimacy, instead the USA has actually gone behind the backs of many of it's core NATO members without discussing how that conflicts with member states national interest, case and point Australia and France submarine deal as an example. for most members of NATO, NATO has ceased to be an alliance to protect against communism and the USSR and is now mostly a tool for US power projection and influence which is now waning due to the rise of China, energy conflicts with Russia and new economic interests in africa and the middle east mostly about oil, untill the USA resolves these issues and conflicts and makes a new concensus on it's mission goal which could easily replace the USSR with China (communist still in name) with economic support for nations hurt by China's policies, the Alliance could get a new fresh start and help come to a mutual understanding of long term EU goals and NATO, right now that does not exist and thus the cracks in the alliance are forming and conflicts within NATO are no longer out of the question.
    1
  6111.  @stephenjenkins7971  again I don't understand how your worldview works, France after ww2 was not exactly the world power and even when France left NATO it was still open and talking with the USA that in case of a war with the USSR they would side with the USA, there was no reason for the USA to become engaged with France because France was not much of a threat, now if France became an ally of the USSR or started doing stuff in Africa or it's colonies that would most certainly get into indirect or direct conflict with the USA. I don't see any difference between the concert of Europe before ww1 and the current era we live in, the only difference being that instead of one European power becoming dominant enough to dictate peace on their terms (currently done by the USA) we had the failed attempted peace by the league of nations which the USA did not back and thus it fell apart, the USA got involved in ww1, made sure nobody actually came to dominate it, then left and did a pikachu face when Germany and the USSR wanted to become the hegemon which again is now filled by the USA. I don't really bother with make believe or childish illusions of propaganda or fake morality, nations act in their own self interest, just as the USA, China, Russia and EU are doing today and as they did in the past, same with the roman empire or the mongol empire, it's more about the nature of war and the nature of civilization that turn the wheel of history, the current moralistic idiots can very quickly become the nazi's of the future, it's all just pretend, same with the USA, the USA is powerfull because it expanded, commited what we would call warcrimes and the current world order is as fragile as it was before, no morality is going to punish nations that win the wars and write the history books . the irony is that many of the founding members and people who made up the EU were actually former fascists and member of the national socialist party of germany and many of it's policies were actually on the agenda of Germany in ww1 and well as ww2 just less voluntary and more directly organised. the USA could very easily become an enemy of Europe if say the EU federalizes, it would start small with minor conflicting issues, Russia could collapse and make the Chinese and EU willing to engage to ''bring peace and stabilty'' back which at that point would anger the USA or imagine of Russia became a democracies and wanted to join the EU? what if conflicts in the middle east and africa made the Europeans act more directly which to the USA could be seen as ''problematic'' the current era exists because the USA forces it to exist do to it's economy, it's industry and esspecially it's military, once one or more of these variables changes so does the behavour and national interest of the USA. ''the USA does not have friends, it has alliances that serve it's national interest'' same with China, same with Russia, same with the EU, thinking it's going to last forever or won't at some point lead to conflict is a great error of reading of history.
    1
  6112. 1
  6113.  @crescent4996  wars today are realy weird, there have been multiple proxy wars with semi legit democracies and the USA as well as others the funny thing is most often they don't declare war on other nations, instead they use sanctions and use allies to also put up sanctions while/or at the same time actually engaging in acts of war, coups, vote rigging, hacking, air raids, covert opperations and assasinations to get the desired outcome, most of Europe just follows the same line as the USA so there is little need to use such forces but without a doubt the USA would engage with such behavour if it's national interest is being threatened, many elites in Europe (not me) do want China to be the world power or at least the main power in Asia because they believe an alliance with them with or against the Russians is in their interest and in a way they are kinda right. Imagine your some wackey EU politician who just wants power, that wants Europe to be one of the main dominant forces in the world, an Alliance with China makes perfect sense, the Chinese need markets, Russia has resources and you have modern weapons and technical know how, the Chinese aren't going to care about human rights violations, the Chinese system would give that type of Eurocrate immense power over society, the Chinese would not care about imperialism in Africa or the middle-east, the EU + Russia + China would have more than enough power and resources to take over all of the old world and change the status quo, of course some EU politicians imagine these things, some care about the people for sure but others just want the power same with the USA elites.
    1
  6114.  @crescent4996  I've read a few articles that many leaders within Germany and France want to try and move towards an EU federalization by 2025, though it would probably take much longer, it's not impossible to happen since a great deal of Europeans want it for security reasons. I've often compared the current EU to the USA under the articles of confederation (the laws within the EU are also called articles btw) back then the USA had the same issues the EU does today, lack of a unified voice, unrepresented populations, lack of proper tax and spend controles, more of a state by state identity than a real american identity, it took great leadership, vision and also a desire to expand that secured and created a true american identity that many americans still have to this day. Europe is much the same, though much older, much more divided and with a lot more bloodshed in between but what makes it work is external forces that threaten them as a whole, that almost forces them to work together and understand that it's either eachother or the Russians/Chinese the USA does not really have sure presures, it could indeed become very isolationist and many of it's people would probably benefit from it, for a while... However history shows that isolationism tends to lead to decline, lucky for the USA they had already expanded so much so it's not really isolationism as much as claiming a mountain of gold as your own but with time isolationism would probably cause stagnation, Europe can't be isolationist it does not have that luxury thus it is much more focused on playing both sides, getting rich while waiting for a chance to justify a full EU Federation. And about the wellfare state, the EU has many different types of wellfare, most of southern and eastern Europe don't have a large wellfare system, sweden has one but is also hyper capitalistic on top, Germany and France have large wellfare states but the people don't have giant big macs or are as unhealthy as many americans are and that has more to do with their culture and their governments, taken all together the collective wellfare systems probably look slightly better than the USA as a whole. The USA also gets major power in trade due to it's military, it's the main reason the USA is the main reserve currency in the world. The EU has to do more for sure but that has to go with a decline in the USA, one gives rise to the other, it's not that it's good or bad but it is what it is so we better make the best of it.
    1
  6115. 1
  6116. 1
  6117. 1
  6118. 1
  6119. 1
  6120. 1
  6121. 1
  6122. 1
  6123. 1
  6124. 1
  6125. 1
  6126. 1
  6127. 1
  6128. 1
  6129. 1
  6130. 1
  6131. 1
  6132. 1
  6133. 1
  6134. 1
  6135. 1
  6136. 1
  6137. 1
  6138. 1
  6139. 1
  6140. if the USA just left tomorrow that would be a huge power vacuum and would probably lead to war with Russia that would want to expand into eastern Europe, the Europeans would probably rush to try and get their military production up to size but either it's not enough time to compete with Russia or it can barely hold off long enough for the rest of Europe to counter Russia, it would be a bloody war and people would hate the USA for not just abandoning them but doing so in a way that they could not prepare enough in time, perhaps you see limited nuclear strikes too. however if the USA wanted to leave NATO and Europe, it could do so very easily in a very responsable way, there could be agreements of a slow but steady withdrawal from Europe to other parts of the world/back to the USA and the need for the European nations/EU to fill the void, if given say 5 years or more they could probably have their militaries up to the same level as the USA military bases provide today, the only thing they would be lacking is the army experience of their soldiers, these nations have enough wealth and manpower to deal with Russia if properly prepared, they aren't weak or poor, stagnating to a degree perhaps but not weak. but the USA would be stupid to do this, NATO is a great benefit to US power projection, it ensures stable supply lines and logistic support as well as access to intelligence support for the whole region from the middle-east, to africa to central asia, giving that up without a fight would be bizzar from geo-political standpoint as well as a historical standpoint and would make the USA seem much weaker than it actually is.
    1
  6141. 1
  6142. 1
  6143. 1
  6144. 1
  6145. 1
  6146. 1
  6147. 1
  6148. 1
  6149. 1
  6150. 1
  6151. 1
  6152. 1
  6153. 1
  6154. 1
  6155. 1
  6156. 1
  6157. 1
  6158. 1
  6159. I don't have time to watch this in full but I expect it will talk about how Europe has low birthrates, lets in migrants and how they somehow want to copy the USA or how they are dependent on the USA for everything which has been a repeated theme with whatifalthist video's for a while now. And much of this is actually not that accurate, low birthrates and migrants yes but Europe has been moving away from the USA for quite some time now and will continue to do so, culturally it's hard for americans to see native european culture, movies, songs and series but they exist and are quite popular but they are very local and hard for americans to understand. Just because Europeans love eating a burger or pizza does not mean that is a sign of american hegemony, it just means they like burgers and pizza. American movies and tv shows have been on the decline in quality and quanity for a while now and local series or UK remain a big chuck of entertainment, USA is the only global game in town because everyone speaks english as a second language. as for the EU it's moving to become more and more of a federal state and is less inclined to trust or build on the USA which can change within each 4 year election cycle and is very polorized to say the least. Europe has problems for sure but if you compare Europe to the problems in most of the middle-east, africa, India, south america, Russia or even China we are doing very well for ourselfs and trying to take steps to become better, the issue is that americans are safe from the fallout of their own actions, Europe is right next to hostile powers like Russia, problems in Africa Hit Europe first same with the middle-east and China has no human rights to worry about while we attempt to actually held them up (unlike the USA) I would say Europe's biggest issue is that it has to implement full federalization of the EU and tackle these global issues that come to their shores from outside and they need to realise and fund a better more united military to match both the USA and Russia in order to maintain some kind of order as the US led world order slowly falls apart.
