PDA

View Full Version : Have any of you done a complete 180 on any of your political opinions?



BrocepCurls
06-25-2017, 06:24 PM
Is there a particular issue which you vehemently argued for in a particular direction, only to later do a total 180 and change your view to the opposite stance?

What was it and why did you change?

MojoTheMonkey
06-25-2017, 06:33 PM
Yeah, women's rights.

If I had my way women wouldn't be allowed to vote and it would be lawful to discriminate against them in terms of employment and our society would a 1000 times better.

BRB whole family, no single moms
BRB men are more alpha, much less cucks
BRB the left as we know it doesn't exist, no more dumb pollyanna policies
BRB women are far happier fulfilling prime biological directive of having kids and raising them instead of having a 'career'

Aircommander91
06-25-2017, 06:35 PM
Yup. When I was a teen I used to believe marx, engels and che guevara were good guys fighting greedy bastards. that communism was fighting for good and capitalism was bad.

when I grew up and saw reality, what really happened and what actual communism was and not the fairy tale portrayed by marxist teachers/educational system. I started questioning things and seeing them for what they were.

If USSR was a paradise and the capitalist west slavery, how come people were fleeing the communist side to the capitalist?

http://i.imgur.com/azJgBix.gif

why did they have to put guards on the communist side to stop people fleeing to the other side?


why tens of thousands of cubans(living in a "commie paradise") throw themselves at high sea in improvised boats to escape to the most capitalist country in the world?

why people in socialist/welfare countries with many labour rights flee into freer and less regulated countries?


this is all just common sense and logic afterall.

but it seems some people are immune to it and still believe in fairy tales and fallacies.. even though it's been proven wrong, time after time.

SillieBazzillie
06-25-2017, 06:37 PM
When I was younger I was very conservative thinking that taxes were bad and that rich people were rich because they were "better" than the rest of us.

As I've aged I realize that we are all pretty equal and that rich people are usually rich because of some advantage they had that I did not. Kind of like an aristocracy. Now I'n very liberal and think that the USA as a country needs to take care of all, it's best and it's least. And the majority of rich people I've dealt with or CEOs are no smarter than me or those like me.

NVious
06-25-2017, 06:37 PM
Yeah used to be a lolbertarian, realized it was politically impossible.

Was very pro capitalist, but now I view corporations with as much disdain as the government.

I changed because I realized libertarianism isn't something that will work due to the fact that only white males care about the idea and that is not the major demographic that votes anywhere.

As far as corporations go, I was always semi skeptical of them, but capitalism obviously has many tangible benefits so that overrode my skepticism. There are three things that changed

1.Seeing how explicitly anti white and anti right many corporations are

2.Seeing how the ability to deny service only worked one way with the corporate hegemony which is to say that the left can hurt the right not the other way around

3.Seeing how totally cucked most right wing corporations are in standing up for themselves and their consumers

Although corporations are government created fictions to begin with, so it could be traced back to them, but basically big groups of anything can go haywire and if the culture that rules is one of leftism, corporations will just mirror that. Even the ones that don't can only go so far in counter signaling.

I also used to believe politics matter, now I realize that politics are irrelevant and swim down stream from culture meaning that politics will only ever reflect culture, not the other way around, so your best bet in influencing politics is actually to create culture.

I guess I didn't do a 180 as much as I lifted myself off the ground and decided I'll go whichever direction the truth takes me, whether it be a 10, 45 or no scope 360.

cashinout
06-25-2017, 06:39 PM
I used to lean democrat

















































































then i got a job

beowulf10
06-25-2017, 06:40 PM
I've just become more practical. I think life is too complex to expect any one political ideology to solve all problems.

wickedman
06-25-2017, 06:41 PM
Was pretty liberal regarding social issues, would have considered myself a democrat. But back when I was younger we were dealing with getting rid of discrimination against gays. Somehow something that made sense snowballed into a party "protecting" the rights of every ass backwards movement that was conceivable.

SillieBazzillie
06-25-2017, 06:41 PM
Yeah used to be a lolbertarian, realized it was politically impossible.

Was very pro capitalist, but now I view corporations with as much disdain as the government.

I changed because I realized libertarianism isn't something that will work due to the fact that only white males care about the idea and that is not the major demographic that votes anywhere.

As far as corporations go, I was always semi skeptical of them, but capitalism obviously has many tangible benefits so that overrode my skepticism. There are three things that changed

1.Seeing how explicitly anti white and anti right many corporations are

2.Seeing how the ability to deny service only worked one way with the corporate hegemony which is to say that the left can hurt the right not the other way around

3.Seeing how totally cucked most right wing corporations are in standing up for themselves and their consumers

Although corporations are government created fictions to begin with, so it could be traced back to them, but basically big groups of anything can go haywire and if the culture that rules is one of leftism, corporations will just mirror that. Even the ones that don't can only go so far in counter signaling.

I also used to believe politics matter, now I realize that politics are irrelevant and swim down stream from culture meaning that politics will only ever reflect culture, not the other way around, so your best bet in influencing politics is actually to create culture.

I guess I didn't do a 180 as much as I lifted myself off the ground and decided I'll go whichever direction the truth takes me, whether it be a 10, 45 or no scope 360.

Shocking you still think whites are the only productive race. I'm assuming you'll never veer from this opinion.

Spoolme
06-25-2017, 06:44 PM
Yep. Was a patriotic conservative in high school. Started doing my own research and found out all the BS our government is feeding us, especially republicans. Slowly transitioned to liberal, now im full blown communist and hate liberals and conservatives. lol srs.

Oinkerjnn
06-25-2017, 06:45 PM
This is as good a spot as any for the quote,

"If you're young and you're not a democrat you have no heart. If you're old and you're not a republican you have no brain".

NVious
06-25-2017, 06:48 PM
Shocking you still think whites are the only productive race. I'm assuming you'll never veer from this opinion.

You're a total moron, not surprised that's what you got from this:

I changed because I realized libertarianism isn't something that will work due to the fact that only white males care about the idea and that is not the major demographic that votes anywhere.

So let's take the most left wing SJW outlets and see what they have to say about this:

https://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/6/11/1537448/-Ninety-four-percent-of-Libertarians-are-white-and-68-percent-are-men

Ninety-four percent of Libertarians are white, and 68 percent are men.

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/why_libertarianism_is_so_popular_on_the_right_its_ the_last_bastion_of_white_male_dominance/

In a 2014 Pew poll, it was found that about one in ten Americans describe themselves as libertarian, and men were more than twice as likely to be libertarians. In a 2013 Pew poll that Heer states in his article, it was found about two-thirds (68 percent) of American’s who identify as libertarians are men, and 94 percent are non-hispanic whites. Compare this to “steadfast conservatives,” who were found to be 59 percent male and 87 percent white, or “business conservatives,” found to be 62 percent male and 85 percent white, according to another survey done by Pew. Clearly, the entire conservative movement is dominated by white males, but libertarians are the most male-dominated.

Shocking that people use data when looking at political beliefs, must be hard for you not to virtue signal about your anti racism.

BrocepCurls
06-25-2017, 06:48 PM
Yep. Was a patriotic conservative in high school. Started doing my own research and found out all the BS our government is feeding us, especially republicans. Slowly transitioned to liberal, now im full blown communist and hate liberals and conservatives. lol srs.

You're pretty much me.

MojoTheMonkey
06-25-2017, 06:50 PM
Yep. Was a patriotic conservative in high school. Started doing my own research and found out all the BS our government is feeding us, especially republicans. Slowly transitioned to liberal, now im full blown communist and hate liberals and conservatives. lol srs.

Communism is a pipe dream though. It's a nice fairy tale but it ALWAYS ends in oppressive genocide. The 1 percent will rule over the rest, with the 19 percent being admins/high servants and the rest are the peasants. That is how humans are setup. The key is making the 1 percent behave somewhat decently, like being bonded to the land and the people.

Commie revolution happens -> leads to chaos when dumb ideas are actually implemented -> savvy psycho reaches power in the chaos -> psycho proceeds to rule with iron fist -> commie states brakes down into traditional dictatorship with upper class living like kings with peasants in poverty.

SillieBazzillie
06-25-2017, 06:52 PM
You're a total moron, not surprised that's what you got from this:

I changed because I realized libertarianism isn't something that will work due to the fact that only white males care about the idea and that is not the major demographic that votes anywhere.

So let's take the most left wing SJW outlets and see what they have to say about this:

https://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/6/11/1537448/-Ninety-four-percent-of-Libertarians-are-white-and-68-percent-are-men

Ninety-four percent of Libertarians are white, and 68 percent are men.

