Why do so many people vote for authoritarianism?

>>35572652
Some people like shitty ideas I guess

File: 65111CFF-6009-4FC8-BE3D-1C2A4A25DAC5-10164-0000072E0E5325ED_tmp.png (18KB, 624x470px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 624x470px

>>35572652
Because of the white problem

They understand that people are generally idiots and should not have absolute autonomy over their lives.

All successful civilizations have utilized authoritarianism. The strong have always led the weak. When you remove the strong from power it creates a massive vacuum, which is then inhabited by those who want power but do not understand how to wield it.

File: fefe.jpg (45KB, 450x470px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 450x470px

>pursuing smaller government with incredible ferociousness
>shittalking government and career politicians on a daily basis
>glorifying freedom, patriotism, pride and selfishness even at the cost of possible increased bigotry and xenophobia
>"authoritarianism"

Lol ok

>>35572742
Ah yes, I guess 1/3 of all spics, asians, and "other minorities" just accidentally checked the wrong box, huh?

>>35572742
who is this other group? native americans?

>>35572742
Wow. I'm literally shaking. White genocide when?

>>35572652
..Its not authoritarianism.. its populism. Theres a difference. Populism is the momentum of the people. Authoritarianism is clamping down from the top.

>>35572857
As a Mexican American I voted for trump because illegal aliens have no right to be in our country.

>hahaha Trump is such a fascist amirite guys?
>WTF? Milo is gonna speak at some college! Quickly! Shut that down! We can't allow him to express his views!

The reason people vote for Trump is because the alternative is to vote for you

>>35572652
Not sure. Bernie really did have a lot of votes, but luckily he wasn't able to make it far, otherwise this country really would have been lead by an authoritarian

>>35572912
What if the people are demanding authoritarianism?
>>35573032
>taxes and universal health care are authoritarian
>being this politically illiterare and classcucked

>>35572962
Then I'm afraid you're actually white, please report to your community's nearest gas chamber for "safe zone training"

>>35572786
Read past the fake news headlines and get redpilled. The Trump administration has deep ties to Wall Street and the MIC, all the stuff about him clashing with the CIA or whatever is surface-level tabloid nonsense.

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-trump-regime-was-manufactured-by-a-war-inside-the-deep-state-f9e757071c70#.160a2xqe9

>>35572774

Is someone with a lot of power and influence, perhaps even intelligence, who enjoys torturing people for fun, still "strong"?

Is someone like Stephen Hawking "weak"?

These terms don't make sense without context.

>>35572652

I don't know. I voted for him because he hates mexicans.

>>35573238
The guy was listing basic republican beliefs you moron. Being for everyone to own guns, lower taxes, free speech, etc are the polar opposite of fascism and authoritarianism. The democrats and socialist scum are way closer to being fascist.

>>35573188

If I don't want to pay for universal healthcare, and the government makes me, then yes, that is technically authoritarian.

>>35572652
because it actually works unlike libtardism

>>35572652
Both democrats and republicans were authoritarian last election. trump and bernie just pretended not to be.

>>35573188
Its the natural progression of history. It cycles from moments of peace to moments of war.. wait until the actual uprising.

>>35572652
>Why do so many people vote for authoritarianism?

To combat the other authoritarianism.

Because they need a daddy now instead of a mommy. Libertarian btw

People voted for Trump because that pink hair girl at the coffee shop was mean to them.

>>35572652
>Why do so many people vote for authoritarianism?

Because I am a fascist

>>35573321
How much did you read? The extensive documentation of the Trump administration's ties to the deep state wasn't good enough for you? I'm not sure how you read that article and your takeaway was a list of "basic republican beliefs".

>>35573679
>Liberalism sucks, I don't need basic rights and freedoms because the jack-booted thugs definitely won't ever come after me
>The far left and far right both unironically believe this

File: 45437345346.png (75KB, 981x671px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 981x671px

>>35572742
It really baffles me that blacks have the least percentage in the "no answer" category. I thought blacks are against political discrimnation. Then I reminded myself that Obama played race card.

>>35573704
Your article is conspiracy theory nonsense and also had nothing to do with the post you were quoting. Are you the libtard version of infowars?

>>35573729
Liberalism, s in actual classical liberalism, is great.

Its biggest flaw is that is cannot or will not defend itself against an organised, ideologically driven attack on the freedom and liberty it provides.

When liberalism comes up against Marxism, liberalism loses.
Like in our current society.

>>35572652
Because libertarianism will not resolve problems that other citizens are causing.

>>35572652
ask youself this question, lefty shitter

>>35572652
Because they are dicks that call their ''''loved ones''''' boy and woman and then say whenever people vote left that they never got beat and that'd fix them, and once they're too old they say draft them to kill them, that's why. They personally were raised to see freedom as childish.

Honestly.

>>35573906
Freedom and cowardice are two different things. If you can't take responsibility for yourself you do deserve to get belittled. If everyone was like you none of us would be alive right now.

>>35573935
Bravery and stupidity hold hands though. Liberals have higher IQ's also.
>if you're smart you should get your head beat till you're not
Okay kid.

>>35573826
Hitler rose to power promising to defeat the communists. When the far right offers you protection against the far left, it may be tempting but don't listen to them. Statism is statism is statism.

>>35573761
>Don't follow the money goyim, it's "conspiracy theory nonsense"
>Instead you should be paying attention to POTUS' woke clapbacks on Twitter, that's real news!
Which side of the political spectrum am I arguing with now? The post I was responding to made a weak argument for why Trump isn't authoritarian, I responded with an article showing why he is.

>>35573826
Options:
>weak heaven that may not last
drugs legal, party all day, etc
>sturdy hell that will last
everything fun illegal, high prison rates, etc

>>35573846
If they're causing problems in a way that infringes upon my property rights, then libertarianism provides all of the conceptual tools necessary to address it. If they're causing "problems" that do not infringe on my property rights, I have no right to demand that they stop. Simple.

File: 640f144b07793d46ee1c8467c9b16ee2.jpg (665KB, 799x1131px) Image search: [Google]

665KB, 799x1131px

A bunch of whiny brats are making a lot of noise and people want them to shut the fuck up.

>>35574036
Then who will protect us from the communists?

Moderates aren't doing a very good job of it.

If I have to choose between two versions of statism, I'll go for the one that is closer to my ideals.

>>35574077
>drug party
>heaven

Degenerate pls

>>35574118
Libertarians protect themselves from communists. That's what private gun ownership is for. "Statism is inevitable" is defeatist thinking.

>>35574163
That's the point of jails though. The good book says obey the laws of the land, but what if you don't care and are le degenerate atheist? Need something real to scare ya, prisons. Hell simulation.

And most go there because of drugs, heaven simulation.

Think about it.

>>35574197
Most libertarians are too moderate.
They are only willing to act in direct self defence.

Communism grows in the dark, like a fucking mould growing in a cupboard.
It comes out when it's too big and powerful for the libertarians to defend themselves from it.

