AngryWhiteMenIstan Vs Kekistan

That's what buzzfeed told me

Funny thing is that list is exactly the same for Saudi Arabia with the exception of yes to Muslims and elites.

>>132648555
good, they can stay out

>>132649105
How is that funny, cuck?

>>132648555
Sounds alright

>>132649463
yee yee boy!

>>132648555
The rest of the world would be so fucking butthurt when it became the fucking beacon of civilized society within about 1 year.

>>132649314
How is it not?

>>132649314
Because the liberals that hate le ebul white man for those thing just want to accept the Muslims when they do the exact same.

Shouldn't that be happy white menistan? What's left to be angry about?

>>132648555
Angrywhitemenistan seems like a pretty dope place to be

>>132652672
Liberals project their insecurity and assume white men will always be angry like them. In reality, "angry white men" have only existed for as long as attacks on white identity and the economy have.

>>132648555
and yet they still want to get in

Why are they implying "Thug culture" is a good thing?

File: IMG_3640.jpg (63KB, 640x682px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 640x682px

>>132648555

>>132648555
BASED WHITE MAN

is "thug culture" just another term for nigger?

>>132648555
Needs some improvement but looks like a big step up desu.

>>132648555
Civic nats fail to understand the Civic nats is what got us into this mess.

>>132648555
Mate I would fucking love a country like that, why can't we have it? Nigerians get to have their country right? Indians get to have theirs? So why can't whites have our own countries?

Why are these lefty comics always ironically awesome?

Someone post the "new right" one where it's a tall hyper masculine guy. Like, c'mon I bet being a huge muscle dude is awesome

>>132648555
Question is: Why does everybody want so badly to be allowed in Angrywhitemenistan?

hmmm... really activates my almonds

File: 1495487342343.jpg (111KB, 600x458px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 600x458px

>>132653547

File: Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs copy.png (157KB, 879x445px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 879x445px

>>132653270
because the most powerful and privileged people, dominating all the worlds resources, and then cutting everyone else off, is morally indefensible. its unjust.
a moral person wants the greatest good for the greatest number. even conservatives ultimately want this, they are not immoral people. but conservatives have put moral progress on the shelf, and decided that morals are not a priority right now, because the priority is managing and dealing with threats - the entire constellation of various boogiemans that they are afraid of. all the various groups of people that they believe present a future threat to their safety and security.

>>132648555
>I've never stepped foot outside a 99% white enclave.jpg

File: 1497480855034.jpg (21KB, 255x234px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 255x234px

>>132654319
I'm gonna bite the bait
>Progressives
>Morality
>Problem solving
>Lack of Prejudice
>Acceptance of facts
>Creativity
>Self Esteem
>Confidence
>Achievement
>Respect of others
>Respect by others
>Family
>security of anything
>food
>water
>sleep when you have to work 16 hours a day for nothing under communism.
>Breathing when you are not a party idealogue
>Implying that they have literally any of these right now.
>Implying that they have had literally any of these in the past.
>Implying that their ideology would have or bring about literally any of these.

This is being generous and assuming that they are capable having actual friends and that meaningless Slaaneshi tier fucking would ever count as sexual intimacy. It's basically spontaneity and excretion from here on out.

>>132654319
Do you know how that chart works, dumbass? It's saying that conservatives concentrate on basic things, while progressives concentrate on frivolous things

>>132648555
>yes to guns
>meaning most anyone can have them
>including liberals

>no thug culture
>no political correctness

liberals disagree with this?

>>132648555
>He thinks he can get rid out of elites

File: I7Q8i7A - Imgur.gif (2MB, 299x328px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 299x328px

>>132655316
the primary thing i want to express is the motivation behind peoples engagement in politics. i dont really want to criticism anyone or put people into tiers.

every liberal policy is driven by moral perfectionism. we can fix inequity, we can fix injustice, we can fix unfairness, we can fix oppression, we can increase peoples liberty and freedom, we can reduce needless suffering from poverty or sickness.

conservatives believe all of these things also. and they want all of these things. but it doesnt motivate them politically, because they are stuck in a stage of being afraid for the future. every single conservative idea about policy relates to how society will address threats to their own personal safety and security of their bodies, their families, they money, etc.

>>132655517
>a society built on rational morals is frivolous

a liberal person would tell you thats the entire point of politics and political engagement at all.

the important thing to focus on is that none of the fears that conservatives have are shared by liberals. liberals do not fear any of those things. this is where so much of the disconnect occurs and is the source of so much of the fruitless and unproductive debate. what you call basic things - a liberal person would simply call unfounded and unverifiable fears of merely POSSIBLE futures. while you consider them inevitable futures.

File: eqwem.jpg (12KB, 480x320px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 480x320px

>>132654319
> progressives
> acceptance of facts

File: leonardo.gif (660KB, 356x272px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 356x272px

>being a foreigner-hating mulatto

Nobody will ever comprehend Burgericans

>>132655517
You don't mean frivolous. A better word is intellectual. If you still want a negative connotation, you can call it pretentious. The problem is when authoritarians impose their morals and solutions onto others, as is becoming more common. The "safety" tier is what is necessary to existence. The top tier is more about what is necessary to be fulfilled. Unfortunately, the top tier can only be achieved on an individual level, not dictated or given communally.

>>132654319
But what if these "boogiemen" ARE legitimate threats? It would be immoral to ignore them if they threaten the others. If you're using your image to supplement your argument, I would think it less moral to focus on giving the underprivileged "self-actualization" (which you can't do for people) while they remain at risk to an actual threat. The problem is that people have much different standards for what they consider an actual threat. It's never as simple as conservatives (or liberals or the umpteen other political categorizations) shelving morals.

> white men believe in themselves enough to think they can run a prosperous country, from the low status to the upper status.

better than the incessant egotism that is some third generation latino hollering about how if his grand daddy didn't pick apples the entire country would of collapsed.

>>132648555
sounds good sign me in

File: 1439824566663.gif (2MB, 330x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 330x270px

>>132657786
unfortunately conservatives are winning right now in america. but if you imagine conservatives were losing, then the burden would be on them to prove to liberals that conservative fears of islam, mexicans, the perceived 'attack' on heterosexuals/CIS, foreigners, or whatever else, are things to actually be afraid of. not just to be afraid of, but so pressing of a threat that everything else in politics becomes secondary to these threats. i can tell you that for most liberals, it would take some kind of miracle to convince them that these things are a threat to america or american values.

because liberals are losing then the burden is on liberals to somehow reach conservatives in a way that they put these fears in perspective, and that a conservative audience is somehow made to feel secure about the future. which is an incredible task. maybe impossible.

but when you understand these two facts, these two realities, you understand fully why the debate between right and left is totally dysfunctional and unproductive. there is so much talk wasted and so much animosity generated by unproductive conversations, because liberals do not relate to conservative fears, and conservatives do not relate to liberal fearlessness, and neither side really addresses this, they get bogged down in moralistic and policy-focused splitting of hairs, when i believe both sides are not far apart at all when it comes to beliefs about what is most moral.