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/why_libertarianism_is_so_popular_on_the_right_its_ the_last_bastion_of_white_male_dominance/

In a 2014 Pew poll, it was found that about one in ten Americans describe themselves as libertarian, and men were more than twice as likely to be libertarians. In a 2013 Pew poll that Heer states in his article, it was found about two-thirds (68 percent) of American’s who identify as libertarians are men, and 94 percent are non-hispanic whites. Compare this to “steadfast conservatives,” who were found to be 59 percent male and 87 percent white, or “business conservatives,” found to be 62 percent male and 85 percent white, according to another survey done by Pew. Clearly, the entire conservative movement is dominated by white males, but libertarians are the most male-dominated.

Shocking that people use data when looking at political beliefs, must be hard for you not to virtue signal about your anti racism.

I don't even understand most of what you're posting. I simple judge other by my interactions with them. For example, my interactions with you lead me to the conclusion that you're a low IQ racist.

NVious
06-25-2017, 06:54 PM
I don't even understand most of what you're posting. I simple judge other by my interactions with them. For example, my interactions with you lead me to the conclusion that you're a low IQ racist.

>Doesn't understanding me posting basic stats
>"but you're the one that's actually low IQ"

Perhaps read the first five words I posted in that post and I think you'll have a better sense of reality.

SillieBazzillie
06-25-2017, 07:00 PM
>Doesn't understanding me posting basic stats
>"but you're the one that's actually low IQ"

Perhaps read the first five words I posted in that post and I think you'll have a better sense of reality.

"Shocking that people use data when looking at political beliefs, must be hard for you not to virtue signal about your anti racism." virtue signal? anti racism?

metco
06-25-2017, 07:00 PM
yes used to be anti abortion.

nosirrahx
06-25-2017, 07:01 PM
Have any of you done a complete 180 on any of your political opinions?

When I was fresh out of high school I was pretty Liberal due to some pretty aggressive indoctrination.

A few years later I started to question a lot of the BS, did not like the answers but since I still was under the spell of the 2 party system I became a Conservative.

A few years after that it finally dawned on me that "team" based politics is the actual problem and I have been an Independent ever since.

AlwaysFocus
06-25-2017, 07:01 PM
I never flipped, only learned where I really stand. That being said, 18 is almost too young to vote and I sort of believe that land owners or at least tax paying citizens should vote.

Halfway
06-25-2017, 07:05 PM
I'm unironically starting to believe that Islam might be the only hope for Europe, given the binary choice the ''elite'' are presenting them between unthinkable degeneracy and the religion of the imported soon-to-be majority.

As an atheist I'd love it if our own imported replacement population had a massive, growing, powerful Christian (but not like our own White people Christian stuff, this is DIFFERENT because reasons) radical element too, because without an aggressive, untouchable, un-criticizeable religion to counter the rise of the insane left I can't see it having a happy ending.

BrocepCurls
06-25-2017, 07:08 PM
Communism is a pipe dream though. It's a nice fairy tale but it ALWAYS ends in oppressive genocide. The 1 percent will rule over the rest, with the 19 percent being admins/high servants and the rest are the peasants. That is how humans are setup. The key is making the 1 percent behave somewhat decently, like being bonded to the land and the people.

Commie revolution happens -> leads to chaos when dumb ideas are actually implemented -> savvy psycho reaches power in the chaos -> psycho proceeds to rule with iron fist -> commie states brakes down into traditional dictatorship with upper class living like kings with peasants in poverty.

If humans ever actually realised en masse that they don't need to submit to authoritarian power structures (something Marx referred to as class consciousness) then ideologies like socialism or communism are perfectly possible. The problem now, evidenced by what you said, is that people seem to think that we just have to submit to a ruling class in order to have a stable and functioning society.

People said the same thing back when society was ruled by slave owning Pharoahs. They said the same when the Feudal lords were the masters in medieval Europe. And they're saying the same thing now when corporations and the capitalist elite run society. But in each of those cases, society moved forward and people did become relatively more free (except the last one, which we're still working on).

Ephedra
06-25-2017, 07:18 PM
I was a liberal until 5 years ago. Cringe worthy looking back at some of my R/P posts defending Democrats. I remember how happy I was when Obama won in 2008.

Then I got a career, house, etc and became self sufficient. Obviously self-sufficiency and liberal thinking doesn't mix. I think as you grow up you finally see liberalism for the bullsh*t it really is... a thought process for the self-induced "victims" and the largest hate group in America. Never happy, nothing is ever enough, and corrupt to its core.

NVious
06-25-2017, 07:31 PM
If humans ever actually realised en masse that they don't need to submit to authoritarian power structures (something Marx referred to as class consciousness) then ideologies like socialism or communism are perfectly possible. The problem now, evidenced by what you said, is that people seem to think that we just have to submit to a ruling class in order to have a stable and functioning society.

People said the same thing back when society was ruled by slave owning Pharoahs. They said the same when the Feudal lords were the masters in medieval Europe. And they're saying the same thing now when corporations and the capitalist elite run society. But in each of those cases, society moved forward and people did become relatively more free (except the last one, which we're still working on).

Natural hierarchy exists, this is a law written into the CODE of the universe. Why would I want to be equal with an inferior, likewise why would a superior seek to be equal with me?

The universe is far more winner take all than our extremely egalitarian societies today would ever imagine, just watch:

fCn8zs912OE

If you live in the west, you're already in the 1% to begin with, but beyond that there are many means to acquire the things that every man desires in the west. Never before has the acquisition of looks/money/status been as openly available to everyone and that certainly wasn't the case under communism. Actually under communism, the ability for a man to create a desired life was next to impossible, you are not removing the hierarchy, you are just making it more extreme. The desire for wealth, outstanding friends and attractive mates doesn't go away no matter what system you use, you just make these things more scarce under communism, so you allow the worst to thrive

Communism is impractical because even within it's OWN system they idealize HIERARCHICAL ideas of:

Beauty (communist art isn't post modernist art)
Strength (communist sports and competitions aren't everyone is equal and we all come in the same place, the USSR actually had very successful Hockey, basketball, chess and other competitive teams)
Relationships (polyamorous otherkin weren't idealized, why aren't I entitled to your wife? Why don't we all share all the beautiful women instead of allowing the best men to have them?)

Communism just seeks to remove other hierarchies, it does not seek to destroy them all together because that's a self defeating task, it also exacerbates inequality as we see in Venezuela where the 1% looks like this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3192933/Hugo-Chavez-s-ambassador-daughter-Venezuela-s-richest-woman-according-new-report.html

Being the ex-President's daughter pays off: Hugo Chavez's ambassador daughter is Venezuela's richest woman


And EVERYONE is worse off for it.

There's a reason communism doesn't attract the people that it needs to succeed, no man with a functioning endocrine system or above average IQ can believe in such nonsense, the only reason it ever had success was because it served an evolutionary purpose for certain peoples, but the reality is that wherever you had legit right wing vs left wing battles commies got BTFO because they have no warriors as it's an effeminate ideology. The only way the Russians even defeated the Nazis was

1.Due to environment

2.Due to the fact that they were financed by many different groups, specifically the west

3.The fact that any soldiers caught deserting or turning back would be tortured, therefore death on the field was preferable

4.The west's involvement in stopping them

Regardless America was the biggest winner of WW2 and they were extremely right wing, almost fascist one could say in their world view.

The best example of the futility of communist "warriors" was what happened in Spain though as WW2 is a separate issue and Chile was just too easy.

In Catalonia you had VOLUNTARY communist soldiers who were "true believers" (George Orwell even fought) and they got BTFO by the right wing factions that emerged.

Communism is weak on all fronts:

1.Philosophically as open debate DESTROYS communism, there's a reason it doesn't exist in nations where the open exchange of ideas is more or less allowed
2.Spiritually as it inevitably turns into genocide
3.Economically as communist countries are poor AF
4.Militarily as true believer communists like antifa are weak low value men who are only allowed to exist because we don't live in scarce times

beowulf10
06-25-2017, 07:42 PM
You're a total moron, not surprised that's what you got from this:

I changed because I realized libertarianism isn't something that will work due to the fact that only white males care about the idea and that is not the major demographic that votes anywhere.

So let's take the most left wing SJW outlets and see what they have to say about this:

https://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/6/11/1537448/-Ninety-four-percent-of-Libertarians-are-white-and-68-percent-are-men

Ninety-four percent of Libertarians are white, and 68 percent are men.