Libertarians aren't willing to open up the cupboard and clean out the mould before it grows too large.

>>35572652
because the power of the state must be ferociously expanded, dissent must be crushed, the people must be unified into a greater collective, beyond classes, beyond religion, beyond anything but the march of industry and progress. Burn the false idols, stamp out traitorous thoughts and bring peace and unity to America.

>>35574197
Private gun ownership has always been a communist idea. Arm the working class, use them to seize control, eradicate freedom. To defend freedom we must paradoxically disarm the masses who are too stupid to responsibly use their firearms.

>>35573280
>Is someone like Stephen Hawking "weak"?
I mean, yeah?
His wife used to beat the shit out of him.
Just because he's "something to write home about" intelligent and probably more useful to humanity than anyone here doesn't change the fact that an autistic toddler could end his existence at any time if his lemon-law body doesn't get him first.

File: 3682669+_165e8f2e4fc0447c74c1110cd34ca98f.jpg (91KB, 500x652px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 500x652px

>>35574632
But which of two matters more in your rhetorical dog fight?

Despite Hawking needing someone to move things around. He's worth millions of people for his contribution, for the fact that one idiot farmer does the work of thousands in this day and age, the autistic child does not matter. Only the designer of the tractor and it's current opperator, of which is soon to be replaced by a machine once tractors are automated. Then the repairs will be soon after, and only Hawking will be important, no the idiot that can win a dog fight.

The modern world does not value brute strength.

File: 1478623783026.gif (1MB, 273x322px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 273x322px

plebs are spooked anon

He's not authoritative though, not anymore than the previous president. Most likely less authoritative.

People are internally racist.

>>35574602
Myth. Communist revolutions have never come about as a result of mass uprising. Selective disarmament of this sort is what Hitler used. It just helps the far-right seize and maintain power.

>>35573238
And any Clinton administration doesn't have ties to the deepstate and certain elements that are certainly more than morally bankrupt?

>>35575263
The point is that this election was never establishment vs. anti-establishment, or anti-Wall Street / GS, anti-war, etc. Trump was all of those things. I don't think a Clinton administration would be quite as deep in Russia's pocket but there still were financial connections there.

It really did just come down to boring policy differences even if voters couldn't see it that way.

>>35575215
Never, except every single time they happened.

>>35575467
>deep in Russia's pocket
Damn I miss the days when it was mostly rightists who spouted stupid conspiracy shit.

>>35575476
Lenin and Trotsky were just common working men until one day they led their fellow workers and countrymen in a revolt against the establishment. Definitely not part of the elite in their society. Actually this is what people somehow believe about Trump so I guess I can see why someone would think that.

>>35572652
Because it's superior you plebian

>>35575543
>Lenin and Trotsky were just common working men
please read a book

File: don't tread on me2.png (121KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1280x853px

>>35572652
To answer your question, OP, I am Libertarian, in principle. However, I am circumstantially Authoritarian, in certain ways. e.g. I acknowledge that Mestizos, whether it be a genetic predisposition, or something in relation to culture, will never, in a million years, vote for limited government en-mass.

At least I'm being honest :^)

>>35575571
mexico is a libertarian paradise

what are you on about

>>35575509
Me too, Russia has enough of it's own problems already

File: mexico fiscal policy.png (184KB, 947x716px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 947x716px

>>35575598
yeah, so they have a ton of regulation/price controls and government regulated industries. seems like a mixed economy to me. definitely not corporatism. even then, I am talking about how Mexicans vote in the United States, which is OVERWHELMINGLY democrat.

>>35575509
Tillerson, Manafort, Flynn, Sessions, Kushner, none of that stuff happened right? And there's absolutely no reason he's still the only presidential candidate in modern history not to release his tax returns?

This feels like one of those things where you can decide that something is a meme and so you never have to address it, you can just say "ha! nice meme!" Where's the counter-argument?

>>35575672
I meant to type "definitely corporatism", but I'm intoxicated at the moment. apologies. kek

>>35575674
Maybe the fact that after a billion different investigations they've not been come up with a single shred of proof of any sort of collusion? And wtf does being "in russia's pockets" even mean you moron? A billionaire who we just learned makes a shit ton of money on his own just fine, has no business dealings with russia, takes money from russia? Fucking idiot.

Isn't voting for someone inherently authoritarian? I mean, you are voting to give someone more power than you. So it seems like no matter what, it will be authoritarian. That's not to say it will be bad, or over the top, but it is certainly authoritative. Or am I wrong?

>>35575674
Why would someone worth 5 billion dollars need putin's money/influence to win an election?
Oh, and the wikileaks person wasn't Russian. They were a DNC insider and an American

File: image.jpg (23KB, 366x329px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 366x329px

>when you realize Trump has actually been less authoritarian than Obama so far
>he's just doing things people don't like cause they're either ideologically-driven or literally illegal immigrants

>>35575732
Which investigations and what did they find? That's really, really general. I listed the ways that there are proven Trump administration <-> Russia connections, we know that for sure. What we lack is a direct link from Trump to Russia and unless he releases his tax returns it's going to be hard to come up with evidence.

Putin is always the world's most second powerful man behind the POTUS and Russia has a powerful state with global ambitions. It's not a crazy conspiracy that they would have financial ties to the current administration. Like I said, Clinton would have as well, but probably fewer.

>>35575818
>goes to war with the free press
>calls news he disagrees with "fake news"
>not authoritarian

>>35572652
Trump is a populist, and nativist
There is a difference.

>>35575806
Why would someone worth 5 billion dollars need putin's money/influence to win an election?
Gee I guess if Bill Gates decided to run in 2020 he would win because the guy with the most personal wealth always wins it.
Also, it's not just winning the election but making money in office.
>Oh, and the wikileaks person wasn't Russian. They were a DNC insider and an American
No proof whatsoever. WikiLeaks admitted that they timed their releases to deliberately hurt Clinton's campaign (e.g. right before the Democratic Convention). It could be because they were working with Putin (they were).

>>35575827
>Russia connections

you sound like a literal CNN moron. "Russia connections" doesn't actually mean anything because for most of them it literally amounts to "they talked to a russian government official at some point in their lives. We've been able to come up with no other connection. No business dealings, no nothing, etc. The fact that he talked to a russian is literally all we have to go on that this man is an agent of russia"

What's hilarious about people like you is that you seem to have such a low opinion of the US government and consider them so incompetent that Russia would literally be able to come in and plant an agent of theirs as fucking president of the united states and they wouldn't be able to see it coming or even now figure anything out or come up with any sort of evidence and just let him win. If you think the CIA, FBI, US Gov is so incompetent why are you even worried about Trump in the first place? By your logic Russia should already have taken over

>>35575912
>>35575912
>No proof whatsoever
If you're going to believe them when they said they deliberately dropped it to hurt her campaign, then you should also believe them when they say the hacker was American
>It could be because they were working with Putin (they were).
citation needed

>>35575921
>you sound like a literal CNN moron. "Russia connections" doesn't actually mean anything because for most of them it literally amounts to "they talked to a russian government official at some point in their lives. We've been able to come up with no other connection. No business dealings, no nothing, etc. The fact that he talked to a russian is literally all we have to go on that this man is an agent of russia"
It's about talking to Russians and secrecy. If Flynn hadn't lied about it, if Sessions hadn't lied about it under oath, that wouldn't be cause for concern. If it was so innocent why did they lie? But when you look at it in conjunction with the known financial ties it begins to look more sinister.
>Russia would literally be able to come in and plant an agent of theirs as fucking president of the united states
Strawman. He doesn't have to literally be an agent of Russia for them to have undue influence on the administration.

