It seems like modern politics is built on tying two positions together, one logical and one incredibly unpopular. For example, you can't have an anti-Islam party that isn't also natalist.

posted 4 days ago by DresdenFirebomber 4 days ago by DresdenFirebomber +3 / -5

Natalism literally disproves every argument people make about deportations. If there aren't enough jobs, why are you subsidizing births?!

10 comments

10 comments share save hide report block hide replies

You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.

Comments (10)

sorted by:

▲ 3 ▼

– free-will-of-choice 3 points 4 days ago +3 / -0

truth is subjective so what I imagine is as equally valid as whatever anyone else thinks

Nature implies equal; being implies differential...subjecting to true or false information equalizes differences among one another.

Nature cannot be true or false...only ever changing, hence offering equal value.

I complain the loudest

Which only works because natural sound implies silence, while artificial words imply noise. Nature neither articulates sound into words, nor does nature com (together) plain (to spread)...it sets instruments apart from one another.

natalist

-ist (natialist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (natalism)...which one can only do after being born (natal).

-ism implies consensus; -ist implies consent...natal represents the distraction used to harvest consent into consensus.

just look at how many kids they have

Looking/locking onto another is unjust to ones offspring. Nature implies singularity...a jew suggests the rhetoric "how many" to tempt gentiles with plurality.

how one could tolerate Islam

Islam/salam - "peace/piece" implies each piece within all of God aka law of all (al-lah). Tolerance vs intolerance among one another tempts one to ignore that.

Nature gives and takes each beings life...no matter how tolerant or intolerant one chooses to be to one another.

obviously, Christians are bad, right

Obvious aka ob (in front of) via (way).... https://www.etymonline.com/word/obvious

Being implies in front of (life) way (inception towards death)...not a right vs wrong aka good vs bad conflict, but a separation during a transfer representing christ (to anoint) and islam (to separate into piece).

A jew suggests the rhetoric "religion of peace" to tempt gentiles into "war" with one another. What's religion? Re (to respond) ligo (to bind) aka binding pieces together within war.

Because it's real in my mind

One responds (re) to all (al) perceivable, while holding suggested within ones mind....that's why anything fake is also real.

If one fights others (real vs fake), then one cannot discern self as response (re) within all (al).

permalink parent save report block reply