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/why_libertarianism_is_so_popular_on_the_right_its_ the_last_bastion_of_white_male_dominance/

In a 2014 Pew poll, it was found that about one in ten Americans describe themselves as libertarian, and men were more than twice as likely to be libertarians. In a 2013 Pew poll that Heer states in his article, it was found about two-thirds (68 percent) of American’s who identify as libertarians are men, and 94 percent are non-hispanic whites. Compare this to “steadfast conservatives,” who were found to be 59 percent male and 87 percent white, or “business conservatives,” found to be 62 percent male and 85 percent white, according to another survey done by Pew. Clearly, the entire conservative movement is dominated by white males, but libertarians are the most male-dominated.

Shocking that people use data when looking at political beliefs, must be hard for you not to virtue signal about your anti racism.

I'm glad SillieBazzillie is a fellow U.S. citizen. We may disagree on things form time to time but I know he's a decent person.

On the other hand, I wouldn't let you anywhere near any member of my family. You honestly kind of sound like you are trying to justify what appears to be a severe empathy deficit.

BadMonkeyFunker
06-25-2017, 07:46 PM
its easy to call ppl 'lazy bums' and think they dont work hard enough when you're a 20 something fukhead..

but then as you get older and meet all kinds of ppl from all kinds of different backgrounds and misfortunes, you realize it's NOT that black and white...

NVious
06-25-2017, 07:46 PM
I'm glad SillieBazzillie is a fellow U.S. citizen. We may disagree on things form time to time but I know he's a decent person.

On the other hand, I wouldn't let you anywhere near any member of my family. You honestly kind of sound like you are trying to justify what appears to be a severe empathy deficit.

I'm so heart broken.

At least you can maintain your family in their veil of ignorance and never confront them with hard facts like the fact that different racial groups have different political preferences.

It's truly amazing what estrogenic babies you liberals are, you have no argument but calling names and trying to virtue signal.

'WELL ID NEVER LET YOU NEAR MY FAMILY"

Great post bro, really destroyed the facts about libertarianism and contributed to this thread's topic. At least the other lefty babies on here know you're a virtuous person, hopefully you get reps for not letting an internet poster near your family for his wrongthink!!!

BrocepCurls
06-25-2017, 07:48 PM
Natural hierarchy exists, this is a law written into the CODE of the universe. Why would I want to be equal with an inferior, likewise why would a superior seek to be equal with me?

The universe is far more winner take all than our extremely egalitarian societies today would ever imagine, just watch:

fCn8zs912OE

If you live in the west, you're already in the 1% to begin with, but beyond that there are many means to acquire the things that every man desires in the west. Never before has the acquisition of looks/money/status been as openly available to everyone and that certainly wasn't the case under communism. Actually under communism, the ability for a man to create a desired life was next to impossible, you are not removing the hierarchy, you are just making it more extreme. The desire for wealth, outstanding friends and attractive mates doesn't go away no matter what system you use, you just make these things more scarce under communism, so you allow the worst to thrive

Communism is impractical because even within it's OWN system they idealize HIERARCHICAL ideas of:

Beauty (communist art isn't post modernist art)
Strength (communist sports and competitions aren't everyone is equal and we all come in the same place, the USSR actually had very successful Hockey, basketball, chess and other competitive teams)
Relationships (polyamorous otherkin weren't idealized, why aren't I entitled to your wife? Why don't we all share all the beautiful women instead of allowing the best men to have them?)

Communism just seeks to remove other hierarchies, it does not seek to destroy them all together because that's a self defeating task, it also exacerbates inequality as we see in Venezuela where the 1% looks like this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3192933/Hugo-Chavez-s-ambassador-daughter-Venezuela-s-richest-woman-according-new-report.html

Being the ex-President's daughter pays off: Hugo Chavez's ambassador daughter is Venezuela's richest woman


And EVERYONE is worse off for it.

There's a reason communism doesn't attract the people that it needs to succeed, no man with a functioning endocrine system or above average IQ can believe in such nonsense, the only reason it ever had success was because it served an evolutionary purpose for certain peoples, but the reality is that wherever you had legit right wing vs left wing battles commies got BTFO because they have no warriors as it's an effeminate ideology. The only way the Russians even defeated the Nazis was

1.Due to environment

2.Due to the fact that they were financed by many different groups, specifically the west

3.The fact that any soldiers caught deserting or turning back would be tortured, therefore death on the field was preferable

4.The west's involvement in stopping them

Regardless America was the biggest winner of WW2 and they were extremely right wing, almost fascist one could say in their world view.

The best example of the futility of communist "warriors" was what happened in Spain though as WW2 is a separate issue and Chile was just too easy.

In Catalonia you had VOLUNTARY communist soldiers who were "true believers" (George Orwell even fought) and they got BTFO by the right wing factions that emerged.

Communism is weak on all fronts:

1.Philosophically as open debate DESTROYS communism, there's a reason it doesn't exist in nations where the open exchange of ideas is more or less allowed
2.Spiritually as it inevitably turns into genocide
3.Economically as communist countries are poor AF
4.Militarily as true believer communists like antifa are weak low value men who are only allowed to exist because we don't live in scarce times

Yawn, got about 1/4 through this retarded rant before being reminded how uneducated and cringeworthy you are, I almost forgot over your ban

Communism isn't about 'everyone being equal', whatever that means. It's an economic system which opposes using the violent backing of the state to allow a certain class to profit from the labour of other individuals. If you work hard youll be rewarded above others. But you can't sit and collect from the hard work of thousands of other labourers underneath you, which is what happens under capitalism. Essentially it opposes institutional hierarchies, that is simply using an institution backed by state violence to establish dominance over other people.

Your whole rant seems to be nothing more than saying 'right wingers are better at violence', which isn't a great endorsement of whatever mish-mash ideology you even advocate. Society moved from feudalism to capitalism, which was a blow to authoritarians, and it can also move from capitalism to socialism/communism, which would be another blow to authoritarians like you.

Anyway let's not hijack the whole thread with a communism argument, you've been ethered enough times on this topic already

NVious
06-25-2017, 07:54 PM
Yawn, got about 1/4 through this retarded rant before being reminded how uneducated and cringeworthy you are, I almost forgot over your ban

Communism isn't about 'everyone being equal', whatever that means. It's an economic system which opposes using the violent backing of the state to allow a certain class to profit from the labour of other individuals. If you work hard youll be rewarded above others. But you can't sit and collect from the hard work of thousands of other labourers underneath you, which is what happens under capitalism. Essentially it opposes institutional hierarchies, that is simply using an institution backed by state violence to establish dominance over other peoe.

Your whole rant seems to be nothing more than saying 'right wingers are better at violence', which isn't a great endorsement of whatever mish-mash ideology you even advocate. Society moved from feudalism to capitalism, which was a blow to authoritarians, and it can also move from capitalism to socialism/communism, which would be another blow to authoritarians like you.

Anyway let's not hijack the whole thread with a communism argument, you've been ethered enough times on this topic already

I almost forgot over your ban

Good to see I'm so in your head you're keeping up with my postings.

Also good to see you're incapable of interacting with arguments, a great case of why I said:

1.Philosophically as open debate DESTROYS communism, there's a reason it doesn't exist in nations where the open exchange of ideas is more or less allowed

If you oppose hierarchy, you're about rabid egalitarianism.

Right wingers are better at violence, violence is required for political systems to work, hence why I brought up communism propensity for genocide. Communism will never rise in the west, socialized states sure, but never communism because the people advocating it are worthless weak individuals.

Ok let's let people get back to the topic, you have no arguments and if you're a communist in 2017, you're mentally ill to begin with and should be treated as such. My posts are not so much for you, but for clarifying arguments for other individuals who deal with mentally ill individuals like yourself.

beowulf10
06-25-2017, 07:55 PM
I'm so heart broken.

At least you can maintain your family in their veil of ignorance and never confront them with hard facts like the fact that different racial groups have different political preferences.

It's truly amazing what estrogenic babies you liberals are, you have no argument but calling names and trying to virtue signal.

'WELL ID NEVER LET YOU NEAR MY FAMILY"

Great post bro, really destroyed the facts about libertarianism and contributed to this thread's topic. At least the other lefty babies on here know you're a virtuous person, hopefully you get reps for not letting an internet poster near your family for his wrongthink!!!

I consider myself more of a libertarian than anything else, but when I see someone else in pain I still feel bad for them.

Do you feel bad when other people are in pain? Serious question. Family members? Friends? Strangers?

NVious
06-25-2017, 07:57 PM
I consider myself more of a libertarian than anything else, but when I see someone else in pain I still feel bad for them.

Do you feel bad when other people are in pain? Serious question.