>>35575841
>doesn't shut them down just disagrees with them and openly disdains organizations which had been blatantly skewing reporting for their biases like CNN
>"""""authoritarian"""""

>>35576001
>If it was so innocent why did they lie?
Oh I dunno maybe because you morons and the media have been spinning this russian story for 6 months and they knew damn well what would happen if they drew attention to it? Why does anyone lie ever? People lie about the dumbest things all the time

>the known financial ties it begins to look more sinister.
What financial ties? You sound like a literal brainwashed idiot man.

>Strawman. He doesn't have to literally be an agent of Russia for them to have undue influence on the administration.
Point still stands. If you think Russia can do something as big as put one of their guys as US president what's so far fetched about them also controlling every other aspect of government?

>>35575827
>>35576001
Even if there were tangible and influential connections to Russia, so what? You want to be diplomatic with other nations, and in particular Russia would be a good country to ease relations with which might help see an end to the shit going on in the Middle East, and balance out the butting of heads between the EU and Russia. It's not as though they're affecting policy over here. The US has had connections with Saudi Arabia for a long time now and there's no Islamic nonsense being pushed here.

>>35576098
>and they knew damn well what would happen if they drew attention to it?
Lying under oath is the opposite of not drawing attention to it. One person lying for a dumb reason is one thing, two people lying about the same thing for their own dumb reasons is something else. You're extremely naive if you believe that.

>What financial ties? You sound like a literal brainwashed idiot man.
Kushner and Tillerson's business connections in Russia.

>Point still stands. If you think Russia can do something as big as put one of their guys as US president what's so far fetched about them also controlling every other aspect of government?
Point doesn't stand. Clinton made deals with the Russians to sell them uranium but she was still allowed to be a candidate. Financial ties don't disqualify you.

>>35576251
>Lying under oath is the opposite of not drawing attention to it.
People lie under oath constantly and they always get away with it. Again, you have no proof, and they have nothing to worry about. They lied about it because they didn't want a billion different headlines and late night shows making jokes about them being russian agents.

>Clinton made deals with the Russians
And nobody even made a big deal of it or even until now when leftist morons started attacking Trump over it. It's almost like the whole russia thing is a way to delegitimise and to divert attention from the fact the democratic party is such a miserable failure.

>>35572652
To piss SJW's off. The constant whining from them is better than it was under Bush.

>>35575841

The press deserves to be called out for its bullshit. Are we supposed to just accept it completely? Is anyone who criticizes the press a fascist now?

>>35575841
>press called out on fake news
>waah muh free press dis is fascism

kys

File: right-libertarians.png (1MB, 1600x800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x800px

>>35575571
>right-"libertarian" reveals his true colors
Unsurprising.

File: pinochet-011.jpg (29KB, 460x276px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 460x276px

>>35576965
Yeah, so this is the problem with most Lolberts that I know. You guys are great, in terms of principles, but you don't understand practicality, because you're too autistic. Do you understand that, regardless of what your stupid fucking principles are, Mestizos are going to outnumber huwhytes in 40 or so years, and they are going to OVERWHELMINGLY vote for Socialist policies?

File: 1488414480026.png (466KB, 530x678px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 530x678px

I'm not Assmericunt, but I'm glad Trump made it. He's (so far) the best president of the US for decades IMHO.

It's just pathetic to witness how super extremely obvious the previous power holders want him removed and do everything, literally 24/7 shit-talking and bashing him on all channels available. I've never seen such a blatant use of media manipulation, selective reporting and utter lies from the mainstream media in my life.

Jews gonna jew.

File: origin-of-american-libertarianism.jpg (59KB, 674x640px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 674x640px

>>35577072
You're better off calling yourself a national capitalist. You don't stand for liberty in any meaningful way.

>>35576874
>Is anyone who criticizes the press a fascist now?
well, if you call news outlets that disagree with you "fake" but support other news outlets that are just as, or if not even more faker, then thats a point towards fascism

File: don't tread on me.jpg (35KB, 417x338px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 417x338px

>>35577148
Nah, senpai. I just recognize that, due to the current political climate, Mestizos aren't going to vote for limited government.

>>35573032
>thank goodness a conspiracy at the DNC kept him from getting nominated
>haha fucking authoritarian dem socialists

>>35572652
He played up the panic people had while his opposition did the fucking opposite like idiots.

>>35577256
What policies will they vote for that are authoritarian to you?

>>35572876
Everyone that doesn't consider themselves white/black/Hispanic/Asian, use your imagination.

>>35576479
>People lie under oath constantly and they always get away with it
So they lied because this Russia issue was under intense public scrutiny, and also because they thought they would get away with it? Both of them (two highly intelligent and successful men) thought this internally contradictory thing, and that's why they both lied? No other explanation comes to mind?

>And nobody even made a big deal of it or even until now when leftist morons started attacking Trump over it. It's almost like the whole russia thing is a way to delegitimise and to divert attention from the fact the democratic party is such a miserable failure.
I'm not interested in what captures MSM attention. You're changing the subject, which are the Trump administration's real ties to Russian business and government.

>>35577171
>believes the narrative by the MSM that anything that isn't them is fake
>don't look at those other sites, good citizen, it's illegal! Only we can do that!

>>35577286
I mean, they statistically vote for Democrats, who institute policies that are in direct opposition to fiscally conservative policies that I support. That, and they're generally in support of gun control.

Also, anon, I went to a highschool that was 50% Mestizo, for a couple of years, and my own experience has opened me to the idea that the IQ phenomenon between races is very real. (And this is coming from someone who is a quarter black). I recognize that there is a different DISTRIBUTION between races, but in general...

>>35577256
We'd better round up and exterminate white people because they're voting for expanded military, border control, anti-drug, etc. It's the proper libertarian to do.

>>35577345
Those things don't bother me nearly as much as the Socialist and anti-gun policies that Mestizos vote for.

>>35572742
I'm so glad lower class whites voted for him.

Making six figures I'm fine. I'll actually get more money back in tax breaks under him and I always get healthcare through my job so I don't need any government coverage. For every poor and working class trump meme voter who gets buried in healthcare debt when their kid gets sick or dies penniless from shit coverage I'll just laugh.