    1
  6160. 1
  6161. 1
  6162. 1
  6163. 1
  6164. 1
  6165. 1
  6166.  @incarnation151  im not sure if that's accurate, I'm not an expert on han dynasty but at that time Chinese culture had already cemented itself for quite some time, the only matter that changed was who would end up ruling most of China, the Mogols were a brutal bunch if you resisted them but if you opened your gates for them and peacefully changed rulers they would be pretty mild, in fact Koblai khan the ruler of the Chinese part of the mongol empire, quickly adopted chinese customs and in essence became just another chinese dynasty with no real intention of destroying Chinese civilization. Now go back to the communist take over, you just had the century of humiliation, the overthrow of the imperial system that lasted 6000+ years, you just had decades of warlord driven civil war and a brutal jappanese war that killed millions, then on top of all that you get a communist regime that tries it's best to uproot the whole of chinese culture, religion, history, causing the biggest famine known in human history, millions fled the country and when Mao died China was one of the poorest nations on the planet, it only took mild market reforms for China to become the second biggest economy in just a few decades and even now the seeds of the communist one child policy is haunting the Chinese nation still. I just can't imagine anything worse for Chinese culture and history than the communist take over of the country, even today it's still not mended it's wounds, who even remembers the han dynasty anymore compared to that? Though to be fair actions in the past have had long term effects for the far future, Alexander the Great, Tamurlain, Charlemaine dividing his kingdom between his kids, the Discovery of america, the list goes on and on.
    1
  6167. 1
  6168. 1
  6169. 1
  6170. 1
  6171. 1
  6172. 1
  6173. 1
  6174. 1
  6175. 1
  6176. 1
  6177. 1
  6178. 1
  6179. 1
  6180. 1
  6181. 1
  6182. 1
  6183. 1
  6184. 1
  6185. 1
  6186. 1
  6187. 1
  6188. 1
  6189. 1
  6190. 1
  6191. 1
  6192. 1
  6193. 1
  6194. 1
  6195. 1
  6196. 1
  6197. 1
  6198. 1
  6199. 1
  6200. 1
  6201. 1
  6202. 1
  6203. 1
  6204. 1
  6205. 1
  6206. 1
  6207. 1
  6208. 1
  6209. 1
  6210. 1
  6211. 1
  6212. 1
  6213. 1
  6214. 1
  6215. 1
  6216. 1
  6217. 1
  6218. 1
  6219. 1
  6220. 1
  6221. 1
  6222. 1
  6223. 1
  6224. 1
  6225. 1
  6226. 1
  6227. 1
  6228. 1
  6229. 1
  6230. 1
  6231. 1
  6232. 1
  6233. 1
  6234. 1
  6235. 1
  6236. 1
  6237. 1
  6238. 1
  6239. 1
  6240. 1
  6241. 1
  6242. 1
  6243. 1
  6244. 1
  6245. 1
  6246. 1
  6247. 1
  6248. 1
  6249. 1
  6250. 1
  6251. 1
  6252. 1
  6253. 1
  6254. 1
  6255. 1
  6256. 1
  6257. 1
  6258. 1
  6259. 1
  6260. 1
  6261. 1
  6262. 1
  6263. 1
  6264. 1
  6265. 1
  6266. 1
  6267. 1
  6268. 1
  6269. 1
  6270. 1
  6271. 1
  6272. 1
  6273. 1
  6274. 1
  6275. 1
  6276. 1
  6277. 1
  6278. 1
  6279. 1
  6280. 1
  6281. 1
  6282. 1
  6283. that's very naive, idealistic, utopian nonsense, look to the past people who were of no benefit to the tribe or group were banned and exilled from the society and most often died or did not reproduce as a result, this has been the norm since humans if not all life existed on this planet, only after the industrial revolution were we able to provide for most people and did we stop having natural selection and instead had artifical selection, this is what helps lead to genetic diseases as well as mental illness most of which are in the cities and urban centers. humans are only worthy of what they can produce of value to other humans, the people that can't/won't produce anything are a burden, now that does not mean they should be removed or done away with but it's important to understand ''this thing is a burden we should try and produce more than this burden is burdening us and do so for the long term not just short term'' this could then lead to automation of key industries, a focus on technology and new forms of economics, new ideas of culture and identity within society and hopefully lead to a better outcome. what we can't do is be bogged down by sentimental emotions or naive idealism (not specifically to you but to society in general) migrants can be a benefit but they are also a risk, raising children should be a primary concern of the government for the long term future, the elderly have to understand they are a burden on the youth and need to contribute more or be taken care of by their close family members, these aren't easy choices but we allowed them to fester and become worse due to inaction and naive idealism. again we can provide for everyone if we wanted to but that means being willing to implement radical changes and understanding that not all people are equal or valued, the first step in solving a problem is realising there is one.
    1
  6284. 1
  6285. 1
  6286. 1
  6287. 1
  6288. 1
  6289. 1
  6290. 1
  6291. 1
  6292. 1
  6293. 1
  6294. 1
  6295. 1
  6296. 1
  6297. 1
  6298. 1
  6299. 1
  6300. 1
  6301. 1
  6302. 1
  6303. 1
  6304.  @scotthalland  yes the Chinese and east asian communities have a large group that votes for conservative values but the majority of 3rd world countries do not and these are the groups the leftists and progressives seek the most, protect the most and demand the most. Your lame excuse of "they switch leftwing when the rightwing becomes racist" is a very childish and uneducated argument because it has no bases in reality and does not effect the migrant groups in any meaningfull way, they don't het lynched, they don't get terroized, they don't get robbed or slandered in the media, in fact your argument is the exact opposite of reality, whites face real racism, face terrorism, face abuse, humiliation and loss of wealth and wages and as a result of those conditions they become more racialy aware and more nativistic because not doing so just means more of the same. You might not have noticed by the rightwing and those who oppose anti white racism (like me) face constant censorship, racism, anti white propaganda and can see the attempts by the leftwing to use authoritarian means like immigration to take controle and abuse society. People swing to the leftwing when the leftwing and their media allies report fake news on supposed racist abuse by whited while whites face actual racism and you can just look at most posts on youtube by progressives and leftists they are some of the most genocidal, evil, racist and tyranical things you will ever read. I talk to a lot of different people, alt-right, neo-nazi's, fascisten even commies and non of them reach the level of hatred and racism the progressives and leftist do on a dayle bases. And I love them for it, a few years back they pretended to care about minorities or hide behind the illusion of "fighting the evil racists" now they don't even hide their racism anymore which makes white advocates, nativists and nationalists seem like the sane and rational people. Racism is simply a term used by the elites to slander people's own self intrest, notice how they don't adress racism directed at whites. The more people hold on to this childish Believe of "anti racism" or "racism bad" the more they actualy create and support real racists. The left needs migrants to get votes because they have abandoned logic, reason and the people who made the country, all they have left now is violence and that's the main goal of immigration today, to promote violence, Division, us vs them mentality not the rightwing, the rightwing wants to go back to normality which inevitably means seeking to reverse the racist policies of the leftwing there is no way around that, deportation and assumilation, multiculturalism is tyrany always.
    1
  6305. 1
  6306. 1
  6307. 1
  6308. 1
  6309. 1
  6310. 1
  6311. 1
  6312. 1
  6313. 1
  6314. 1
  6315. 1
  6316. 1
  6317. 1
  6318. 1
  6319. 1
  6320. 1
  6321. 1
  6322. 1
  6323. 1
  6324. 1
  6325. 1
  6326. 1
  6327. 1
  6328. 1
  6329. 1
  6330. 1
  6331. 1
  6332. 1
  6333. 1
  6334. 1
  6335. 1
  6336. 1
  6337. 1
  6338. 1
  6339. 1
  6340. 1
  6341. 1
  6342. 1
  6343. 1
  6344. 1
  6345. 1
  6346. 1
  6347. 1
  6348. 1
  6349. 1
  6350. 1
  6351. ​ @leon-jj9dv  I disagree, China is expanding in every direction and while some of their actions aren't as smooth shall we say as they wanted it to be, they do get away with it, facing little to no problems in doing so, if a western nation even did 1% of what China is doing to the Ugers in Xinjiang (which we even got on tape for crying out loud) then there would be a huge outrage world wide but in China? nobody seems to care or at least not enough to actually do something. I have to be carefull with language on youtube since it likes to censorship issues related to race, esspecially with a few specific demografics but basically the reason why they aren't assimulated is that black culture is by it's nature very hostile and independent of the wider american culture, you got a diversity of european people's hispanics, asians, so on people who consider themselves american but the african americans for quite some time now consider themselfs victims of america and not a part of the wider society, miscegenation won't realy let them assimulate because that would mean losing their oppressed status in society a fact that many democrats use to maintain influence over their voter base. for them to be assimulated would mean two things, 1. an exodus from the USA as no longer being one where they exist as ''african americans'' but just as americans, some black nationalists want seperation (unrealistic) or a return to africa movement (more realistic) some movements have been made to promote this and as the african continent grows more wealthy this might become a realistic move to make. 2. the people who are mixed have to basically become ''white'' as much as possible along with many hispanic groups, there can be non of this hostile, racialist, turning america black which many, many african americans believe in for them to be accepted properly, people realy have to push down on this mentality, it's not even good for african americans themselves, it's them creating themselves as the ''other'' and different from american values, history and identity and does not earn them any favors, it actually make certain white nationalists look good and democrats love to see the fires rise in american cities. idk how would the USA incorporate northern mexico? since it's government still controles it's territory, the northern counties would have to leave Mexico and then join the USA which they could reject, could happen but im not so sure. as for Canada, I don't think the USA wants Canada, Greenland is perhaps the most likely since it's basically a puppet of Denmark and might have more to gain by being an actual state of the USA, the USA would also love to have Greenland because most people there are white, very few in number and would give them a greater reach in the artic which is a potential new front for the USA and Russia. though to be honest, why not make a EU style North American Federation/union? won't change US laws, no extra senate seats, more interconnected movement of people, goods and services, might be difficult on the mexican border but perhaps have the US controle the borders on the Mexican southern border, way cheaper and easier to maintain compared to the US southern border.