Wow good for you man, does it hurt you that only white males care about that philosophy? Why have you failed to convince non-white male individuals? Serious question(s).

BrocepCurls
06-25-2017, 08:01 PM
I'm unironically starting to believe that Islam might be the only hope for Europe, given the binary choice the (((elite))) are presenting them between unthinkable degeneracy and the religion of the imported soon-to-be majority.

As an atheist I'd love it if our own imported replacement population had a massive, growing, powerful Christian (but not like our own White people Christian stuff, this is DIFFERENT because reasons) radical element too, because without an aggressive, untouchable, un-criticizeable religion to counter the rise of the insane left I can't see it having a happy ending.

I have no fukking idea what kind of spastic logic this is

mynameisuntz
06-25-2017, 08:07 PM
Islam: I used to fall for the notion that any criticism of Islamic ideas implied bigotry towards Muslims. I've since come full circle on this in the sense of being extremely critical of Islam as a set of ideas, but without making generalized claims about individual Muslims.

WarriorRustler
06-25-2017, 08:07 PM
I have no fukking idea what kind of spastic logic this is

Well I have no fukking idea what kind of spastic logic is needed to believe that people can eliminate government and be completely communist Anarchist where everyone just naturally knows their place in society without some authoritarian nut job reminding them everyday or else they'll be kicked out of the community for not knowing their place.

How does a person just naturally know their place in the community, and not want to strive for something greater if he or she so desires?

scooterbrah
06-25-2017, 08:20 PM
kind of always leaned blue. originally from a blue state, former union worker, used to care about other people, etc. but between being self employed and now that the left has become the side for severe corruption, fake news, serial killers, terrorist organizations(like blm, antifa, cnn, and isis), whiners, losers, and sjw's, i left them. cant really call myself a right winger as i hate guns, believe that abortions should be encouraged if not mandatory, believe in science, and am agnostic, etc i dont really fit in there either. hated trump until about a year ago and now love him which is weird but thats mainly because i am drawn to individuals whose mere presence causes anger for no reason. i also hate the clintons and chitbags like bernie sanders so he was the only logical option. plus he is best for business

at this point in my life my leanings are based on my wallet and not due to feelings

Ml16121
06-25-2017, 08:21 PM
I consider myself more of a libertarian than anything else, but when I see someone else in pain I still feel bad for them.

Do you feel bad when other people are in pain? Serious question. Family members? Friends? Strangers?

Your level of empathy really defines your political outlook above anything else. Most political rants are little more than people rationalizing their emotional state.

If they don't feel it, it's because "I believe in self sufficiency, personal responsibility, no excuses, no victimhood, if you do the work you will succeed" yada yada.

If they do feel it, it's because "compassion is real strength, Christians don't abandon their brothers, love is stronger than hate, we have to do everything in our power to end human suffering" yada yada.

What you think is really just a reflection of what you feel, and what you see around you (or more accurately, how you see it) is projection of who you are inside.

tk217
06-25-2017, 08:28 PM
Only if science dictates I should and empirical evidence is there.

wesleysh21
06-25-2017, 08:33 PM
Yup. When I was a teen I used to believe marx, engels and che guevara were good guys fighting greedy bastards. that communism was fighting for good and capitalism was bad.

when I grew up and saw reality, what really happened and what actual communism was and not the fairy tale portrayed by marxist teachers/educational system. I started questioning things and seeing them for what they were.

If USSR was a paradise and the capitalist west slavery, how come people were fleeing the communist side to the capitalist?

why did they have to put guards on the communist side to stop people fleeing to the other side?


why tens of thousands of cubans(living in a "commie paradise") throw themselves at high sea in improvised boats to escape to the most capitalist country in the world?

why people in socialist/welfare countries with many labour rights flee into freer and less regulated countries?


this is all just common sense and logic afterall.

but it seems some people are immune to it and still believe in fairy tales and fallacies.. even though it's been proven wrong, time after time.

There are not many positions that I feel "strongly" about and become willing to stand up and argue for/against. For most issues I side with giving as much latitude as possible by the law, and letting each person decide on their own what to do. One example is abortion. I've long been a person who thought when you got a girl pregnant it was just a blob that doesn't really "exist" until it is fully formed and can survive outside the womb. After having my daughter, I realize that for me personally, I felt it was a baby the minute I heard the heartbeat. I personally can't abort after that, its a legit baby. But I support others right to abort later.

Going back to the post I quoted, I am normally only passionate about economic issues. I'm another former Marxist who saw the light. I even took a class on Marxism in college (srs). After a series of red pills, I realized how wrong I was.

UTSoccerbro
06-25-2017, 08:58 PM
Used to oppose gay marriage as a kid, thanks mom and church.

Literally no reason other than family influence, outgrew that chit quick.

Used to be cool with the huge anti-drug stance by both neocons and mainline liberals, now I'm all for legalization.

Other than that, pretty conservative/libertarian.

Bentley41
06-25-2017, 09:01 PM
Plenty
Gay marriage, was raised ultra Christian, now I don't care and support it
Hard drugs, I think they should all be legal
Marijuana, I think should be legal
Probably more I can't think of

Stizzel
06-25-2017, 09:14 PM
Yes but not over night. Used to be a socialist.

DMoney818
06-25-2017, 09:19 PM
Yes. When I was younger I used to think that my people and the coalition of poc would be able to play identity politics until we won.

With Trump and white people thinking it's ok to do the same, I'm scared.

Nihiliste
06-25-2017, 09:36 PM
I went from extremely left leaning socially and economically when younger, to more centrist for a time, to extremely right leaning and reactionary in both domains, really over the last 3 years.

zinkhan99
06-25-2017, 09:38 PM
Coming from one of the countries that was oppressed and hindered by communism I can say that that college kid OP who thinks he has it all figured out is a fkin retard.

I'm sure your communism will be a glorious success this time :rolleyes: cringe

usersignup2
06-25-2017, 09:41 PM
I'm thinking about doing a 360 instead

XterraRob
06-25-2017, 09:57 PM
No but I find that the truth in politics exists when you start looking in between the party lines.

PickleBrah
06-25-2017, 10:04 PM
Yes, I've changed my political views on quite a few things and I assume I'll change them even more as I progress through life. It's very rare to find someone who's never changed their political views at all.

> I used to be a liberal in my early to late "teens" era.
> In my early twenties I was a libertarian (until I realized that's just not possible nowadays.) *Note: If I thought that it could work, I'd be pro "this".
> I use to believe that women should hold the same roles as men within our society, I have now changed that opinion.
> I used to believe in the 1965 immigration act, I no longer do.
> I used to support Israel, I now see it as a "terrorist state".
> I used to think our government was honest and that real change could be made at the voting booth, I have since redacted that belief and replaced it with melancholy.
> For a VERY short stint, I actually believed Communism could work and that it was like it was being portrayed by Communists (I have since grown up and realized how inhumane it is and what it does to countries and the peoples within it.)
> I used to be a complete nihilist, but have changed my views on religion and its role within society.
> I have changed my opinion slightly on the concept of "freedom" and the way we currently viewed it, as opposed to what the founding fathers had in mind.

Dave22reborn
06-25-2017, 10:37 PM
If humans ever actually realised en masse that they don't need to submit to authoritarian power structures (something Marx referred to as class consciousness) then ideologies like socialism or communism are perfectly possible. The problem now, evidenced by what you said, is that people seem to think that we just have to submit to a ruling class in order to have a stable and functioning society.

People said the same thing back when society was ruled by slave owning Pharoahs. They said the same when the Feudal lords were the masters in medieval Europe. And they're saying the same thing now when corporations and the capitalist elite run society. But in each of those cases, society moved forward and people did become relatively more free (except the last one, which we're still working on).

And yet you can't even name one single place where communism worked.

Austanian
06-25-2017, 10:42 PM
Healthcare - I now support universal. (Less of a flip and more of a best possible option given where we are at)
Abortion - Was fully anti. Now I am full support for first trimester.
Gay Rights, but not really - I use to be an Ally... Now I am a racist bigot. None of my positions changed.
Formerly open minded for Islamic immigration - now fully against.


And yet you can't even name one single place where communism worked.

He doesn't even think you should have ownership of your own ideas. I don't know why you even bother.

sawoobley
06-25-2017, 11:07 PM
I used to think republicans could solve some of the nations major problems. Then they changed, I recognized it and now their only value is in keeping insane liberals out of office. Only the individual citizens of the country with the help of local and state legislators can change things around.

TDKSparda
06-26-2017, 12:09 AM
Used to believe in social mobility.