>>35577342
>I mean, they statistically vote for Democrats, who institute policies that are in direct opposition to fiscally conservative policies that I support.
Seems like you have no argument that you're a libertarian. You just want to use the state to crush everyone who disagrees with you.
Not to mention the fact that conservatives aren't fiscally responsible either.

>>35577317
>>believes the narrative by the MSM that anything that isn't them is fake
wow, nice straw shit. good shit.

a good way to argue my point is pointing out the fact that fox news had been consulting an individual who presented himself as some kind of head worker for the Swedish government for quite some time, and just a little bit ago, as im sure you know, it was revealed he was lying about his credentials all along. fox news had been spreading "fake news" all along. hmm. doesnt trump like fox news?

File: CHINA.FIG1.4[1].gif (5KB, 435x423px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 435x423px

>>35574036

I'd rather die under Hitler than have communism to be quite fucking honest with you family. even the skin lamps and oven roller coasters people pulled out of their asses at the Nuremberg trials are more humane than the psychopathic cullings communism gets up to in literally every nation it takes over. At least fascism takes pride in its people, communism inherently views like cattle, regardless of race or creed, and it will slaughter them by the millions like it's nothing.

File: costanza-sensei.jpg (88KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 500x500px

>>35577450
>that pic
What's the methodology used to come to such figures?

>>35572652
Limited social mobility.

Look around how often do you see a thread on here about it? People wouldn't complain about shit jobs and wage slavery if it paid better. People expect shittier jobs to pay less while better more disirable jobs should pay better. Which is totally backwards, because doing something you don't want to do should mean you'd demand more for it while doing something better should pay less. Yet poor people have a boot to their throat to do what they can.
The boot isn't the rules and regulations, it's a lack of enforcement of the rules and regs.

>>35577435
Not really, anon.

I just have two feasible choices; voting for conservatives who disagree with me on some social issues, or voting for a party which is going to import an ethnic group who votes for Socialist policies, which, IMO, will hurt the country by a more objective measure, in comparison to the harm that some Conservative social policies will induce.

>>35577497

these are actually conservative numbers, stalin and mao are considered by far the largest instigators of democide in modern history

>>35577497

Hitler and Stalin combined killed less people than Mao

File: this is freedom xD.jpg (406KB, 1005x1826px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 1005x1826px

>>35572652
I like the part where he gave money to big car manufacturing execs as a "bailout" and everyone applauded him while pic related exists. Remember folks, Trump just wants to make the rich richer!

>>35577579
yeah but I cant stay mad at a chinaman

>>35577450
>doesn't want asshole right winger normies to die
>would rather die himself in fascism
Maybe you should actually just kill yourself.

>>35577589

all that inflation bullshit in everything is from retards using computers to trade stocks and other shit. the numbers are being min-maxed to the extreme, and if it ever crashes we're basically done.

File: deaths.jpg (165KB, 1084x1440px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1084x1440px

>>35577528
>I just have two feasible choices; voting
But that's not what you said earlier, when you implied that those who vote for bad policies should get the Pinochet treatment.
I'm no defender of the Democraps and their policies. There will always be people who vote for undesirable policies. You cannot convict them of thoughtcrime and be a libertarian.

>>35577550
If we apply the same methodology to capitalism, we'd find a much higher death toll.

>>35577680
It's not even about convicting people of thought crime. I just don't want to import people who will vote against my interests. Doing so is suicide. How hard is that for you to grasp?

>>35577680

whoever made this chart is an idiot.

>>35577727
>I just don't want to import people who will vote against my interests.
Well now you're confusing me. So you're against immigration, but you're not going to use the state to crush those who are already here? Then that is a reasonable position.

>>35572652
Vote for strong man or coalition of faggot and beta hmm my tough choice

>>35577776
This was not what you were saying before, however.

>>35577756
Explain.

>>35577526
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM

File: 1474662938798.png (74KB, 167x215px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 167x215px

I'm black and I voted for Trump so whites can have an inspiration to breed more thus it will create more white women.

>>35577637
First off if you think stocks cause inflation then you need to read some Pearson and other baby macro shit. Second I think I get what you're saying about "min-maxed" but we could just take the median salaries and get a similar result, verifying the conclusion. Third, you are on point with your last statement. If interest rates aren't raised back to normal levels then we're screwed if it crashes since you can't have <0% interest, on top of a shit ton of other reasons (mass automation, real civil unrest, overpopulation, overcrowding, and more). The U.S. is on the verge of a potential collapse and it's shaping up to be the most anticlimactic thing. We'll all just be shitposting while analysts light themselves on fire.

>>35577814

I was talking about inflation in the stock market, not currency inflation.

>>35572652
>Trump budget says 64 agencies will cease to exist if his budget is approved.
>Implying he is not the most libertarian president in over 70 years.

>>35577864
the money was just funneled into other government entities,
so no
not really.

>>35577776
More like, I'm going to use the state to crush those who came here ILLEGALLY, because they are going to disproportionately vote against my interests, and make children who disproportionately vote against my interests. Also, I have no problem with the state. I never claimed to be an anarchist. I am a Libertarian who believes in minimal government. There are certain MINIMAL functions of government which ought to be fulfilled.

>>35577835
That don't mean shit since stock has intrinsic value. Value =/= inflation. You're buying a piece of a company in the hopes that it expands and you can trade it for a higher value.

>>35577890
He raised defense spending, but not nearly at the amount he cut. Also look into his lobbying executive order which got almost no press for some reason.

>>35577864
2004
>hurr durr fewer government employees -> smaller government -> more freedom
2010
>hurr durr budget cuts -> less money for government -> smaller government-> more freedom
2017
>hurr durr fewer government departments -> smaller government -> more freedom

When will they learn?

>>35577897
Minarchists are statist boot-licking scum and will not be welcomed into VoluntaryAncaptopia. Your time will come on the day of the contract.

File: pinochet1322 (0;00;00;00).png (553KB, 594x389px) Image search: [Google]

553KB, 594x389px

>>35577959
Good thing that the VoluntaryAncaptopia will never come about, because it is not feasible 8)

>>35577799
Tricksy negro.

I like you, dubs confirm.

>>35577952
>Also look into his lobbying executive order which got almost no press for some reason.
Because it's meaningless. "Lobbying" has a specific definition for regulatory purposes and it's very easy to avoid this. It's just something to tell his supporters that he's draining the swamp and kicking out the bums without actually doing anything and while covering up his own corruption.

>>35577864

It's annoying when Trump proposes cutting funding for programs and people call him a tyrant or authoritarian. it's like wtf, that's the exact opposite of authoritarian, he's basically saying that the taxpayer isn't being forced to pay for these programs anymore.

>>35577795

it's just lumping a fuckload of different causes of death from multiple countries together in a giant pool, deaths that would have happened regardless of the system in place, and definitely worse under a system like communism, which actively doesn't give a metric fuck about its people (whereas capitalism at the very least needs their money, which requires them to be alive).

your chart can essentially be summed up as "capitalism isn't solving all of the worlds problems" which is a fucking ludicrous argument that anyone who isn't a retard can tell is fundamentally flawed.