    1
  6352.  @leon-jj9dv  yeah China is not loved, it's more of a boss employer relationships than a sense of brotherhood between civilizations, Europe and the USA might bicker and hate eachother on specific topics or feel insulted by eachother sometimes but there is a civlizational sort of bond that's way stronger than say Russia and China. China's economy will have a downturn at some point, esspecially with their demografics, the question is can they act now and create the type of economic and military alliance to challange the US superpower status? im not sure, probably depends on if they can get India on their side and gain minor victories like Taiwan. as for african americans, if it were the 1920s I would agree with you but it's 2021 and from my perspective it honestly looks like african americans (the majority) are very hostile to the USA as an identity and I don't mean that as in ''they want to destroy the USA because they hate it so much'' (some do for sure) but more so that their whole identity is incompatible with the idea of the USA as a whole, the majority sees themselves as victims or simply enjoy the perks of being seen as a victim by both the republican and democrat parties, just for different reasons, let me give an example, the George F riots, the saintfication of this man both by the media, the african american community as a whole and the democratic party shows an immense disconnect and subjugation to the idea of victimhood, the BI_m movement even furthers this victimhood status, while at the same time having this one-drop rule become flipped on it's head, in which every mixed race person becomes seen as part of the african american identity not mixed or white, it's not that white people aren't accepting of them, in fact they tolorate them too much and play along with the victimhood game, the divide is deepening not closing. the main reason why african americans don't move to africa is not because they don't feel a connection to the continent but because that would mean they aren't victims of evil white oppresors, also due to africa not being as rich as the USA going to africa would mean losing many privilages, standards and rights that they have, it's a bad deal indeed but instead of becoming fully american they want both which brings them into conflict with the wider american culture. they don't feel at home in the USA or Africa, their identity is always the oppressed, not the oppresor, not the american, not the equal, that's not my view but the view of themselves and the elites, I just don't see them suddenly giving up this identity to go back to making jazz music and having stable families, I just don't think it's going to happen, I could be wrong, im not an american but that's what I see when I look at the USA, a nation of americans of all colors and backgrounds and the african americans acting like crazies and tearing it all apart for some new sneakers or something, a minority of african americans have adapted but only by rejecting this majority view of african american identity. Canada might fall apart and then the USA could annex bits of it, that might happen but I have my doubts that the elites in government will want it, even if the people supported it. as for Mexico, that might be the same situation, still seems unlikely though and would piss off the mexican government, of course the US can say ''fuck you'' but idk, kinda asking for a potential cuban missle crisis if it became a chinese ally. I think the EU style relationship between mexico and canada might be for the best, it would stabalize both nations potentially and get them into the US sphere even more, that might smooth the full annexation process and perhaps give a frame work for new potential members like Guatamala or something.
    1
  6353. 1
  6354. 1
  6355. 1
  6356. 1
  6357. 1
  6358. 1
  6359. 1
  6360. 1
  6361. 1
  6362. 1
  6363. 1
  6364. 1
  6365. 1
  6366. 1
  6367. 1
  6368. 1
  6369. 1
  6370. 1
  6371. 1
  6372. 1
  6373. 1
  6374. 1
  6375. 1
  6376. 1
  6377. 1
  6378. 1
  6379. 1
  6380. 1
  6381. 1
  6382. 1
  6383. 1
  6384. 1
  6385. 1
  6386. 1
  6387. 1
  6388. 1
  6389. 1
  6390. 1
  6391. 1
  6392. 1
  6393. 1
  6394. 1
  6395. 1
  6396. 1
  6397. 1
  6398. 1
  6399. 1
  6400. 1
  6401. 1
  6402. 1
  6403. 1
  6404. 1
  6405. 1
  6406. 1
  6407. 1
  6408. 1
  6409. 1
  6410. 1
  6411. 1
  6412. 1
  6413. 1
  6414. 1
  6415. 1
  6416. 1
  6417. 1
  6418. 1
  6419. 1
  6420. 1
  6421. 1
  6422. 1
  6423. 1
  6424. 1
  6425. 1
  6426. 1
  6427. 1
  6428. 1
  6429. 1
  6430. 1
  6431. 1
  6432. 1
  6433. 1
  6434. 1
  6435. 1
  6436. 1
  6437. 1
  6438. 1
  6439. 1
  6440. 1
  6441. 1
  6442. 1
  6443. 1
  6444. 1
  6445. 1
  6446. 1
  6447. 1
  6448. 1
  6449. 1
  6450. 1
  6451. 1
  6452. 1
  6453. 1
  6454. 1
  6455. 1
  6456. 1
  6457. 1
  6458. 1
  6459. 1
  6460. 1
  6461. 1
  6462. 1
  6463. 1
  6464. 1
  6465. 1
  6466. ​ @charlieputzel7735  honestly your response sounds like something a bot would say, it's a word for word repeat of articles written by ''game journalists'', the methode to this maddness is how they infect media, it realy is like a virus, they don't target low budget and low reach movies or series, they tend to go for the higher up shows and series, the popular shows, they then say X (X most times being ''toxic masculinity'' or ''whiteness'') is problematic and needs to change, they make edits to shows and movies to inject it with woke ideology, things like strong female character that has no real enemies, mary sue characters, gay or minority characters in historical or unrealistic settings and then when fans or just movie observers point out how silly, inaccurate or poorly written something is, the accusations and frankly hate towards quality comes into play by some of these ''article writters'' as a result they don't realise their mistake, these movies or series lift on the creative and fanbase loyalty of their former creators and basically kill the series as a result, after they destroyed that medium or show they tend to look for new victims to drain the life of that as well, from TLOU2 to the walking dead, to comics, to tv shows, to historical drama's to everything, they destroy and collapse whole industries of medium. game reviews and movie reviews have bought and sold positive reviews by producers to avoid fan backlash and they have damage controle within the media, this is what is quite popularly observed by most people as the dark age of movies, series and medium, nothing is safe from them, all your favorite shows are being subverted and destroyed by their actions and forces people to look to far away places that don't have this ideology for a form of entertainment, right now Manga, Anime and some video game developers fill that void but block buster movies, western comics, woke game companies like Ubisoft or Blizzard are bleeding their fans dry and are not as profitable as they could be. this is not the first time that we've seen a decline in movies and series quality but it's never been this far reaching and destructive, the power of social media and the internet plus big tech companies has just made it more global, that's why it's seen as the dark ages. don't believe me? most reviews by fans dislike wokeness, the ''writer class'' of people often praise series that inject it with this woke ideology, while the company that produces it suffers as a result, corporations don't just want money, their quality would be much better if they were, this is just the fallout of a lazy industry that does not want to innovate or improve it's writting, that's teh truth.
    1
  6467. 1
  6468. 1
  6469. 1
  6470. 1
  6471. 1
  6472. 1
  6473. 1
  6474. 1
  6475. 1
  6476. 1
  6477. 1
  6478. 1
  6479. 1
  6480. 1
  6481. 1
  6482. 1
  6483. 1
  6484. 1
  6485. 1
  6486. 1
  6487. 1
  6488. 1
  6489. 1
  6490. 1
  6491. 1
  6492. 1
  6493. 1
  6494. 1
  6495. 1
  6496. 1
  6497. 1
  6498. 1
  6499. 1
  6500. 1
  6501. 1
  6502. ​ @Sunbearvygv  what the hell is the WBC? what is polite day to day conversations? since the goal post of what consititues that changes every day because of authoritarian leftists, woke ideology and political correctness, literally anything can be deemed ''offensive'' and is therefor either forbidden or punished if you simply mention things that are true or real, a few days ago i heared about a woman that got banned from university because 12 years ago she sang a rap song that had the n-word in it, so what you say can also be used against you even if it was said in the past, it's too subjective and open for interpretation so im not sure what you mean by that, speaking out against censorship and sueing companies that do it, as well as anti trust lawsuits seem to be a method to adress it. islam is alt right? have you ever met anyone who even still uses that label? they hate islam with a passion, at best all they share in common is they desire to have higher birthrates which islam does as well, other then that nothing realy in common, their views on woman, what they should do and their views on religion are far more secular, pagan or christianity focused, so I don't quite understand that connection there. many of the so called ''far right'' ideologies are very compatable to western democracies in fact historically they were the ideologies in the past that people had that led to western society in the first place, it's a return to old ways of looking at society and value of society, in sort it's basic, actual conservatism, it's just labeled ''far right'' by those that wish to censor and discredit them, ironically this fuels actual far right and far left ideologies and they feed off eachother, it's much like weimar germany. many people don't seem to be aware how much censorship there is or how corporations like Google and Facebook are used as proxies for political parties and rich elites to censor their competition to influence society, which is also why they fund you know who groups on the left we have seen in 2020 in 2016, you can't even mention them in any negative way or you will get censored online, same for video's, same on facebook, same on twiter, parler gets kicked off app store because they are competition for their influence and controle. in a true free market they would face competition and would not be able to maintain their monopoly like they do now. so to keep seeing channels i watch get banned, video's taken down, comments removed, political parties demonized, politicians call for violence and special rules for one class of people and different rules for others then to hear censorship is not a big deal or your not actually being repressed, is quite offensive and insulting, which is why society is so polorized today.