PenorBrahNoHomo
06-26-2017, 12:25 AM
I consider myself more of a libertarian than anything else, but when I see someone else in pain I still feel bad for them.

Do you feel bad when other people are in pain? Serious question. Family members? Friends? Strangers?

Another retard who doesn't know what empathy is. (Hint: it isn't feeling sorry for people)

Lord_Lemon
06-26-2017, 03:57 AM
I used to have a harder stance on entilements but after my mom lost her job and is unable to work because of her degrading health, I softened up alot and see the need to help our poor and disabled with food stamps and healthcare without equivocation. There should definitely be mandatory and periodically done drug tests however to deem who's applicable. The process to get on disability, at least here in Florida, is a joke. It's a 2+ year process.

BrocepCurls
06-26-2017, 04:34 AM
I used to have a harder stance on entilements but after my mom lost her job and is unable to work because of her degrading health, I softened up alot and see the need to help our poor and disabled with food stamps and healthcare without equivocation. There should definitely be mandatory and periodically done drug tests however to deem who's applicable. The process to get on disability, at least here in Florida, is a joke. It's a 2+ year process.

That's cool, the typical conservative stance on it (everyone on welfare is just a lazy leech) is pretty much entirely detached from reality

ManxCat
06-26-2017, 04:41 AM
Yeah, women's rights.

If I had my way women wouldn't be allowed to vote and it would be lawful to discriminate against them in terms of employment and our society would a 1000 times better.

BRB whole family, no single moms
BRB men are more alpha, much less cucks
BRB the left as we know it doesn't exist, no more dumb pollyanna policies
BRB women are far happier fulfilling prime biological directive of having kids and raising them instead of having a 'career'

I actually agree with that, I find females pretty much impossible to work with, I reckon thats part of the reason why they're so nasty at work, because they deep down resent it and actually want to be at home instead.

HoganIsGOAT
06-26-2017, 04:54 AM
Is there a particular issue which you vehemently argued for in a particular direction, only to later do a total 180 and change your view to the opposite stance?

What was it and why did you change?

Gay marriage and legalization of MJ. I've become more socially liberal through age and experience, and generally speaking I don't really care what individual people do as long as it doesn't harm others. That being said, I also realize that some social issues have consequences if the majority of people start doing it (eg: a majority smoking marijuana may weaken productivity/drive), so that is a potential long term, big picture concern.

My position on MJ probably came from government misinformation and a bias against it based on my previous career. I discovered the truth on my own and although I do not partake, I am for complete legalization.

My position on gay marriage probably came from the influence of societal norms and not enough exposure to LGBTQRSTUVQXYZ culture. I look back now and say "Who the hell am I to say other people who just want to be happy can't get married" because of a man-written book or some other ridiculous reason. And I say that as someone who very much believes in the family unit and believes having a majority of families in society with a male and female parent is important, and generally speaking, the best case scenario. I think most of us know a gay/lesbian or bi person (whether we know it or not). We've all heard of girls experimenting with other girls in college, but I do believe that males specifically have a larger population of bisexuals than suspected, due to societal norms and cultures preventing them from coming to terms with it, or being honest about it.

I could probably write a more detailed explanation, but ain't nobody readin' that ****.

BetaAsPhuck
06-26-2017, 04:58 AM
Libertarianism to... A post-scarcity society based in automation. (I was in political limbo for many, many years.)

The documentary the corporation helped me to begin question libertarianism.

Brief research into ethical philosophy, economics, and transhumanism helped me to become interested in a post-scarcity economy.

BrocepCurls
06-26-2017, 05:01 AM
Libertarianism to... A post-scarcity society based in automation. (I was in political limbo for many, many years.)

The documentary the corporation helped me to begin question libertarianism.

Brief research into ethical philosophy, economics, and transhumanism helped me to become interested in a post-scarcity economy.

"Libertarianism" seems to be a philosophy that the majority of people grow out of once they actually do a little research into the history of our economic and political systems

jtaylor2010
06-26-2017, 05:02 AM
I've always been pretty moderate but used to lean a little more left and now I lean more right. None of my political views have drastically changed, but again I'm definitely more conservative now. The one thing I was horribly wrong about was the slippery slope argument. I used to always think that if the only argument a person had was "it's a slippery slope" then they didn't have any argument at all. After watching the Western World slip and slide down this slope for my entire adult life(and longer) I realized just how dangerous it is. Not only have I gone further right but I realized we have to dig our heels in and let everyone know "we won't willingly go any farther down this slope" regardless of how many brain dead leftists call us bigots.

BetaAsPhuck
06-26-2017, 05:04 AM
Another retard who doesn't know what empathy is. (Hint: it isn't feeling sorry for people)

From what I've read there are 3 different meanings of empathy...

Cognitive empathy... Seeing other's perspective. (Psychopaths can have that form of emapthy)

Emotional empathy... Feeling other's feelings (joy, sadness, contentment, anger, etc)

Empathic concern... Synonymous with compassion.

BetaAsPhuck
06-26-2017, 05:07 AM
"Libertarianism" seems to be a philosophy that the majority of people grow out of once they actually do a little research into the history of our economic and political systems

Not IME.

That majority of people online seem to think that capitalism (which is synonymous with libertarian economics) exists. Unregulated and undirected markets don't exist anywhere based on what I've read, and yet many people seem to either criticise or support 'capitalist countries'.

Stizzel
06-26-2017, 06:00 AM
Not IME.

That majority of people online seem to think that capitalism (which is synonymous with libertarian economics) exists. Unregulated and undirected markets don't exist anywhere based on what I've read, and yet many people seem to either criticise or support 'capitalist countries'.

There are degrees of free capitalism. For example china is obviously not a free market but they have made changes to allow more economic freedom. Neither korea is a free market but south korea decided approximately 70 years ago to allow for a more capitalist system whereas north korea did not. They were both dirt poor at the time.

The most recent example of a real free market was the western territories of the united states before the government was able to expand there.

kusok
06-26-2017, 06:03 AM
I've done a 360.

GolfPants
06-26-2017, 06:28 AM
Yeah I actually did the opposite of what most people do.

I went in to college pretty lefty and came out completely libertarian/conservative

Thelonebadwolf
06-26-2017, 06:35 AM
As a kid I wondered why my parents had such a disdain for Arab governments as Iranians. Why would someone hate their neighbors. I thought peace between the Persians and Arabs would foster some new outcomes.

I also was Pro Palestinian at a point.

Then I read about Iran-Iraq War, how the Palestinians cheered for Saddam, how Saudi financed them. Then I realized Jews and Persians should be natural allies vs Arab unity.

Then 9/11 happened. Now I knew why my semi religious dad referred to Wahhabis as scum of the earth.

TsarChasm
06-26-2017, 06:42 AM
When I was in high school I started looking into politics. Before that I leaned Dem because in Massachusetts thats what everyone did. I just followed along with the rhetoric even though I honestly didn't really pay attention to politics. I didn't really understand what each side represented. I am guessing this is where a majority of our country lies.

I started gaining interest and reading a lot about politics and world affairs and eventually 'red pilled' myself. It really started for me around 9-11 and the Iraq wars. I started to see how things actually worked and how war is a big business and I just continued down that rabbit hole.
I also starting reading a lot about social conditioning and questioning why things are the way they are. How do trends start? How does the flow of information work and influence societies etc.

One big thing I have changed my view on is about Islam. I believe the Progressive propaganda machine is ultimately social conditioning for accepting a Caliphate.

YesiEvenLiftBro
06-26-2017, 06:53 AM
Is there a particular issue which you vehemently argued for in a particular direction, only to later do a total 180 and change your view to the opposite stance?

What was it and why did you change?

Pot legalization,

Used to be anti, now pro, had a preconception when I was anti legalization that marijuana being legal was a net bad for communities in general and could lead to wider use of drugs in general. I then saw evidence to the contrary and heard arguments that made analogies to prohibition and realized there are social benefits to having it legalized as well as cons and it seems to make drug use both safer and less prevalent while generating tax revenue at the same time.

Also death penalty, when I was a kid I grew up between the U.S. and Canada and it didn't make sense to me why Canada did not put killers to death, it actually bothered me. I later changed my opinion on this. I learned about why Canada stopped using the death penalty. I also realized it is actually very expensive to have capital trials. I also came to the conclusion that rotting in a maximum security cage surrounded by other violent criminals for the rest of your entire life is probably much worse then simply being executed, they both reach the same conclusion.

TsarChasm
06-26-2017, 06:58 AM
Libertarianism to... A post-scarcity society based in automation. (I was in political limbo for many, many years.)

The documentary the corporation helped me to begin question libertarianism.