>>35578039

and I fucking forgot to mention, because life is funny, that some of those numbers are guaranteed to have been sampled from communist countries abusing their people for personal financial gains.

File: best ideology.jpg (23KB, 228x346px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 228x346px

>>35577991
>he isn't Friedmanpilled
You were never a libertarian. You were always a fascist but the fascism label wasn't mainstream ten years ago and you weren't a traditional conservative so you had to call yourself a libertarian as compromise. But now it's 2017, the fascists are gaining power and you are free to identify with their movement.

>>35577952
>lobbying executive order
it literally weakens what was in place before him.
Old rule: people who were recently registered lobbyists can't work in the administration
New rule: people who were registered lobbyists can't work in the administration on subject matter related to industries they were registered as lobbying for.

As someone else pointed out it's all meaningless anyway since people figured how to get around registering when the first rule was put in place in '09.

>>35578031
>fascism is when the government does stuff and has to pay for it
I'm still getting over the fact that people think this is what socialism means, now I have to deal with this shit?

>>35578100

I'm saying how ridiculous it is to call Trump fascist for something like cutting funding.

>>35578039
it's a specific response to the claim that stalin and mao are responsible for the deaths of millions. You're making an entirely different argument, that it's impossible to keep people fed and healthy, so obviously you would not attribute deaths from famine and the like to stalin and mao.

>>35578131
The people calling Trump a fascist are the people who think disliking brown people is fascism. They have no idea what the word means.

>>35578011
Rise with me brother.

>>35578085
Bullshit. Fascists support a mixed economy, and are generally corporatist. I support a free market, and just recognize that certain demographics are less likely to support it.

>>35578131
fascists can operate on a "small" or "big" government. You think North Korea has a well-funded bureaucracy? Everything goes to the nukes, that doesn't make them less fascist.
Making the arguments you do just proves that you're an airhead who believed the made up shit the GOP gave up on pushing years ago.

>>35578143

communist china literally just took their grain and let them starve, how is that a "famine"?

>Administration committed to drastically reducing government power and the deep state
>authoritarian

I don't get it.

>>35578269
capitalism lets whole nations in sub-saharan africa starve if they can't afford to import food, how can you call those deaths that would happen "regardless of the system in place"? Be consistent, if economic systems can kill people then capitalism has some serious problems. If they can't, then Mao did nothing wrong, he only followed the rules of his system.

>>35577799
>That cunning
>That use of best girl Lisa with your post

Nigga, from this day forth, you are my nigga

>>35578376
Are they really, though? Are they really?

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-trump-regime-was-manufactured-by-a-war-inside-the-deep-state-f9e757071c70#.160a2xqe9

>>35578406
That's a false equivalence and you know it.

>>35572652

Wanting strong borders is hardly authoritarian.

I really think there needs to be a difference between internal and external politics. Internally, Trump really does not want to infringe on any rights or freedoms. He just wants to keep people out.

Authoritarianism is cooler

File: 1469220822012.jpg (2MB, 1800x2700px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1800x2700px

>>35578407
If I could have any white girl like Lisa or Envy. I'll be in debt to whites forever

>>35578506
Voting for someone to make laws in your daily life is extremely authoritarian

>>35578406

that is the most flawed argument I have ever read in my life. an international economic system not performing billions of dollars of charity for nations run by despots and their ilk, who let their people die, is not an even remotely comparable issue.

you are ignoring the fact that Mao wasn't denying his people food, he was STEALING IT FROM THEM, and LEAVING THEM TO DIE OF STARVATION. He fucking killed millions of subsistence farmers because he considered them detrimental and useless.

>>35578427
How? What exactly is so difficult about the governments of the world helping out Africa?
The rules of capitalism say you don't get to import food unless it's paid for it with money, which is tricky to get if you have no exports.
Maoism said you don't get to import food unless you meet unrealistic production levels, which is hard to do if the people are just scraping by. Same bullshit, different systems.
Call it natural if you like, I call it barbaric.

>>35578582
>Maoism said you don't get to import food unless you meet unrealistic production levels

you are a fucking retard

>>35578579
You're making the mistake of considering capitalism natural. It's not "charity", it's basic human decency.
Can't you see that you're making the exact same argument as Mao? Follow my rules, and give me shit you don't have, or starve. Absolutely inhuman, but people in every modern economic system are brainwashed into believing it one way or another.

>>35578582

was general mao "helping out africa"? general mao wasn't even feeding his own fucking people, he was stealing their food and leaving them to die. you are comparing a lack of international charity to a government backed democide. you are a retard.

>>35578638
if you actually believe that Mao starved the farmers because he's just a really bad dude or something, we can't have an adult conversation. Come back when you learn real politics.

>>35578406
>capitalism lets whole nations in sub-saharan africa starve if they can't afford to import food
We don't even have to go to Africa to see deaths caused by capitalism. Just look up US foreign policy in Latin America, or deaths by preventable causes in the US. If we are applying the same standard that is applied to "communist" regimes, (we count any unnatural deaths that happen under regimes, disregarding whether the economic policies were actually communist, as long as the government called itself communist) it's fair to blame capitalism for the deaths by smoking in the 20th century, which easily killed tens of millions of people.

>>35578143
>>35578406
ITT tankies

ORIGINAL HAHA SO INTELLECTUALS

>>35578692

he starved them because he wanted communism to look successful. He forced the local politicians to take the exaggerated amounts of grain at threat of death. He fucking chose to let those farmers die to make himself and his communist government look better.

>>35578640
If they want food so badly, then they should swear fealty to a country that has plenty of food so there's an actual obligation. Nevermind the fact that a shitton of food is already sent to these countries but local despots and warlords horde it for themselves. Kinda like what Mao did.

>>35578793
This. Mao even called many of his supporters "useful idiots". Tankies should make the effort to actually do research on things they believe in and stop being useful idiots themselves.

>>35572652

He is less authiritarian than most European social democrats.

File: what-tankies-think-socialism-is.jpg (301KB, 1066x1374px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1066x1374px

>>35578793
You should stop arguing with tankies. They are irredeemable. They are not taken seriously. Most socialists wish they would go away, as they great misrepresent socialism.

>>35578704
>"capitalism lets whole nations in sub-saharan africa starve"
>implying this is a bad thing
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>35578704
>We don't even have to go to Africa to see deaths caused by capitalism

Jesus christ kys

>>35578905
Capitalism lets whole nations full of white people starve too.

>>35578932

You obviously have no idea what capitalism is you retarded fuck.

>>35578932
explain, commiefag

>>35578889
Well hey, they're useful idiots to this day for countries like China. It allows tyrants to claim more victims from a group of naive people who think that super special brand of state Communism will solve everything. You get retards who fucking WANT to go to North Korea. If they can't come "home", though, they can also always try to make their home country one that would purge idiots after they've outlived their usefulness. See American Vanguard and arguably Antifa.