    1
  6503.  @Sunbearvygv  the fact that google and facebook are going after their competition shows they fear them, will take a lot of time before they catch up but in the meantime the government and media are going to side with them over their competion, that's why NYT and such write hit pieces on their competition to justify blocking them from the app stores to limit their reach to customer base. the WBC is nothing, they barely exist and are more a usefull tool for media, government and corporation to try and argue against free speech, you can find the same types of people in the black isrealites but you won't realy hear the media mention them because that would mean ''african americans can into hatred, anti gay, racism and anti semitism. ironically islamic countries and the former USSR were the ones pushing for so called ''hate speech laws'' because they don't want their bad ideas to be attacked, that's where it always, always, always comes down to. Slavoj Zizek is not that impressive in my opinion, I will admit his anti post modernist and anti political correctness stance is good but he only really scratches the surface rather then look at the big piture though it's been some time since i last seen his work so he might have moved past that at this point, esspecialy after what happened in 2016 and 2020. there realy is no good, rational and objective argument against free speech, it always comes down to emotions, hurting people's feelings and just wanting to shut down views one group does not like, mostly authoritarians, communists, islamists, fascists and globalists argue in favor of censorship and political correctness, the only real solution is to fight back against this type of tyrany which always ever few decades start to pop up, often in different forms and from different groups, i remember the early 2000s the left were the ones being censored by the rightwing christian groups, you had patriot act and war in iraq and stuff and now the left are the ones calling for more wars, more censorship and demanding people be treated unfairly because meh feelings, in 20 years it will likely be the rightwing that repeats this same cycle because people don't seem to get it or keep making the same mistakes once they win.
    1
  6504. 1
  6505. 1
  6506. 1
  6507. 1
  6508. 1
  6509. 1
  6510. 1
  6511. 1
  6512. 1
  6513. 1
  6514. 1
  6515. 1
  6516. 1
  6517. 1
  6518. 1
  6519. 1
  6520. 1
  6521. 1
  6522. 1
  6523. 1
  6524. 1
  6525. 1
  6526. 1
  6527. 1
  6528. 1
  6529. 1
  6530. 1
  6531. 1
  6532. 1
  6533. 1
  6534. 1
  6535. 1
  6536.  @Warren_Peace  yeah you just keep telling yourself that while China gets stronger and stronger, they already own most of africa, ports in Europe and their one belt one road is an attempt to remove the american sanctions and searoute tradelines. Russia and China are now buddies, the USA build up turkey's military that now has a dictator, USA has been waging billions worth of wars in the middle-east and all it has done is spread islam and terrorism far and wide esspecialy to your "allies" The EU is looking to become a superstate in an attempt to remove american influence on our political and military abilities and to get rid of NATO. Meanwhile the USA has to put sanctions on every nation out competing them, has to force Europeans to buy their shitty gas instead of from Russia, plus the demografics of the US are worse than in Europe. The US dollar has lost 90% of it's value, it's military is the most expensive in the world, your trillions in debt, no end in sight to the endless wars. If you study history it's clear the USA wants to hold on to a fake legacy that never existed they keep shooting themselves in the foot. And who cares about consumer markets? Europe is the biggest single market in the world, african union just passed a free trade deal for it's nations, the only reason nations trade with the USA is they get invaded if they don't. Not to mention all the propaganda from the USA, honestly you need the world a lot more than the world needs you, the world hates you and for good reason.
    1
  6537. 1
  6538. 1
  6539. 1
  6540. 1
  6541. 1
  6542. 1
  6543. 1
  6544. 1
  6545. 1
  6546. 1
  6547. 1
  6548. 1
  6549. there is a sense of powerlessness in the modern era in that all the old ideas that made sense are dying or already dead, at the same time the powers that are decadent are the ones with the most power and influence on society to prevent any kind of revolt against the status quo, while at the same time economic growth has slowed down and people are more disconnected than ever. it's hard to view our society as being the best in the world or the most peacefull even while it is since it's so broken down to bare minimum of needs met instead of things that give meaning to people's lives, there are no great teachers, no great connections, great new ideas or means of really self improving yourself beyond merely going to the gym or studying for a degree to become another cog in the machine of the economic engine which can then be taxed into oblivion by elites that are out of touch with reality and openly mocking towards the working class. there is also the lack of god or religion to offer redemption for sins or promise of a better future be it heaven or anything material, how to overcome these trends? I don't know but the first step is knowing that this is the reality of many people today and that we have to look for new ways to improve our society in whatever small way we can. for starters be aware of your vices, try and give back to your community or country in whatever way you can, be humble, know your own limitations and try and surpass them if possible, keep a positive and stoic additude in life, be greatfull for the good things in life however small they may be, try and be happy for other people's joy and happiness even if it might give you a sense of envy, try and respect other people but also don't judge yourself too harshly if you distrust or dislike certain groups for whatever reason and don't let that stop you from trying to treat people fairly when possible, have a code of personal honour and rules you wish to maintain and be willing to admit whenever you have been proven wrong or have come to doubt something you held true for a long time.
    1
  6550. 1
  6551. 1
  6552. 1
  6553. 1
  6554. 1
  6555. 1
  6556. 1
  6557. 1
  6558. 1
  6559. 1
  6560. 1
  6561. 1
  6562. 1
  6563. 1
  6564. 1
  6565. 1
  6566. 1
  6567. 1
  6568. 1
  6569. 1
  6570. 1
  6571. 1
  6572. 1
  6573. 1
  6574. 1
  6575. 1
  6576. 1
  6577. 1
  6578. 1
  6579. 1
  6580. 1
  6581. 1
  6582. 1
  6583. 1
  6584. 1
  6585. 1
  6586. 1
  6587. 1
  6588. 1
  6589. 1
  6590. 1
  6591. 1
  6592. 1
  6593. 1
  6594. there realy are only two solutions here. 1. punish gold buyers/sellers 2. punish botting Blizzard sees wow classic as a cow that has to be milked dry but has nothing to offer long term (their view now mine) so their main focus is on getting more subs from more or less people but as long as they get payed they don't realy care unless it's realy hurting the community to the extend that it hurts their profits and the thing is, they don't realy hurt their profits as much, people adapt, they buy gold which feeds more botting, more botting creates more gold in game and repeat. You could argue this harms the game and makes them lose subs but that's not realy the case since most players aren't new to the game, they are older players who return for classic and TBC, have a way to skip the grindy stuff to get what they want for real life money is a easy way compared to spending their time, they aren't going to punish the gold sellers and buyers because it hurts their pay check so would not count on that happening unless it's very specifically for realms that are bleeding player subs because of it. then there is the punishing of bots and Blizzard has (finally!) done a great deal of purging of the bots from most realms but here is the catch, they adapt very fast and even now in ZT, EU server they still are everywhere, they only play for certain hours on certain times, in specific spots, not realy looking for the highly valued stuff and just farming mobs for hours and hours non stop for raw gold and perhaps leathers and stuff. In my opinion dealing with the bots is far more realistic, since they can and do mess up the in game economy to a large degree and if they are stopped, gold sellers will have to jack up prices to be able to make a profit, which lowers the amount of people willing to buy them while keeping most accounts active. perhaps the Bllizard of early 2000s would have done more but this era of Blizzard just does not care at all.
    1
  6595. 1
  6596. 1
  6597. 1
  6598. 1
  6599. 1
  6600. 1
  6601. 1
  6602. 1
  6603. 1
  6604. 1
  6605. 1
  6606. 1
  6607. 1
  6608. 1
  6609. 1
  6610. 1
  6611. 1
  6612. 1
  6613. 1
  6614. 1
  6615. 1
  6616.  @leon-jj9dv  actually the European empires tried to maintain their colonial empires after ww2 and were able to maintain them for many years till the USA started applying presure and pulled funding from the marshal plan if they continued with their empires, the funds from that plan was most often worth more compared to maintaining an army and exploiting their colonies and when they left the European nations had an economic boom. The Europeans then fell in line with the wishes of the USA, Germany is still not allowed to build up their military or be able to declare war, after the fall of the USSR, NATO and the EU actually expanded into eastern Europe and there have been talks and progress towards shared EU army and other pan European military projects like the Eurofighter. Basically Europe has to compete against both the USA and Russia with two hands tied behind their backs. For Europe to even be able to act aggresively in a manner like the USA or Russia it would first have to break away from NATO to not be dependent on the USA for protection, then build up their military forces, then engage in expansionist policies and then not get into conflict with any US allies and only focus on their shared enemies without getting help from the USA and then becoming a semi-super power like the USA. Now knowing what happened in the world wars and how easy it could result in Europe going into a war with either Russia or the USA, how smart do those odds look? Does that seem like a smart move to make?
    1
  6617.  @leon-jj9dv  the USA is a colonial empire, in fact it's the biggest one, their settler based colonialism is superior to the European explotative colonial system. The European people still had some desire to maintain their empires but not to expand it, however the american presure is what realy killed the desire for empire, since empires was about prestige and about making money but now in the modern era they would have neither due to how both the USA and the USSR opposed European colonialism, after that decolonisation set in many places, often against the wishes of local leaders and elites who had power over their local regions, many of these nations economies collapsed afterwards, so basically it was an indirect splitting up of colonial holdings due to the rise of the new two super powers and the entanglement within the cold war. The desire for empire is dead in Europe but more so because the USA would not allow it to happen first and the economic reasons behind it no longer make sense, it would cost to much and give them nothing. The roll of expansion and empire still exists but it's more subtle, it's in the form of corporations, military projects, web of allies and military involvement (like France in Africa) and internal expansion with supranational organisations, the EU is a good example of this, starting quite small, expanding to eastern Europe, trying to improve it's system of government, the era of empires might be over but empires still exist, the biggest one remains the USA.