Brief research into ethical philosophy, economics, and transhumanism helped me to become interested in a post-scarcity economy.

I also am interested in this type of stuff however, I don't believe we have to live in a "Minority Report" type society where every footstep is documented to achieve post-scarcity.

Individual freedom should be preserved no matter how technologically advanced we may become.

Some peoples ideas of a post scarcity utopian society are different.

Dave22reborn
06-26-2017, 06:58 AM
I kind of have the same views as i did when i was 13-14. I sort of believed in God when i was real young, but became an athiest.

BetaAsPhuck
06-26-2017, 07:09 AM
Individual freedom should be preserved no matter how technologically advanced we may become.

I don't agree with that.

I don't like the idea of anyone and everyone having access to guns or biochemical weapons. (Even many pro-gun advocates call for restrictions regarding mental health history, weapons grade plutonium, etc.)

There's a trilogy of fiction that I highly recommend (the Author is a respected futurist and invertor) called Nexus By Ramez Naam. I really like that he presented an ethically ambigious exploration of a transhumanist society. It showed the possible dangers, and benefits simultaneously. Very real possibilities IMO.

Transhumanist technology could potentially liberate or threaten humanity as a whole (ditto AI).

BetaAsPhuck
06-26-2017, 07:14 AM
There are degrees of free capitalism. For example china is obviously not a free market but they have made changes to allow more economic freedom. Neither korea is a free market but south korea decided approximately 70 years ago to allow for a more capitalist system whereas north korea did not. They were both dirt poor at the time.

I agree that there are degrees.

IME many people don't think in degress or nuance, and literally believe that China is a communist state, when it's a mixed economic/political system. Like everywhere on the planet. With some facets of the economic and political system inclining towards different places on the ideological map.

Stizzel
06-26-2017, 07:14 AM
I don't agree with that.

I don't like the idea of anyone and everyone having access to guns or biochemical weapons. (Even many pro-gun advocates call for restrictions regarding mental health history, weapons grade plutonium, etc.)

There's a trilogy of fiction that I highly recommend (the Author is a respected futurist and invertor) called Nexus By Ramez Naam. I really like that he presented an ethically ambigious exploration of a transhumanist society. It showed the possible dangers, and benefits simultaneously. Very real possibilities IMO.

Transhumanist technology could potentially liberate or threaten humanity as a whole (ditto AI).

Its unfortunate that you've allowed fear to impede your ability to think rationally

BetaAsPhuck
06-26-2017, 07:24 AM
Its unfortunate that you've allowed fear to impede your ability to think rationally

That's not an argument. It seems to be an intended character attack.

What specifically do you disagree with, and why?

Stizzel
06-26-2017, 07:39 AM
That's not an argument. It seems to be an intended character attack.

What specifically do you disagree with, and why?

Obviously its not an argument its an observation. No matter what "individuals" are going to have access to this technology, unless you think that a person that gets into a position of political power stops being a person.

You're so afraid of people having weapons that scare you that you've convinced yourself that only the most degenerate, corrupt and violence prone individuals in society - politicians - should have access to them. Because you read a science fiction novel about it.

Im not saying you shouldnt be concerned, but important topics warrant a rational analysis.

And Im not attacking your character. If I thought you were unintelligent I'd say so. Ask anyone here :)

ZenBowman
06-26-2017, 08:27 AM
1) Used to believe libertarianism was a viable policy, now I consider it even more destructive than unrestrained liberalism.
2) I used to think socialism was a good thing, now I consider it the most evil ideology, on par with Nazism. Equality of opportunity or equality of outcome are both utopian ideas that lead to tyranny. In contrast, equality under the law, and respecting all people with equal dignity are good.

BrocepCurls
06-26-2017, 08:38 AM
1) Used to believe libertarianism was a viable policy, now I consider it even more destructive than unrestrained liberalism.
2) I used to think socialism was a good thing, now I consider it the most evil ideology, on par with Nazism. Equality of opportunity or equality of outcome are both utopian ideas that lead to tyranny. In contrast, equality under the law, and respecting all people with equal dignity are good.

Lol'd cringe level > 9000, did you learn this from a PragerU video?

Socialism at it's core is nothing other than the idea of introducing bottom-up, non-authoritarian control to the workplace. Rather than one person sitting at the top and dictating the working life of the thousands or millions of workers beneath him, and gaining billions in personal wealth solely through collecting from their labour, socialism advocates autonomy, ownership and proper compensation for those thousands or millions of workers.

Such ideas were hugely popular among the mill and factory workers of the US during the industrial revolution. These people had never heard of the word socialism, yet understood the concept behind it and its value. Abraham Lincoln himself compared being a wage labourer to chattel slavery, and this position was also commonplace among the workers at the time. Decades of propoganda and opposition from the capitalist class beat these ideas out of the heads of workers and in the head of today's self-hating wage cucks it's nowhere to be seen.

NVious
06-26-2017, 08:48 AM
Lol'd cringe level > 9000, did you learn this from a PragerU video?

Socialism at it's core is nothing other than the idea of introducing bottom-up, non-authoritarian control to the workplace. Rather than one person sitting at the top and dictating the working life of the thousands or millions of workers beneath him, and gaining billions in personal wealth solely through collecting from their labour, socialism advocates autonomy, ownership and proper compensation for those thousands or millions of workers.

Such ideas were hugely popular among the mill and factory workers of the US during the industrial revolution. These people had never heard of the word socialism, yet understood the concept behind it and its value. Abraham Lincoln himself compared being a wage labourer to chattel slavery, and this position was also commonplace among the workers at the time. Decades of propoganda and opposition from the capitalist class beat these ideas out of the heads of workers and in the head of today's self-hating wage cucks it's nowhere to be seen.

Yeah rather than one person sitting at the top and dictating work life, you have one person sitting at the top and dictating every aspect of your nation, SO MUCH BETTER!!!!

OlB_xNOAn1c

fitfanatic123
06-26-2017, 08:58 AM
Is there a particular issue which you vehemently argued for in a particular direction, only to later do a total 180 and change your view to the opposite stance?

What was it and why did you change?

Yes, I used to think that everyone should try to help everyone else.

Then one of my friend's from high school wanted Bernie to win so she and her husband could have all of their student loans forgiven meanwhile she was pregnant with her second child living in her parent's basement at 26. Like maybe you could have held off on having kids until you got your student loans to a reasonable level.

I then realized I don't want to help people who are extremely irresponsible with financial decisions and i only want to worry about myself.

mynameisuntz
06-26-2017, 09:02 AM
Yes, I used to think that everyone should try to help everyone else.

Then one of my friend's from high school wanted Bernie to win so she and her husband could have all of their student loans forgiven meanwhile she was pregnant with her second child living in her parent's basement at 26. Like maybe you could have held off on having kids until you got your student loans to a reasonable level.

I then realized I don't want to help people who are extremely irresponsible with financial decisions and i only want to worry about myself.

Isn't a larger problem the fact that educated people need to decide between having kids vs. being able to pay off excessive student loans? When costs of college have increased exponentially while wages have stagnated, isn't that a larger problem than the tough decisions people face?

I'm all for personal responsibility and people having to make tough decisions, but it's a different topic entirely when those tough decisions entail a system that is corrupted on some level.

mxglife
06-26-2017, 09:03 AM
"Shocking that people use data when looking at political beliefs, must be hard for you not to virtue signal about your anti racism." virtue signal? anti racism?

Lol you must be either a troll or a dumb*ss. His original claim was that only white people are the ones who care about Libertarianism, you proceed to call him racist simply because he used the word white (I think you're the racist one actually), he shows you data that shows that 94% of Libertarians are white and you don't understand what his point is?

HoganIsGOAT
06-26-2017, 09:03 AM
Gay marriage and legalization of MJ. I've become more socially liberal through age and experience, and generally speaking I don't really care what individual people do as long as it doesn't harm others. That being said, I also realize that some social issues have consequences if the majority of people start doing it (eg: a majority smoking marijuana may weaken productivity/drive), so that is a potential long term, big picture concern.

My position on MJ probably came from government misinformation and a bias against it based on my previous career. I discovered the truth on my own and although I do not partake, I am for complete legalization.

My position on gay marriage probably came from the influence of societal norms and not enough exposure to LGBTQRSTUVQXYZ culture. I look back now and say "Who the hell am I to say other people who just want to be happy can't get married" because of a man-written book or some other ridiculous reason. And I say that as someone who very much believes in the family unit and believes having a majority of families in society with a male and female parent is important, and generally speaking, the best case scenario. I think most of us know a gay/lesbian or bi person (whether we know it or not). We've all heard of girls experimenting with other girls in college, but I do believe that males specifically have a larger population of bisexuals than suspected, due to societal norms and cultures preventing them from coming to terms with it, or being honest about it.