>>35572857
I mean it's not like minorities are monolithic groups. It's possible for individuals to make a mistake by voting for a president who will serve to harm them.

File: 1489714641872.png (19KB, 945x222px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 945x222px

>reducing funding to NIH despite more Americans dying to cancer and genetic diseases than terrorists
>reducing funding to public education services and stations like PBS
>reducing funding to the EPA that not only combats global warming, something all scientists believe is a large problem; but also deforestation in the midwest
>reducing funding to farming subsidies, the people who rallied behind Trump the most
>reducing funding to Americorps, a program regarded as highly successful in job acquisition and community support

>increase funding to the military
I thought conservatives wanted to decrease foreign engagement and you know... spend more money on making america great again?

Curious what the altrighters here think about climate change. If it's real it's clearly the most important issue beyond all others.

Do you seriously place more faith in the words of christian fundies, talk show personalities, and corporations rather than believing overwhelming scientific consensus?On what reasoning would you deny the scientific reasoning of the phenomenon? Are you in denial about the basic chemical proprieties of CO2 and Methane? Do you think the Atmosphere is a myth? That raising the global temperature won't have dire effects?


Are you retarded or do you just want to watch the entire normie planet burn?

File: 1486271872685.png (51KB, 497x471px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 497x471px

>>35579075
>public service
>climate change
>subsidies

>>35572652
daddy issues

(not original)

>>35579078

Climate change is obviously real, climate changes. Human impact it minimal at worst.

t. not an alt righter

>>35579078
You'd have an easier time arguing with them if you didn't make your questions loaded, even if you feel the answer is obvious.

>>35579075

We need to spend more on military to fund the JOBS that are created by doing so you dumb liberal

Why do we need better infrastructure when we can just keep paying people to make very useful tanks and bombs until they can afford their own damn infrastructure? Maybe you should try picking up an economics book? hm?

>>35573280
The answer to both of those questions is "yes".

File: ancap-and-hierarchy.jpg (164KB, 1500x974px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1500x974px

>>35578954
>he probably thinks capitalism = le free markets
Capitalism and free markets are not the same things, that's why we have the term "free market capitalism" and it's not an oxymoron. Capitalism is any system under which:
1) the means of production (factories, firms, etc) are not owned and run by the workers
2) production is for profit
3) there is capital accumulation
(1) is necessary and sufficient for capitalism, while (2) and (3) are necessary but not sufficient.
Therefore, we can have an economic model where the state becomes the major capitalist firm, managing production for profit, beating down workers, etc. This is not a free-market model, but it is capitalist because of (1) (2) (3). This model is known as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

Socialism is not anything the government does, or the state of the government owning the economy. It absolutely must satisfy this condition: the workers control the means of production. There's disagreement about what follows, however.

>>35578959
Under capitalism, because production is under an authoritarian system, the workers are given a wage that is a fraction of what they produce. Take X to be the value of, say, a car a factory worker makes that is sold on the market. Whatever X may be, it will always be less than W, the wage given to the worker for the car. Therefore, despite the fact that the worker did enough work to produce a car, he is not able to buy it. He has to work harder to buy a car than it takes to make it himself. He would be better off running the firm with his workers without the boss getting a cut.

>>35579078
I literally built a snowman in my yard this year.

But oh... that's right, the Earth is heating up because we drive too much, so surely that couldn't have been possible? Fuck off.

>>35579184
>and it's not an oxymoron.
Meant to say "and it's not redundant."

>>35579184
>X may be, it will always be less than W
Here I meant that W will always be less than X. W being the wage, X being the market value.

File: capitalism1.jpg (299KB, 1108x938px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 1108x938px

>>35579184

A hell of a lot of assumptions you're making there buddy.

if global warming is real, then why does it get colder in the winter still?

>>35579078

I literally have a snowball in my hand right now you fucking libtard.

>Warming
hahahaha

File: mises-its-praxeology.jpg (144KB, 712x840px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 712x840px

>>35579287
>A hell of a lot of assumptions you're making there buddy.
The assumptions are verified by empirical evidence. But you wouldn't care about empirical evidence, Mr. Praxeologist. :^)

because either side you vote for is authoritarianism

do people actually think it makes a difference or that hillary isn't authoritarian?

>>35579184
Your image implies a co-op which is consistent with capitalism.

When you say "workers" must own the "means of production", does that mean that all the workers of the world must collectively own every single unit of capital, or only the workers who use that capital productively?

>>35579078
I can literally walk to my freezer RIGHT NOW and grab ice cubes. So much for global """""""warming""""""".
>me 1, shills 0

>>35579350
>Your image implies a co-op which is consistent with capitalism.
I've never cared if capitalists call coops capitalism. I view them as socialist, but if some capitalists like yourself support them, absolutely fine by me.
>or only the workers who use that capital productively?
The latter.

>>35572652
This question is incomplete, it's not a proper question yet

>who do so many people vote of authoritarianism EVEN THOUGH (your argument for why this is bad goes here)

File: 1488689332213.png (140KB, 857x773px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 857x773px

>>35579323

Indeed, empirical evidence show us that under capitalism and freedom, humans prosper.

File: corporate-stalinism.jpg (49KB, 618x412px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 618x412px

>>35579484
I am very much for freedom of the individual. I regard corporations and the state as two types of collectivist institutions that break the individualist spirit of the worker.
>that pic
Now I could very easily prove that the countries you are referring to, which are all Leninist states, used a state capitalist model. You would probably say "NOT REAL COMMUNISM." I could either go down the road of blaming capitalism for deaths that happened under self-described capitalist leaders (since after all, it only matters what leaders call themselves, not what policies they actually implemented). Or I could say that there is a difference between state capitalism/crony capitalism and the idealized free-market capitalism you like, just like how there's a difference between Leninism and anarchist socialism.

>>35579628

Except in every single case of marxism/socialism/communism it has not worked and been horrible, call it whatever you want, it doesn't work and it's terrible.

>>35579628
So you really believe in anarchist socialism?

You are content, even if anyone can walk away with their fortune out of your system as soon as they have a marginal edge on the rest of the people, hence making it more beneficial for them to not be part of it?

Because if you wish to have an actual communist state, things like having the police confiscate all the wheat really is a ideological inevitability. If you didn't force people to bring in the wheat, people would notice one farmer wouldn't bring anything in because that way he has more to eat, but still stays within the system.

Of course they would do the same. This would ruin the economy and would go against your ideological goals, so you'd have to choose between either abandoning your ideology or taking away people's freedom.

File: socialism-has-never-worked.png (190KB, 793x4231px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 793x4231px

>>35579987
>call it whatever you want, it doesn't work and it's terrible.
It has worked when you consider examples outside of the media's frame of "big government = socialism." Cooperatives in general perform better than other firms. And societies like Anarchist Spain, Rojava, Kerala, and so on are good examples.

>>35579987
That's objectively false though. While admittedly most have failed, a number of socialist areas exist today, such as Rojava and the land controlled by the EZLN.