    1
  6618. ​ @leon-jj9dv  forgive me but I feel like we aren't talking about the same ideas when it comes to what an empire is, to how it acts to what it means to be an empire, so if you could help me understand we might come to a better understanding of eachother because i feel like what your saying is a very american focused perspective without the perspective to how it looks from Europe or how we experienced/would want empires. an empire (at least in my opinion) is whenever a core nation/people expand into the historical/literal territory of another nation/people to either settle it or exploit it, in the case of the USA, the thirteen colonies are it's core, it then expanded into other territories either by buying land, using force or simply by demografics to spark joining the core like with Texas, with this in mind most of the USA is a colony used for settlement and expansion of it's core, some are more empire like compared to others, like Hawaii which was openly annexed against local wishes by force but they could not do anything against it. Russia and China are also empires and they have mixed amounts of controle per period in time, Russia today in fact has had many breakaway parts and continues to have issues with some regions, might even come up this century. now on the subject of the EU, this is where I get confused, you say that ''empires demand aggresion and expansionism that the EU lacks'' but the EU has expanded, just not by force, you then raise the point that if Bulgaria or Romania didn't join the EU they wouldn't force them, this is confusing to me because you seem to propose that the EU could do this but that it just does not want to, this realy confuses me because the EU does not have a standing army to do so but if they did they would probably use it to expand if the USA and it's EU member states would not mind in them doing so. If you listen to some people in the EU they very much want to turn it into an empire, I think Guy Verhofstad says it the most, it's not that they don't want to, they literally can't due to them not having an army and the USA would divide and invade them if they did, so it's a bit odd to say they just don't want to and it has nothing to do with european citizens opposing them, they barely oppose their own governments, if the prospect of empire was there for them to perhaps beat back Russia and defend Europe (a narrative mostly only expressed by people in the so called ''far right'' and fascistic groups) they might be willing to go for it, they just don't have the choice right now. it's a bit of subjective point on who caused imperialism to die down in Europe the most, the americans, the soviets or the Europeans themselves, personally I think it's more the americans more than anything, since the soviets were seen as a threat to unify against and many Europeans still wanted to keep their empires but the USA wanted them docile and also made treaties to the strongest European nations like Germany to limit their army and remove the right of being able to cause wars for Germany, France even left NATO for a while because they did not want to be subjects of the USA and keep their colonial empire as long as they could. as for the future, I think we will see a return to empire in Europe with it's main enemy being Russia and/or Turkey being oppossed to them, probably a flash point with ukraine or belarus, at that point the empire so to speak will become necessary and openly supported by the USA, right now it's not necessary, not allowed, not promoted and serves no purpose, that's why it does not exist yet in the way you consider empires.
    1
  6619.  @leon-jj9dv  I see, there is some truth in what your saying, to me though it's a bit different, the EU today kinda reminds me of the early period of the USA under the articles of confederations, that one was also disfunctional, in an era where each colony saw itself as more of independent nation state than one single country, a feeling that would remain untill the american civil war. likewise Europe is divided between itself, in a disfunctional system in an era where each member is a nation state of itself. however, I would say that the EU does have other tools besides military expansion (which i maintain the US would want to shut down quickly) which is economic presure, when Greece was at risk of leaving the EU, the EU, France, UK and Germany bailed them out and implemented reforms, while the greeks aren't hardline pro EU members they are less inclined to leaving the EU, same with most nations that wanted to leave but after Brexit all seem to have become soft Eurosceptics, not as hardcore as they used to be. as for military expansion in general, when was the last time any major nation annexed another piece of another nation? all I can think of is cremea and looking at Russia they don't realy give me the impression when i look at their demografics and economy that they are going to suddenly take over all of Europe, of course if the USA suddenly left tomorrow that would give the Europeans a panic but at the same time it would be a silly move by the americans since access to Europe and military bases is good for it's power projection towards Russia and in turn more bases for reaching into Africa, the middle-east, western asia, the other expanding force in terms of military use is Turkey under Erdogan and he is becoming quite the dictator and not very well liked by other NATO members and Europe, sometimes been a question for me what would the US do if a NATO member attacks another NATO member? ( I honestly don't know) What im trying to say is, for a long time, empires were seen as backwards, destroyed, sanctioned, invaded or isolated from the rest of the world, often by the USA but not always just them, what modern version of expansion via military means exists in today's world? in order for military expansion to become reasonable there has to be some motivating factor that drives it, it does not simply come from nothing. for Europe to become stronger it can't return to the old days of empire, even if the people wanted it, it would go no-where in today's era, the only way I can see it happening is if it unified to then focus on it's major rivals which any single member state would not want or be able to but as a collective might be driven to. it's a bit hard to say where things are going in Europe, there are nationalistic and even pan-european parties trying to turn the EU into an empire or a desire to return to nationalism as a sort of national revivial but would that work? would the USA tolorate it? would that not bring about the nationalism most Europeans seem to fear? if so then they would want to stick with the EU disfunctional as it is, the alternative would be empire on a smaller scale, right? it's all very complicated and difficult to predict how things will go, I also don't know if the EU itself is able to change or if the people will just come apart like some people predict, when i talk to some of the youth though, they do seem more pan-european focused, even some of the nationalist groups i've seen want some form of European cooporation and nations like the UK seem to be falling apart even faster than nations in the EU, that might also be the spark that forces the change, seeing how the UK collapses and perhaps due to global warming more humanitarian crisis's and threats from Turkey and Russia could motivate more militaristic focus. idk but food for thought, thanks for the reply.
    1
  6620. 1
  6621. 1
  6622. 1
  6623. 1
  6624. 1
  6625. 1
  6626. 1
  6627. 1
  6628. 1
  6629. 1
  6630. 1
  6631. 1
  6632. 1
  6633. 1
  6634. 1
  6635. 1
  6636. 1
  6637. 1
  6638. 1
  6639. 1
  6640. 1
  6641. 1
  6642. 1
  6643. 1
  6644. 1
  6645. 1
  6646. 1
  6647. 1
  6648. 1
  6649. 1
  6650. 1
  6651. 1
  6652. 1
  6653. 1
  6654. 1
  6655. 1
  6656. ​ @psychoboyjack285  the fuck you talking about? of course im condeming Russia, I'm simply pointing out the objective fact that if the USA had pushed for defending Ukraine before any of this or after the annexation of cremea in 2014 then this war never would have even happened. you are trying to twist this into claiming the USA had no way of doing anything or claiming the Ukranian government is just so incompetent and stupid they would not even ask the USA or EU nations to help them out, which they did multiple times even before this conflict but the USA, EU and NATO all said no because they did not want to antagonize Russia because if they did the Russian media, the government, the mainstream media and all the people in those countries would complain and worry that those leaders that would be defending Ukraine were trying to start ww3, remember when Trump got elected and they all screamed that he was going to start ww3? strange how non of this happened when he was in charge and Biden took office and within 2 years Russia invades another nation, this is not rocket science it's very predictable and rational from Russia's part to take advantage of a weak USA and a gullable and dependent on Russian oil and gas Europe. the west had everything to do with this, it acted weak and other nations take advantage of that and it's not going to stop untill you get smart, competent, gutsy and great leaders, the west used to have those for days, now it's lucky to even have 1 leader close to that level, btw Russia's leadership is also incompetent and corrupt, look at how poorly they are doing within this very war, again all of this could have been avoided, that's the harsh truth and that's why you don't like to hear it, the idea that we could have prevented it and we did nothing, same with how ww2 could have been prevented if the allies acted sooner and did not demilitarize their armies, learn from history or be forced to repeat it's mistakes.
    1
  6657. 1
  6658. 1
  6659. 1
  6660. 1
  6661. 1
  6662. 1
  6663. 1
  6664. 1
  6665. 1
  6666. 1
  6667. 1
  6668. 1
  6669. 1
  6670. 1
  6671. 1
  6672. 1
  6673. 1
  6674. 1
  6675. 1
  6676. 1
  6677. 1
  6678. 1
  6679. 1
  6680. 1
  6681. 1
  6682. 1
  6683. 1
  6684. 1
  6685. 1
  6686. 1
  6687. 1
  6688. 1
  6689. 1
  6690. 1
  6691. 1
  6692.  @Ifraneljadida  the odds were pretty stacked against him, it was largely Trump himself who made it happen, not anything the public or the institutions did, in fact the media was on a neverending witch hunt (still is) and he barely got elected only because his opposition was the imbodyment of all that is corrupt and wrong with the USA today, it was realy slim and perhaps the last time it will happen since now the demografics are going to shift even more radically and the democratic party move to remove that last piece that got Trump elected in the first place, the electoral college, since Trump did lose the populare vote, without the electoral college, he would have lost. As for why the USA is so powerfull today, is realy too long to explain in just one comment but typically americans will cite their "freedom, institutions and constitution" as major reasons for their rise to power but in reality while their constitution is impressive, it was realy the US style collonialism called manifest Destiny, waging war and annexing fertile land and "removing" the native populations and creating basically a pan-european ethnostate under libertarian and capitalist economic models, plenty of things could have gone wrong that would have made it a regional power like Brazil, Argentina and others, it annexed large parts of lands from mexico, tried (and lost) in 1812 to annex Canada, it got rid of it's native americans in such an effective way Hitler would even quote and admire it and work the same kind of model for his lebensraum plans. Then ww1 and ww2 happened and with no real competition left the USA stood strong ontop a pille of bodies. Im not saying this as some kind of moral argument or demonisation, all nations did messed up and violent stuff, some of the worst were the british, the french, the Germans and the Russians but the USA is just not strong because of it's freedoms, it's strong because of it's version of collonialism and waging of war like nearly all great nations throughout history, the USA has been and is a lot like the roman Empire, esspecialy now with it's idea that anyone can become a US citizen.