I could probably write a more detailed explanation, but ain't nobody readin' that ****.

Bump, as I want Brocep's direct feedback.

fitfanatic123
06-26-2017, 09:07 AM
Isn't a larger problem the fact that educated people need to decide between having kids vs. being able to pay off excessive student loans? When costs of college have increased exponentially while wages have stagnated, isn't that a larger problem than the tough decisions people face?

I'm all for personal responsibility and people having to make tough decisions, but it's a different topic entirely when those tough decisions entail a system that is corrupted on some level.

Yes I agree. but i just felt like they could have put off having kids until 30, lived at home to save money and made a few other sacrifices to get the debt lower before having kids. Now that is a smart, financially responsible decision (in my opinion). But because they so desperately wanted kids at 25 they now want everyone else to bail them out. It doesn't work that way. I don't want to be responsible for others in society when they are completely irresponsible and reckless with their decisions.

mynameisuntz
06-26-2017, 09:09 AM
Yes I agree. but i just felt like they could have put off having kids until 30, lived at home to save money and made a few other sacrifices to get the debt lower before having kids. Now that is a smart, financially responsible decision (in my opinion). But because they so desperately wanted kids at 25 they now want everyone else to bail them out. It doesn't work that way. I don't want to be responsible for others in society when they are completely irresponsible and reckless with their decisions.

That seems fair, though I'd argue it's ultimately inescapable. No matter what society you construct, there will be some/many who take advantage of others.

ZenBowman
06-26-2017, 09:10 AM
Yes, I used to think that everyone should try to help everyone else.

Then one of my friend's from high school wanted Bernie to win so she and her husband could have all of their student loans forgiven meanwhile she was pregnant with her second child living in her parent's basement at 26. Like maybe you could have held off on having kids until you got your student loans to a reasonable level.

I then realized I don't want to help people who are extremely irresponsible with financial decisions and i only want to worry about myself.

I do want to help the financially irresponsible and destitute.

But I want to do it of my own volition, not have the financially irresponsible dictate what percentage of my income I should keep.

Charity is always good, but forceful redistribution is not.

fitfanatic123
06-26-2017, 09:13 AM
I do want to help the financially irresponsible and destitute.

But I want to do it of my own volition, not have the financially irresponsible dictate what percentage of my income I should keep.

Charity is always good, but forceful redistribution is not.

Absolutely, definitely agree.

Kansas123
06-26-2017, 09:14 AM
I used to be against abortion but then I started thinking about how some kid will get handed to a non blood stranger not knowing who their parents were and knowing that they were a mistake and unwanted.

And a lot less crack babies. Nothing rustles my jimmies more than hearing stories of babies being born with addictions.

Inb4 I was adopted and I turned out great.

but in public speaking class they wouldn't talk about abortion because it's not a topic you can sway each other's opinions on.

Edit: I also don't understand how schools aren't getting enough money. Brb my school had all smart boards, laptops, special sport bus that was painted and everything, turf field, and all that good stuff and we were a rural school that was definitely not rich. It's a budgeting problem.

BetaAsPhuck
06-26-2017, 09:29 AM
You're so afraid of people having weapons that scare you that you've convinced yourself that only the most degenerate, corrupt and violence prone individuals in society - politicians - should have access to them. Because you read a science fiction novel about it.

I'm not sure why you think that was the beginning and end of my thought process.

I've been researching into transhumanism for a while, in various ways.

I don't agree with allowing anyone and everyone to have access to weapons grade plutonium, biochemical weapons, 3D printed guns, gene-editing, etc. Do you?

With things like CRISPR, civilian biochemical weapon manufacturing is becoming a serious possible threat...

https://www.seeker.com/could-crispr-gene-editing-produce-a-biological-weapon-2104864761.html

Do you not agree with any regulation?


And Im not attacking your character. If I thought you were unintelligent I'd say so. Ask anyone here :)

Character =/= intelligence.

Saying that however, you thought I based my view off of reading a science fiction novel.

BrocepCurls
06-26-2017, 09:47 AM
Bump, as I want Brocep's direct feedback.

Seems reasonably common to make the shift you made, social conservatism has been dying for a long time, and you ultimately can't claim to be a 'small government conservative' whilst still demanding the government limits people's personal life choices.

HoganIsGOAT
06-26-2017, 09:49 AM
Seems reasonably common to make the shift you made, social conservatism has been dying for a long time, and you ultimately can't claim to be a 'small government conservative' whilst still demanding the government limits people's personal life choices.

Agreed. Thanks.

BrocepCurls
06-26-2017, 10:06 AM
Gun ownership

- didn't grow up with guns around, never felt the need to own one, never went hunting, thought the NRA was a bunch of wankers
- now i am pro second amendment, plan on buying a firearm, and still think the NRA are a bunch of wankers




Aside from that its all more or less the same. Live and let live. We're all gonna end up in the dirt some day, no real point to live your life so heavily divided and angry toward your neighbors.

Gun control was my big 180 shift too. Back when I was a Tory and then later on more of a liberal, I was firmly anti-gun through and through and my old posts on this forum showed it. These days I'm as pro gun as they come, one thing that I do applaud the US for

jbball92
06-26-2017, 10:14 AM
I used to somewhat respect libtards

bryan324
06-26-2017, 11:07 AM
Yes, I was young and an independent Obama's first term and thought I aligned with his message and policies. I'm now 30 and more conservative/libertarian. I now realiize that it's impossible for the government to put everyone on a level playing field, and at some point personal accountability comes into play.

xXxHussarxXx
06-26-2017, 11:40 AM
I used to be a total lefty. I wanted Obama to win in 2012, thought he was a great president, said that women and minorities need help because they don't have the advantages of white privilege. I was like 14 though so I had an excuse to be an idiot.

TsarChasm
06-26-2017, 12:58 PM
Lol'd cringe level > 9000, did you learn this from a PragerU video?

Socialism at it's core is nothing other than the idea of introducing bottom-up, non-authoritarian control to the workplace. Rather than one person sitting at the top and dictating the working life of the thousands or millions of workers beneath him, and gaining billions in personal wealth solely through collecting from their labour, socialism advocates autonomy, ownership and proper compensation for those thousands or millions of workers.

Such ideas were hugely popular among the mill and factory workers of the US during the industrial revolution. These people had never heard of the word socialism, yet understood the concept behind it and its value. Abraham Lincoln himself compared being a wage labourer to chattel slavery, and this position was also commonplace among the workers at the time. Decades of propoganda and opposition from the capitalist class beat these ideas out of the heads of workers and in the head of today's self-hating wage cucks it's nowhere to be seen.



Except that small businesses still are a driving force in this country. Someone that grew their business from scratch into a thriving enterprise should not impeded from doing so. The less barrier of entry and regulation of small businesses, the better.

Labor markets exist for a reason. While I do believe we should adjust wages with inflation and cost of living increases, I think overall they should be market and competition driven. Higher skills and higher barrier of entry positions will be compensated accordingly.

This is a labor market if you raise the bottom of the barrel skill set to $15 an hour, everyone is going to get a raise. However it will be a wash because the price of everything will raise accordingly.

NYPat
06-26-2017, 01:05 PM
This is as good a spot as any for the quote,

"If you're young and you're not a democrat you have no heart. If you're old and you're not a republican you have no brain".

But I thought Trump said he loves the poorly educated?..

TimDF
06-26-2017, 01:11 PM
I use to be against gay marriage years ago, now I don't care.

BrocepCurls
06-26-2017, 02:01 PM
Except that small businesses still are a driving force in this country. Someone that grew their business from scratch into a thriving enterprise should not impeded from doing so. The less barrier of entry and regulation of small businesses, the better.

Labor markets exist for a reason. While I do believe we should adjust wages with inflation and cost of living increases, I think overall they should be market and competition driven. Higher skills and higher barrier of entry positions will be compensated accordingly.

This is a labor market if you raise the bottom of the barrel skill set to $15 an hour, everyone is going to get a raise. However it will be a wash because the price of everything will raise accordingly.

These points may be valid in a different discussion, but frankly they have nothing to do with what I said

LargePeter
06-26-2017, 02:12 PM
Always conservative, used to believe taxes were necessary
Still conservative, but believe taxation is theft

BrocepCurls
06-26-2017, 02:15 PM
Always conservative, used to believe taxes were necessary
Still conservative, but believe taxation is theft

Makes 0 sense, boyo

TDKSparda
06-26-2017, 02:27 PM
Still conservative, but believe taxation is theft

Can you explain your reasoning please?