Additionally, not all cases in the past have been horrible. I would imagine that, barring the war, revolutionary Spain would have been a great place to live. George Orwell was quite impressed by the areas controlled by anarchists, and he himself fought with a Trotskyist party.

>>35579078

government is the one who keeps funding oil and coal

if we went only by the free market we'd all be using clean energy by now

File: on-the-necessity-of-the-state-to-defend-private-property.jpg (146KB, 640x980px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 640x980px

>>35580072
>You are content, even if anyone can walk away with their fortune out of your system as soon as they have a marginal edge on the rest of the people
It would be near-impossible to have such accumulation under a society for two reasons:
1) there is no recognition of private property. It's not collectivized, there is simply no government to defend it. So it would be impossible to acquire resources and land for the purposes of charging rent. People could only own (de facto, not de jure) what they are using personally. This is personal property. A house, a car, your phone, and so on are personal property. A plot of land owned by a landlord is private property, because he is not using it for himself; he claims ownership to exclude others, so that he can then charge rent to access it. Private property is a form a stable ownership that only exists when a state can defend it, but in nature, the law of the land is "you use it or you lose it."
2) Because all means of production are owned by workers in their respective firms, the entire economy is a meritocracy. It is conceivable that someone who is more industrious could make more money than others. This is consistent with equality. It is fine.
Where workers differ in intelligence and skill, compensation will vary. But it is impossible for someone to be a million times as productive or as skilled as the average worker. Therefore, it will be impossible to have one person worth a billion dollars, but a millionaire is not unlikely.

>Because if you wish to have an actual communist state, things like having the police confiscate all the wheat really is a ideological inevitability.
I'm quite opposed to the state and all forms of hierarchy and authority should be reduced as much as possible. As for the issue with wheat, you are assuming that the economy will be centrally planned, but this is neither necessary nor desirable for socialism. I'd point you to decentralized planning and market socialism.

File: 1452391345534.png (120KB, 304x323px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 304x323px

>>35580080
>>35580113
>i-it works just look I promise

File: capitalism-socialism-explained.png (154KB, 1436x1580px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1436x1580px

>>35580651
Hmm....not an argument.

>>35572652

Look up some things on absolutism they apply to authoritarianism too.

Essentially during the 16th and 17th century in France a new form of Monarchy called Absolutism was formed wherein the Monarch had next to complete and direct control over all aspects of the running of the state and curbed the powers of all lesser nobles. In the feudal system that had existed prior, lesser nobles could rule over their own fiefs like minor kingdoms and wage wars amongst one another inside the realm of the ruling King. Absolutism curbed their powers to do things like this, harshly.

The biggest supporters of Absolutism were the peasantry, the ones at the very bottom of the pile in terms of social standing. Now you may find this odd at first, but the reasons for the peasantry supporting absolute monarchy are the same reasons the lower classes support men like Trump.

They are individual, powerful figures who chiefly curb the powers of those who attempt to exploit the lower classes. Authoritarian figures offer a release on the lowest of the low, as the people who usually shit on them are now being shat on by someone else. The powers of the "minor nobles" are curbed, and we go from having a state where hundreds of different people can potentially exploit the lower classes, to having just one, the one at the very top. The one at the very top will not exploit or hurt the working classes however, because he knows that it is because of them that he rules.

So, authoritarian states can in many instances be a benefit to the ones who are on the bottom of society.

>>35577270
>Yeah, and it was also a conspiracy that our high Chairman sanders immediately joined forces with Wallstreet owned Hillary the quickest moment he could, despite claiming to be the antithesis to her!

>>35572742
Or did democrats win in 2008 and 2012 because of the minority (especially blacks) problem?

Also
>republicans are the authoritarians
Kek

>>35575841
Why is skepticism of the press something so horrible to you? Do you honestly think the MSM in the US is some saintly institution that gives us nothing but the truth?

I'm getting a creepy vibe from you.

>>35572652

Including daddy in the pic doesn't make sense, Trump isn't an authoritarian any way you look at it.

People vote for authoritarians for quick action, usually young, impressionable idiots.

>>35580844

This is a nice theory and it may have been applicable in certain historical situations in the past, but how does it apply to Trump for example?

The average Trump supporter isn't going to gain much power at the expense of those who rule over them, are they? Trump is mostly going after the most powerless (illegal immigrants, refugees fleeting war, etc). So the average Trump supporter thinks that Trump is going to bully others on their same level or below them.

Trump's corporatist mentality is also no good for most Trump supports, certainly no good for the most powerless in society.

>>35581377
When you're faced with two Wall Street owned candidates, you at least side with the one closer to your ideals.

>>35581420
With the way tings are drifting, our only choice is between left or right authoritarianism.

>>35582213
Siding with a sell out reflects many people quite accurately if you ask me

>>35572652
AHHHAHHahahahahaHAHAHAHAHHAA!!!

You got me good anon.

>>35579287
>image of old man who agrees with me


Can be done with an ideology, i got plenty for nazism

>>35579006
>voting for a president who will serve to harm them
How do you think he will harm us?

>>35572962
Latino Trump supporter here too. :^)

>>35572984
That was incredibly ridiculous. It's odd seeing the burnt tree in front of the student union now.

>>35577799
Based.

>>35572652
Because it's realistic

>>35572742
>mfw the rich whites voted for Clinton
>mfw the poor rural whites voted for Trump
>mfw Trump, the champion for the lower class, decides to metaphorically rape their healthcare and make the rich richer

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Feels good to not be an Americuck. Even the Asians who weren't threatened like the Hispanics voted the same ratio. AHAHAHAHAHA!

Fuck, I loved this election.

>>35587062
>>mfw Trump, the champion for the lower class, decides to metaphorically rape their healthcare and make the rich richer
Well done proving you know nothing about the current healthcare system in america

>>35572742
Ironically they probably voted for him because of racist SJWs framing whites as a "problem"

>>35587143
Dr3 *fat bearded brittish man tips*

>>35587083
And yet I do, nigger. Obamacare is replaced for Ryan's shitefesto of making tax cuts for the rich.

It's the Republican tradition. But please, do explain your opinion in spite of these facts.

>>35587211
Yep. Republicans are shit, but Dems are shit too unfortunately.
If you want a party that represents you then join the winning coalition.

>>35587211
Ryan's plan was rejected fag, get with the program

>>35587083
>Y-You'll see
>Ryancare will be good

Politicians should not be given free state healthcare and a 100% pension. It lets them literally do whatever they'd like to the people with zero risk to themselves. They also should not make more than the poverty line in salary (though I support them being given room and board
They are public servants, yet they have set themselves up as our slavedrivers.

>>35587283
See up
>>35587281

>>35587271
Unfortunately the real problem is that reality has a liberal bias. Only the Republicans in America are retarded enough to claim global warming doesn't exist and vaccinations give brain cancer.

At least when you would vote Democrats. you won't get a fucking retard in office. All the losers on /r9k/ would benefit heavily from someone like Colonel Sanders.