    1
  6693. 1
  6694. 1
  6695. 1
  6696. 1
  6697. 1
  6698. 1
  6699. 1
  6700. 1
  6701. 1
  6702. 1
  6703. 1
  6704. 1
  6705. 1
  6706. 1
  6707. 1
  6708. 1
  6709. 1
  6710. 1
  6711. 1
  6712. 1
  6713. 1
  6714. 1
  6715. 1
  6716. 1
  6717. 1
  6718. 1
  6719. 1
  6720. 1
  6721. 1
  6722. 1
  6723. 1
  6724. 1
  6725. 1
  6726. 1
  6727. 1
  6728. 1
  6729. 1
  6730. 1
  6731. 1
  6732. 1
  6733. 1
  6734. 1
  6735. 1
  6736. 1
  6737. 1
  6738. 1
  6739. 1
  6740. 1
  6741. 1
  6742. 1
  6743. 1
  6744. 1
  6745. 1
  6746. 1
  6747. 1
  6748. 1
  6749. 1
  6750. 1
  6751. 1
  6752. 1
  6753. 1
  6754. 1
  6755. 1
  6756. 1
  6757. 1
  6758. 1
  6759. 1
  6760. 1
  6761. 1
  6762. 1
  6763. 1
  6764. 1
  6765. 1
  6766. 1
  6767. 1
  6768. 1
  6769. 1
  6770. 1
  6771. 1
  6772. 1
  6773. 1
  6774. 1
  6775. 1
  6776. 1
  6777. 1
  6778. 1
  6779. 1
  6780. 1
  6781. 1
  6782. 1
  6783. 1
  6784. 1
  6785. 1
  6786. 1
  6787. 1
  6788. 1
  6789. 1
  6790. can we please stop with this nonsense fearmongering, the only thing Europe suffers from is political will and unity to organize as a whole unit. the americans have co-developed much of our and their own weapons and intel gathering tools, them suddenly shutting down any and all hardware we already have is very unlikely but also something that could be bypassed, hacked or find other means of doing so, these technologies aren't that high tech or hard to develop. can we also please stop fear mongering about Russia, Russia can't take Ukraine, Russia has less people, it has less money, it's most scary weapons are it's nukes and it's even uncertain if those will work. meanwhile France has nukes and could make more if they wanted to, same with Germany if they really wanted to. one of the reasons we don't make that many shells for the modern battlefield is because the western NATO nations are heavily air forced and in that department Europe has many of it's own systems, domestically created systems and could make adaptations for current existing models with non-US systems if need be. Russia is not going to blitz into Europe and even if it tried it could be held off long enough to push up production and that's assuming big players like France, Germany, Turkey or the UK sit on their ass and do nothing. we need political will, we need to deregulate much of this market to set it up quickly and we need to return to good old coal, steel and older models for quantity and speed to fill the gap. this is not the end of the world, Russia is not all powerful, now unless the USA + Russia + China decide to team up to destroy us, we can easily overcome this situation.
    1
  6791. 1
  6792. 1
  6793. 1
  6794. 1
  6795. 1
  6796. 1
  6797. 1
  6798. 1
  6799. 1
  6800. 1
  6801. 1
  6802. 1
  6803. 1
  6804. 1
  6805. 1
  6806. 1
  6807. 1
  6808. 1
  6809. 1
  6810. 1
  6811. 1
  6812. 1
  6813. 1
  6814. 1
  6815. 1
  6816. 1
  6817. 1
  6818. 1
  6819. 1
  6820. 1
  6821. 1
  6822. 1
  6823. 1
  6824. 1
  6825. 1
  6826. 1
  6827. 1
  6828. 1
  6829. 1
  6830. 1
  6831. 1
  6832. 1
  6833. 1
  6834. 1
  6835. 1
  6836. 1
  6837. 1
  6838. I remember a bit from I think it was college humor, where they compared fan bases to religions and it's pretty accurate to a degree, fans love shows because of the stories told within them, characters exist, they suffer, they adapt, they overcome, they grow and we the viewer can grow with them. many people will say ''it's just fiction'' but how would those same people or many other people react to a story like the Bible? the Koran? the Saga's? many of these stories have fictional events that don't reflect reality at all and yet millions of people worldwide believe in them, inspire them, drive them to actions or views on the world at large and their part in it. fictional stories like Star wars or Star Trek aren't my cup of tea but I've seen other people love those shows, they love the characters, what they represent and when a cannon gets changed it's like hearing those stories who might have inspired you, be ridiculed, disgraced, changed, mutilated and to you it's insulting and offensive. I don't recommend anything violent but I can guarantee you if fans of shows were fanatical that they would commit say terrorism against corporations that change their cannon, those companies would not attempt to change it, nor dare to add anything to it. That's silly I know but in the real world we do have people who commit such acts and corporations, leaders and nations dare not make fun of some of those religions out of fear of violence against them. btw, Im not bashing religion, it's a fundamental freedom for people and plenty of ideological nonsense out there that's just as if not more destructive, im just making an observation on why people care about stories, cannon and fictional stories because people care about that which inspires them or gives them hope and dislike or even hate those that take their stories away from them for their own profit.
    1
  6839. 1
  6840. 1
  6841. 1
  6842. 1
  6843. 1
  6844. 1
  6845. 1
  6846. 1
  6847. 1
  6848. 1
  6849. 1
  6850. 1
  6851. 1
  6852. 1
  6853. 1
  6854. 1
  6855. 1
  6856. 1
  6857. 1
  6858. 1
  6859. 1
  6860. 1
  6861. 1
  6862. 1
  6863. 1
  6864. 1
  6865. 1
  6866. 1
  6867. 1
  6868. 1
  6869. 1
  6870. 1
  6871. 1
  6872. 1
  6873. 1
  6874. 1
  6875. 1
  6876. 1
  6877. 1
  6878. 1
  6879. 1
  6880. 1
  6881. 1
  6882. 1
  6883. 1
  6884. 1
  6885. 1
  6886. 1
  6887. 1
  6888. 1
  6889. 1
  6890. 1
  6891. 1
  6892. 1
  6893. 1
  6894. 1
  6895. 1
  6896. 1
  6897. 1
  6898. 1
  6899. 1
  6900. 1
  6901. 1
  6902. 1
  6903. 1
  6904. 1
  6905. 1
  6906. 1
  6907. 1
  6908. 1
  6909.  @gentleshark972  I don't think that's realistic or something people actually want, it's something forced on them that they have to accept or be threatened with, this creates resentment and alienation in the public which can only be suppressed by authoritarian governments and equal resentment from migrant populations for not being accepted or seen as equals. In many ways it's tragic, both sides lose, nobody gains anything of any real value and the only people that profit from it are authoritarian politicians who now have more tools to divide people with without solving issues in their community and corporations that erode resistance towards their power, influence and controle on both the public and the governments that they have in their pockets. I can't imagine it having a happy ending, just more white flight, resentment and political radicalism while at the same time less of a footing on the global scale compared to China, India or the USA and before you say it the USA also suffers from this ideology, they however have the benefit of being able to leave their urban cities to rot while most European nations lose their identity, self respect and trust in the government that is suppose to represent them. In way it's a repeat of the conditions that led to fascism, communism and national socialism, disfunctional governments, a humiliating state of their nations and culture and the temptation creeping in that only anti democratic and counter authoritarian ideology can save them. I don't have any faith in that future generations will be greatfull for the legacy we are leaving them, they have no hope with the status quo and everything to gain by seeing it collapse.
    1
  6910. 1
  6911. 1
  6912. 1
  6913. 1
  6914. 1
  6915. 1
  6916. 1
  6917. 1
  6918. 1
  6919. 1
  6920. 1
  6921. 1
  6922. 1
  6923. 1
  6924. 1
  6925. 1
  6926. 1
  6927. 1
  6928. 1
  6929. 1
  6930. 1
  6931. 1
  6932. 1
  6933. 1
  6934. 1
  6935. 1
  6936. 1
  6937. 1
  6938. 1
  6939. 1
  6940. 1
  6941. 1
  6942. 1
  6943. 1
  6944. 1
  6945. 1
  6946. 1
  6947. 1
  6948. 1
  6949. 1
  6950. 1
  6951. 1
  6952. 1
  6953. 1
  6954. 1
  6955. 1
  6956. 1
  6957. 1
  6958. 1
  6959. 1
  6960. 1
  6961. 1
  6962. 1
  6963. 1
  6964. 1
  6965. 1
  6966. 1
  6967. 1
  6968. 1
  6969. 1
  6970. 1
  6971. 1
  6972. 1
  6973. 1
  6974. 1
  6975. 1
  6976. 1
  6977. 1
  6978. 1
  6979. 1
  6980. 1
  6981.  @zhoupact8567  the way China has become so strong is by offering nations a chance to benefit in one way or another, that's how they win them in, make deal, debt lending, technology exchanges/theft, bribery, they sweeten the deal before they drop the hammer, the USA as the world military force feels comfortable and secure but it's not the same in Europe, Africa or Asia, this is where China has sought to expand and influence the most, they don't want a open conflict they want to replace the USA as lets say old world hegomony, then once everyone is dependent on them they can do anything they want, annex taiwan, annex hong kong, annex mongolia, perhaps if Russia fell apart get it's eastern parts in it's sphere, it already has major influence and funds in Africa. And make no mistake Europeans as loyal as they are to the USA still have a sense of bitter resentment towards the USA, mostly because of a sense of second rate power, often humiliated in the news because of mig-rants and what not, the Chinese could promise them everything and most of it's leaders and people would take it, I think NATO and the EU need a total reorganisation of ideals and policies, in order to straighten out it's angry voices and make working with China seem less viable, sadly the USA because of wars, globalist policies and a lack of constructive long term action has lost a lot of favor, it takes things for granted which is a major mistake. It might be impossible to unite and help fund all these different forces at the same time, perhaps actual war is inevitable, I think the cards that will decide it for certain are in India, Africa and Russia, though will they become american spheres? Eurosphere's or Chinese spheres? Idk.