Bassackwards
06-26-2017, 02:38 PM
i used to be somewhat liberal until i started making money. pissed me off that the more i made, the more of it was taxed to pay for services i would never use and for people that will never work
use to be anti gay marriage until i got married. then realized gays should also have the chance to spend the rest of their life with someone and get the benefits of it..... and also enjoy the pain and suffering of divorce
used to be anti abortion, then pro......then back to anti. many moons ago, i was banging my ex and she got pregnant. i was against but she had it anyways. looking back though, i felt she made the right decision. no way were we ready for parenthood, financially, emotionally, etc..... then i got married and had a family of my own. after seeing and hearing my kid's heart beat, i had a switch in my opinion again. she murdered that baby..... fukc, the kid would be 19 years old....

skinnyFAT91
06-26-2017, 04:22 PM
Welfare - Support it because there are decent folk that need it. Support drug testing and after 3 kids, you get the same amount. MEANING if you have 12 kids, you only get support for 3. Its a major loop hole a decent amount of woman like to use.

Regulation to an extent. Corps will become huge through acquisitions and fuk consumers. Pharma needs regulation, would solve a lot of the health care issues we have to day.

Anti War - If were attacked sure, war. But attacking other countries for questionable chit has got to stop. (Vietnam, Iraq, Korea, Syria). Very few thing can justify getting thousands of people killed. Saddam kill a few thousand people sure, but chit was in order and hundreds of thousands of lives were not lost because of the power vacuum left behind.

Health care is kinda 180 for me either socialize it or let it be private. Not this half and half bs like Obamacare

Abortion was firmly for but im kinda in the middle now. (strict rules on it, not a free for all)

NYPat
06-26-2017, 08:08 PM
Gun control was my big 180 shift too. Back when I was a Tory and then later on more of a liberal, I was firmly anti-gun through and through and my old posts on this forum showed it. These days I'm as pro gun as they come, one thing that I do applaud the US for

The US has a gun problem that other countries don't. I don't have a problem with defending your property, but there are too many guns. They end up being sold on the street and used to commit crimes, putting innocent bystanders and police in harms way.

5x10
06-26-2017, 08:10 PM
Grew up republican
Older I got, the harder it was for me to side with either one
I feel it's a good ol boy system, there really aren't two sides, just a front
Which is why I like trump, his ego is too big for the system

NYPat
06-26-2017, 08:14 PM
Grew up republican
Older I got, the harder it was for me to side with either one
I feel it's a good ol boy system, there really aren't two sides, just a front
Which is why I like trump, his ego is too big for the system

The problem with Trump is he's not qualified. I don't like getting ripped off by tradies, but I wouldn't hire a non-tradie to do a tradie job. In the end, I'd rather be ripped off and have someone competent do the job.

5x10
06-26-2017, 08:16 PM
The problem with Trump is he's not qualified. I don't like getting ripped off by tradies, but I wouldn't hire a non-tradie to do a tradie job. In the end, I'd rather be ripped off and have someone competent do the job.i still feel he's better than the status quo
He isn't a politician

And I disagree that the current(pre trump) tradies are doing the job

dyee4613
06-26-2017, 08:20 PM
Is there a particular issue which you vehemently argued for in a particular direction, only to later do a total 180 and change your view to the opposite stance?

What was it and why did you change?
i was a liberal in college.
i became a libertarian outside of college

so pretty much every issue

NYPat
06-26-2017, 08:27 PM
i still feel he's better than the status quo
He isn't a politician

And I disagree that the current(pre trump) tradies are doing the job

How is a real estate developer better qualified than a person who spent their entire life in politics? He doesn't even have a basic understanding of how the government works. Why on Earth does it make sense to hire/elect someone to do a job they're not qualified for?

Trump will have to spend his first (and only partial term) learning to do a job he doesn't fully understand.

5x10
06-26-2017, 08:55 PM
How is a real estate developer better qualified than a person who spent their entire life in politics? He doesn't even have a basic understanding of how the government works. Why on Earth does it make sense to hire/elect someone to do a job they're not qualified for?

Trump will have to spend his first (and only partial term) learning to do a job he doesn't fully understand.

Simply because I think the current system is rigged, its not about you or I, but the politicians and their cronies
I would agree with you if I though the pre trump politicians were in it for us
But life long politicians with deep roots in the current system are the problem, imo
When both the left, the right, the media all hated him, I thought he was perfect for the job

I'm sure you will Disagree but I really do think trump is in it for America, much more than the lifelong crop we have today
If I'm wrong, he will be an ineffective politician and a liar, like all that preceded him

NYPat
06-26-2017, 09:07 PM
Simply because I think the current system is rigged, its not about you or I, but the politicians and their cronies
I would agree with you if I though the pre trump politicians were in it for us
But life long politicians with deep roots in the current system are the problem, imo
When both the left, the right, the media all hated him, I thought he was perfect for the job

I'm sure you will Disagree but I really do think trump is in it for America, much more than the lifelong crop we have today
If I'm wrong, he will be an ineffective politician and a liar, like all that preceded him

I did think the previous administration was in it for us. They gave Americans health care they previously couldn't get.

But at the same time, I have no problem with anyone who didn't want Hillary, although I admit I would have preferred Hillary over Trump (for the reasons I explained earlier).

You said Trump is in it for America. He is fixated on undoing everything Obama did and delivering on wild campaign promises he didn't think through. I'm not sure that's what best for our country. The thought process is lacking.

Baylorballs
06-26-2017, 09:16 PM
Yeah, women's rights.

If I had my way women wouldn't be allowed to vote and it would be lawful to discriminate against them in terms of employment and our society would a 1000 times better.

BRB whole family, no single moms
BRB men are more alpha, much less cucks
BRB the left as we know it doesn't exist, no more dumb pollyanna policies
BRB women are far happier fulfilling prime biological directive of having kids and raising them instead of having a 'career'

The thing is , there's still millions and millions of very attractive women, wanting to do exactly what you stated above. You just need to be making $150k minimum a year to be able to support her and the kids alone on your salary, and enjoy all the creature comforts of modern day.


Times are a changin'

5x10
06-26-2017, 09:22 PM
I did think the previous administration was in it for us. They gave Americans health care they previously couldn't get.

But at the same time, I have no problem with anyone who didn't want Hillary, although I admit I would have preferred Hillary over Trump (for the reasons I explained earlier).

You said Trump is in it for America. He is fixated on undoing everything Obama did and delivering on wild campaign promises he didn't think through. I'm not sure that's what best for our country. The thought process is lacking.were just gonna have to agree to disagree on the previous admin

BrocepCurls
06-27-2017, 03:57 AM
The US has a gun problem that other countries don't. I don't have a problem with defending your property, but there are too many guns. They end up being sold on the street and used to commit crimes, putting innocent bystanders and police in harms way.

The US has an overall crime problem but little evidence that it is correlated with guns, eg. when you look at the changes in crime rates over the past 30 years and compare it to the changes in gun legislation

pUniCepts
06-27-2017, 04:36 AM
Yeah, women's rights.

If I had my way women wouldn't be allowed to vote and it would be lawful to discriminate against them in terms of employment and our society would a 1000 times better.
But misogynists should be allowed to vote?


BRB whole family, no single moms
How does this follow taking away women's rights?


BRB men are more alpha, much less cucks
The only thing that makes a man alpha is himself, not women, not other men.


BRB the left as we know it doesn't exist, no more dumb pollyanna policies
Again, how does this follow?


BRB women are far happier fulfilling prime biological directive of having kids and raising them instead of having a 'career'
Who are you to decide what makes someone happy, and further to base your decision on sex?

Hate to break it to you, but you'll still be a beta cuck if women lose rights.

GhenghisPWN
06-27-2017, 04:47 AM
I was a liberal until 5 years ago. Cringe worthy looking back at some of my R/P posts defending Democrats. I remember how happy I was when Obama won in 2008.

Then I got a career, house, etc and became self sufficient. Obviously self-sufficiency and liberal thinking doesn't mix. I think as you grow up you finally see liberalism for the bullsh*t it really is... a thought process for the self-induced "victims" and the largest hate group in America. Never happy, nothing is ever enough, and corrupt to its core.

I don't get your post. Home ownership and having a job clashed with being a Democrat?

terrysorange
06-27-2017, 04:49 AM
I don't get your post. Home ownership and having a job clashed with being a Democrat?

The brain rot/hivemind among some of the posters here is hilarious