>>35573326
By the same logic every form of taxes is authoritarian. Are you some kind of filthy ancap?

Authoritarianism is coming one way or the other, weather it's left-wing or right-wing.

>>35572857
They can't read senpai

>>35587281
Of course it was rejected, I already know it's rejected, that's not the point, the problem is that they are trying to get such a hilarious plan across. And let's stop with the dodging here, Ryan AND TRUMP's shit idea got rejected.

Here's the issue: they will keep trying to widen the wage gap whilst you faggots buy their dick replicas to suck on.

>>35587354
America would be hilarious if it wasn't so terrifying.

>>35587354
Trump gave Ryan his chance, now its time for the best people to make a better plan. The problem in the first place is that Obamacare is here, the best course of action would be to return to pre-Obamacare days but sadly thats all niggered up now

>>35587437
>being scared of burgerland

War is over and done with. It's only militants and insurgency, that's very hard to deal with because ideas cannot be nuked. Amerikuh is a reality show, looks like the US is The Apprentice.

>>35587471
Nigger, Trump APPROVED that shit. Trump is going to keep him there by his side. Trump is such a fucking sellout he even excused Clinton when he was apparently bent on jailing him and he's buddies with Cruz now.

The only popular Republican not coming back for seconds of orange cock is Arnold, he was already uncomfortable and now he's made his stance clear.

>>35587542
I'm not defending Trump's every action, but he is a sidestep, or at the very least not in the wrong direction, at least ideology-wise. There are rare people that you can support in all their doing, and Trump is a step towards enabling such a worthy person tontake office one day

>>35587638
Name 3 things that Trump did well in his election run up to now.

If electing Trump is """""redpilling America""""" so they will use their vote wisely, then shooting yourself in the head is a good way to understand what pain feels like so you avoid it.

>>35587714
5D Chess m8
I don't expect c u c k s to u n d e r s t a n d his s i c k strategy, but I fully believe in the Don

>>35587750
Did you just call yourself a cuck? Nobody understands his strategy. Believing =/= knowing, you candyass jabroni.

>>35587714
Nah, its all about getting people used to personality authoritarianism

>>35587765
I understand it, he tells me everything in sweet whispers before tucking me in every night

>>35572652
Because the granny one is somehow worse and that says a lot

File: 1489691639963.png (240KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 800x600px

lmao @ trumpcucks still in denial

you made a huge fuckup because you were a hateful racist retard. now you and everyone else is paying for it.

>>35572652
Dont listen to the mane stream meteor, trump fairly liberal next to most politicians

File: 1488922445599.jpg (85KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1024x1024px

>>35572652
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/trump-authoritarianism

File: 1489609335540.jpg (261KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 960x1280px

>>35588188
liberals: trump is a fucking incompetent retard
also liberals: trump is also secretly a genius working to bring back nazi germany where rich people are nazis and powerful people of color are pressed once again

File: 1489691974844.jpg (314KB, 1454x993px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 1454x993px

all the trumpcucks ITT

>>35588000
Holyshit I just realized that get

File: dissapoint.jpg (70KB, 529x529px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 529x529px

HAHAHA

The MSM played you liberals like the cucks you are. During the election Trump says the only way he could literally lose is by hacking. If you looked at the size of his events compared to Hillary's, that would be a pretty reasonable statement.

The Media bashed him for it, Obama told him to "Get over it, there wont be any hacking, you'll just lose". Hillary even said thoughts like these undermine our Democracy.

Then Trump wins, and what happens? RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA.

It's literally a scapegoat. The democratic party couldn't have lost due to being out of touch, NOOO, we were interfered with. It was Obviously Russia.

Trump made the point that it could've been any country not just Russia, he even stated that it was obvious that they were attempting a war with Russia, which is stupid as fuck, I'm glad Trump won. Now we're going head to head with North Korea, and potentially China if they don't step the fuck up.

Then in the past few weeks we find out that the CIA has tools to hack into literally anything and make it look like a Foreign Agent did it. In fact they lost control of the tools and now a multitude of countries has them.

We don't know if it was Russia, it could have been Germany pretending to be Russia, NK pretending to be China pretending to be Russia.

We have no clue. Cut the fucking act.

>>35572774
>All successful civilizations have utilized authoritarianism

The world's only superpower, and its largest economy, the US, has been a democratic republic longer than any other.

You head-bangingly stupid, wretched braindead CUNT

>>35589554
>he even stated that it was obvious that they were attempting a war with Russia

Fuck all evidence for that bullshit. Almost every Trump official has now not only been found out talking to the Russians during the election, but also lying about it.
The house of cards is falling and imbeciles like you living in your little /pol/ bubble denying it and trying to say 2+2=5 is a real sight to behold.

You are one stupid fucking cretin, holy shit.

>>35589554
Russia hated Hillary because Hillary would have been a disaster. Obama was a terrible president all around and he even tried to get cozy with the Russians. So they decided to do their best to help Trump. This is literally all that happened. Trump is not president because of Russia, but Russia hates the democratic party because they are pure evil and want to hurt everyone.

>>35590219
>still believing the russian conspiracy
>>>/x/

>>35572652
because the other "person" was an authoritarian that was also in the pockets of wall street, globalists, 5 mil (4 unreported) from ragheads, the military industrial complex, etc etc. The only reason Trump won is because (((they))) are literally geriatric to the point that they picked Hillary.

For all you pro socialist guys, who say that means of production are controlled by the worker, how do new businesses get started without someone leading the way and heading the company? If workers control the company then what incentive is there to start a company?

>>35572742
I can't wait until whites are exterminated

>>35590511
>russian "conspiracy"
>likely participated in every pizzagate thread

fuck off Alex

>>35592263
Lol good luck after we're gone faggot

>>35591975
A person founds a company, and if he chooses to hire workers, those workers get proportional ownership of the company.

File: 1477361164508.png (1MB, 1421x896px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1421x896px

People like leaders. It is simple and they feel a single leader is more accountable than power spread between many. The presidency, as such, has evolved to reflect this phenomenon. Today's presidents issue considerably high numbers of executive orders, and in comparison with early presidents today's presidential candidates actively campaign in order to get elected. The nature of the presidency thus has changed.

Any presidential candidate, therefore, will seem authoritarian. All of them have the power and permission to issue large numbers of executive orders and stamp their personality onto the country for four or eight years. We voted, thus, for the candidate whose stamp we wanted to see.

Given the choices, our candidate is the one who is willing to build a wall on our southern border, stand up against globalists like Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media, and sort out the immigration problem. Our candidate is the one who believes in America First: of sorting out the affairs in our own country before presuming to interfere in those of others. And our president is also a successful business, a prime negotiator, a man who we believe can make the right sorts of agreements with the right sorts of people in order to reorient our country onto the right track.

And with what we learned about Hillary and her many scandals, her dishonesty, and her insider manipulation, we dodged a bullet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu4VUsaxs6E&t=4s

>>35572652
because republicans and conservatives are stupid

they're anti-intellectual for a reason