    1
  6982. 1
  6983. 1
  6984. 1
  6985. 1
  6986. 1
  6987. 1
  6988. 1
  6989. 1
  6990. children don't see race or understand differences as well because they aren't yet off the age of group competition and understanding of social status, kids and teenagers do have inborn racial bias which comes natural to them of all colors and groups, we like to imprint the innocence of children in this regard but realy it's their naivety and lack of understand which is showing. personally I don't like the label of racist or racism because it's very black and white thinking as in someone is or is not a racist, while in reality all people have racial bias proven by science and on top of that there are positive and negative ethno centric views to varying of degrees, someone could be helpfull towards other races in one setting like say work, while being opposite to those same people living next to them or marrying into their family, not because of individual traits but as a group. what's most interesting though is that modern society does not reject racism, in fact it very much promotes it and pushes for it, it is only that each era in time it's a different group that's being targeted or accepted to dislike by the society and the elites that govern society, in the past it was irish, blacks and jews, today it's whites, males and christians. to be a ''racist'' one must belong to a group and then advocate for the self interest of that group over other groups, by this definition, all human beings with any amount of power, self or group identity interest is a ''racist'' therefor this label is just silly in the manner it's being used today. i think someone being negative ethno centric is much more honest and objective than terms like ''racist'' or ''anti racist'' which as we can see is clearly not what they think it means.
    1
  6991. 1
  6992. 1
  6993. 1
  6994. 1
  6995. 1
  6996. 1
  6997. 1
  6998. 1
  6999. 1
  7000. 1
  7001. 1
  7002. 1
  7003. 1
  7004. 1
  7005. 1
  7006. 1
  7007. 1
  7008. 1
  7009. 1
  7010. 1
  7011. 1
  7012. 1
  7013. 1
  7014. 1
  7015. 1
  7016. 1
  7017. 1
  7018. 1
  7019. 1
  7020. 1
  7021. 1
  7022. 1
  7023. 1
  7024. 1
  7025. 1
  7026. 1
  7027. 1
  7028. 1
  7029. 1
  7030. 1
  7031. 1
  7032. 1
  7033. 1
  7034. 1
  7035. 1
  7036. 1
  7037. 1
  7038. 1
  7039. 1
  7040.  @fritzamparo3209  the russians can sell their oil and gas to China but that takes time and since China has other options but Russia does not means they won't be able to charge them full price. I would say Russia invading another nation is perhaps the most clear show of expansionism you could have, not sure what you mean by this, I'm pretty sure Russia does not really care how close NATO is to Russia that's just propaganda nonsense, what they do care about it a former close ''ally'' of Russia being converted to the western side of doing things and showing Russians what their society could look like without Putin, that makes way more sense than the current Russian narrative. the civl conflict is due to Russian annexation and Ukraine not giving up claims to these lands which is their right but if there is a peace treaty in which these lands are legitimized as Russian lands then that would solve that issue and Ukraine could join NATO but again that's not what the conflict is about, even if Russia got 50% of Ukraine that's not a deal they want, they want to crush any sense of Ukraine becoming western, still if the war goes badly or NATO steps up then they might be forced to make a deal. Afghanistan and Iraq were never democracies, never tried on their own to become democracies and were never really part of the western world in any way, Ukraine is closer to Europe, has some history with the rest of the continent and is strongly economically connected to both the west and the rest of the world, this would not be a NATO occupation, it would mostly be a western liberation of Russian aggresion, like in ww2. nukes won't be used, small yield nukes won't destroy the world, humanity is fine, the scale of nuclear war has been reduced by a lot and nobody wants it, again this is fear of nukes is what's part of Russian propaganda tactics the world is fine, don't fall for the Russian bluf and also the early 80s predictions of nuclear fallout or winter have been disproven because the people that promoted it feared nuclear war would happen otherwise and they were somewhat right to think and thus fearmonger about it, not so much now, back then the global warhead count was like 500.000 now it's like 15.000.
    1
  7041. 1
  7042. 1
  7043. 1
  7044. 1
  7045. I think your predictions of Turkey becoming a new super power/great power is very optimistic, a bit too optimistic but not 100% wrong like someone might say. Turkey is a strong nation for a number or reasons but the biggest reasons for it was the westernization of their society away from the ottoman style system that made them the sick man of Europe for such a long time, their major advantage over the western world is mostly their location, their demografics and their military (funded by NATO and western ideas of war). however while all this growth and westernization has gone on, Turkey itself has become very divided between both rural and urban cultures and Erdogan has revealed himself to be a dictator and is slowly eroding all major freedoms of the turkish people, while at the same time making threats across the region and a lot towards Europe which does not give them any favors. I find it ironic that Erdogan keeps comparing other nations, western leaders somehow to nazi's or Hitler it seems like a projection in what he might wish to be, he has made threats to israel and has been promoting pan-turkish nationalism to create a new sphere of influence. it all depends on what happens with the Turkish leadership now, if they continue down the current road i have great doubts that Turkey will become a superpower, if they get rid of the current insanity and focus on becoming more westernized, creating stability around them rather then fear and hatred for them then they will be a major power in the region and most likely will be a great power but right now, almost everyone in the west hates them, are trying to limit Turkey's influence while the population within Turkey is more and more polorized and divided.
    1
  7046. 1
  7047. 1
  7048. 1
  7049. 1
  7050. 1
  7051. 1
  7052. 1
  7053. 1
  7054. 1
  7055. 1
  7056. 1
  7057. 1
  7058. 1
  7059. 1
  7060. 1
  7061. 1
  7062. 1
  7063. 1
  7064. 1
  7065. 1
  7066. 1
  7067. 1
  7068. 1
  7069. 1
  7070. 1
  7071. 1
  7072. 1
  7073. 1
  7074. 1
  7075. 1
  7076. 1
  7077. 1
  7078. 1
  7079. 1
  7080. 1
  7081. 1
  7082. 1
  7083. 1
  7084. 1
  7085. 1
  7086. 1
  7087. 1
  7088. 1
  7089. 1
  7090. 1
  7091. 1
  7092. 1
  7093. 1
  7094. 1
  7095. 1
  7096. 1
  7097. 1
  7098. 1
  7099. 1
  7100. 1
  7101. 1
  7102. 1
  7103. 1
  7104. 1
  7105. 1
  7106. 1
  7107. 1
  7108. 1
  7109. 1
  7110. 1
  7111. 1
  7112. 1
  7113. 1
  7114. 1
  7115. 1
  7116. 1
  7117. 1
  7118. 1
  7119. 1
  7120. 1
  7121. 1
  7122. 1
  7123. 1
  7124. 1
  7125. 1
  7126. 1
  7127. 1
  7128. 1
  7129. 1
  7130. 1
  7131. 1
  7132. 1
  7133. 1
  7134. 1
  7135. 1
  7136. 1
  7137. 1
  7138. 1
  7139. 1
  7140.  @craigkdillon  yeah I agree, though Stalin did suppressed and killed many more people than the tsar his rule were about the same, except perhaps replacing the orthodox church with himself. Yes Putin has recreated the orthodox church but even further he has been trying to embrace islam as well as they are a growing demografic which clashes with more nationalistic people like Nevalny (the western media likes to display him as some pro democratic, anti authoritarian politician but he is realy a ultra nationalist) Everyone can pass through the sea lanes but what can they sell? Cars? Microchips? Bikes? I have no idea and the USA can blockade any progress they make with sanctions, because resources are so nessisary for western nations these lines of flow are less likely to be targeted with sanctions and can be used as political bargaining chips for other issues, it's why Nord stream 2 with Germany is a big deal because it makes Germany less energy independent. Further Russia has so many problems all at once, demografics, corruption, military security, distrusted by other nations, seperatist movements, all at once and Putin as a authoritarian leader is more focused on staying in power, it's very delicate and balanced between reform and holding on to power, once Putin is gone you could see some major changes or a repeat of his policies, who knows for sure? As for Xi, im not sure actualy how he compares, he's an authoritarian leader for sure, basicaly a bit like Hitler in terms or totalitarian government but China's economy is still growing right? Also demografics problems but in terms of growth still very strong I believe.
    1
  7141.  @craigkdillon  not sure if that's fully accurate since China has gotten sanctions and trade war with USA due to China's actions yet the same was applied to Europe to a lesser degree, Russia has no warm water ports except the one in Cremea which due to them annexing it in full caused the sanctions to begin with, you also have some trade in the far east but again the distance from western Russia to eastern Russia is huge. Russia does make things and exports them to European markets but those same markets are in competition with eachother, the US and China, not all countries can make micro chips or smart phones and even if they could they would get out competed with other companies, Russia can only stick with what they are good at which is basic things like food, oil, gas, weapons and so on, the only way for them to diversity their economy would be for their people, economy and government to be stable with stable property rights, the way Russia works just does not support this. Wealth creation is all about possibilities, capitalism, trade lanes, stable property rights and innovation and Russia has almost non of these things and simply changing the leader won't fix that overnight. I do wonder what you think would happen if say Russia became more of a legit democracy, had more western values, property rights and perhaps become part of the EU, I know the EU itself does not want Russia to join it but if it by some miracle did would that be possitive for Russia or would it harm both Russia and the EU? Love to hear your thoughts on this.
    1
  7142. 1
  7143.  @craigkdillon  I did not know about the Niger river or Congo river but you are misunderstanding what I mean, I mean water lanes, via rivers or shores gives access to greater trade routes from which civilizations can grow and can create multigenerational wealth, most of Africa is one giant land mass with only few large rivers and no interal shorelines, it's hard to explain but when you look at a map of Europe you see a relatively small land mass with many shorelines with interwoven river systems and canals to give greater access to the seas, the Netherlands is a good example, as is the UK both of which became sea focused trade empires, while countries like Germany and Russia are more land based, though Russia used to have access to the baltic countries and even learned boat building from the Dutch thanks to Peter the great. The west of Russia is where most of the people are because most early russian civilizations settled near the rivers, it's also where most of their trade takes place, however the north east of Russia is the Frozen Tundra of Siberia and the vast boreal forests beyond, compare that to the USA which habitat and sea access is far more easy to access and is located in a perfect location for trade with asia to the west and Europe and west Africa to the east, along with south america to the south, made even easier with the panama canal. What im trying to say is sea lanes are the lifeblood of trade which generates wealth, it's not only that of course but it's a measurement of potential of wealth, Kasakstan or western part of China are never going to be as wealthy as the eastern part which is closer to the sea. Likewise Russia has huge amount of land but very little shoreline which they can use, which limits their access to trade, they could solve this issue by investing in better trains and gaining better access to western markets which would then give oppertunity to invest in new Russian products produced in their countries, though not all western nations would like this as well, it's complicated but in most cases easier trade and free markets does produce more wealth.
    1
  7144. 1
  7145. 1
  7146. 1
  7147. 1
  7148. 1
  7149. 1
  7150. 1
  7151. 1
  7152. 1
  7153. 1
  7154. 1
  7155. 1
  7156. 1
  7157. 1
  7158. 1
  7159. 1
  7160. 1
  7161. 1
  7162. 1
  7163. 1
  7164. 1
  7165. 1
  7166. 1
  7167. 1
  7168. 1
  7169. 1
  7170. 1
  7171. 1
  7172. 1
  7173. 1
  7174. 1
  7175. 1
  7176. 1
  7177. 1
  7178. 1
  7179. 1
  7180. 1
  7181. 1
  7182. 1
  7183. 1
  7184. 1
  7185. 1
  7186. 1
  7187. 1
  7188. 1
  7189. 1
  7190. 1
  7191. 1
  7192. 1
  7193. 1
  7194. 1
  7195. 1
  7196. 1
  7197. 1
  7198. 1
  7199. 1
  7200. 1
  7201.  @1996koke  actually yes because the USA legal system is a lot like the British one, just not a Parlement but a republic, I find this whole comparison to be just kinda silly to be honest. as for Singapore and Hong Kong I don't see much of a difference in fact Singapore with it's location right on a trade line between India and China via sea was in a much better place to become a rich nation compared to Hong Kong which was right next to a communist dictatorship. you don't need to have direct influence to guide a nation to a good path, India for example was abused far more than the people of Singapore or Hong Kong by the British and after ww2 they pretty much got their independence but did they fall back to how india used to be? no, they copied the UK legal code, Property rights and now they are doing very good, it's not something that's shamefull or bad, it's good. it's silly to say ''ohhh X specific country did not do as well as Y specific country therefor nation that ruled it before is bad'' that's just silly, nations that copied the british model in one form or another are richer and more technologically advanced then those that did not and those that are rising right now have either stopped doing it after they left or their new leadership after a period of bad times are going back to the same type of model. give me an example of a nation that copied western models in full and somehow got poorer and devolved into tyrany, cuss I can't think of one, the closest i can come up with is Russia after decades of the USSR where it collapsed and had to shift to a market economy and had a short drop in economic growth yet then it magically picked up again and not because they went back to the former USSR model, im just saying.
    1
  7202. 1
  7203. 1
  7204. 1
  7205. 1
  7206. 1
  7207. 1
  7208. 1
  7209. 1
  7210. 1
  7211. 1
  7212. 1
  7213. 1
  7214. 1
  7215. 1
  7216. 1
  7217. 1
  7218. 1
  7219. 1
  7220. 1
  7221. 1
  7222. 1
  7223. 1
  7224. 1
  7225. 1
  7226. 1
  7227. 1
  7228. 1
  7229. 1
  7230. 1
  7231. 1
  7232. 1
  7233. 1
  7234. 1
  7235. 1
  7236. 1
  7237. 1
  7238. 1
  7239. 1
  7240. 1
  7241. 1
  7242. 1
  7243. 1
  7244. 1
  7245. 1
  7246. 1
  7247. 1
  7248. 1
  7249. 1
  7250. 1
  7251. 1
  7252. 1
  7253. 1
  7254. 1
  7255. 1
  7256. 1
  7257. 1
  7258. 1
  7259. 1
  7260. 1
  7261. 1
  7262. 1
  7263. 1
  7264. 1
  7265. 1
  7266. 1
  7267. 1
  7268. 1
  7269. 1
  7270. 1
  7271. 1
  7272. 1
  7273. 1
  7274. 1
  7275. 1
  7276. 1
  7277. 1
  7278. 1
  7279. 1
  7280. 1
  7281. 1
  7282. 1
  7283. 1
  7284. 1
  7285. 1
  7286. 1
  7287. 1
  7288. 1
  7289. 1
  7290. 1
  7291.  @HeadsFullOfEyeballs  Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of "the people" and often juxtapose this group against "the elite". It is frequently associated with anti-establishment and anti-political sentiment. The term developed in the late 19th century and has been applied to various politicians, parties and movements since that time, often as a pejorative. Within political science and other social sciences, several different definitions of populism have been employed, with some scholars proposing that the term be rejected altogether. A common framework for interpreting populism is known as the ideational approach: this defines populism as an ideology which presents "the people" as a morally good force and contrasts them against "the elite", who are portrayed as corrupt and self-serving. Populists differ in how "the people" are defined, but it can be based along class, ethnic, or national lines. Populists typically present "the elite" as comprising the political, economic, cultural, and media establishment, depicted as a homogeneous entity and accused of placing their own interests, and often the interests of other groups—such as large corporations, foreign countries, or immigrants—above the interests of "the people". Populist parties and social movements are often led by charismatic or dominant figures who present themselves as "the voice of the people". According to the ideational approach, populism is often combined with other ideologies, such as nationalism, liberalism, or socialism. Thus, populists can be found at different locations along the left–right political spectrum, and there exist both left-wing populism and right-wing populism. Other scholars of the social sciences have defined the term populism differently. According to the popular agency definition used by some historians of United States history, populism refers to popular engagement of the population in political decision making. An approach associated with the political scientist Ernesto Laclau presents populism as an emancipatory social force through which marginalised groups challenge dominant power structures. Some economists have used the term in reference to governments which engage in substantial public spending financed by foreign loans, resulting in hyperinflation and emergency measures. In popular discourse—where the term has often been used pejoratively—it has sometimes been used synonymously with demagogy, to describe politicians who present overly simplistic answers to complex questions in a highly emotional manner, or with opportunism, to characterise politicians who seek to please voters without rational consideration as to the best course of action. In the 1960s the term became increasingly popular among social scientists in Western countries, and later in the 20th century it was applied to various political parties active in liberal democracies. In the 21st century, the struggle over the term intensified in political discourse, particularly in the Americas and Europe, with it being used to describe a range of left-wing, right-wing, and centrist groups that challenged the established parties.[1] From wikipedia The irony of your statement is that authoritarians in power right now in the west argue via appeal to emotions, against critical thinking, very biased and openly promote authoritarianism, police state policies and censorship and label all populists as "extremists", "far right", "nazi's" , "racists" and via that appeal to emotion try to promote more censorship and authoritarianism. You are simply incorrect.
    1
  7292. 1
  7293. 1
  7294. 1
  7295. 1
  7296. 1
  7297. 1
  7298. 1
  7299. 1
  7300. 1
  7301. 1
  7302. 1
  7303. 1
  7304. 1
  7305. 1
  7306. 1
  7307. 1
  7308. 1
  7309. 1
  7310. 1
  7311. 1
  7312. 1
  7313. 1
  7314. 1
  7315. 1
  7316. 1
  7317. 1
  7318. 1
  7319. 1
  7320. 1
  7321. 1
  7322. 1
  7323. 1
  7324. 1
  7325. 1
  7326. 1
  7327. 1
  7328. 1
  7329. 1
  7330. 1
  7331. 1
  7332. 1
  7333. 1
  7334. 1
  7335. 1
  7336. 1
  7337. 1
  7338. 1
  7339. 1
  7340. 1
  7341. 1
  7342. 1
  7343. 1
  7344. 1
  7345. 1
  7346. 1
  7347. 1
  7348. 1
  7349. 1
  7350. 1
  7351. 1
  7352. 1
  7353. 1
  7354. 1
  7355. 1
  7356. 1
  7357. 1
  7358. 1
  7359. 1
  7360. 1
  7361. 1
  7362. 1
  7363. 1
  7364. 1
  7365. 1
  7366. 1
  7367. 1
  7368. 1
  7369. 1
  7370. 1
  7371. 1
  7372. 1
  7373. 1
  7374. 1
  7375. 1
  7376. 1
  7377. 1
  7378. 1
  7379. 1
  7380. 1
  7381. 1
  7382. 1
  7383. 1
  7384. 1
  7385. 1
  7386. 1
  7387. 1
  7388. 1
  7389. 1
  7390. 1
  7391. 1
  7392. 1
  7393. 1
  7394. 1
  7395. 1
  7396. 1
  7397. 1
  7398. 1
  7399. 1
  7400. 1
  7401. 1
  7402. 1
  7403. 1
  7404. 1
  7405. 1