[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

bloomers being worn by every basic bitch.

Isn't there a less offensive term you could use?

Common canine? Default Dog? Formulaic Fido?

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

educated person in a non-industrial world:

Wouldn't such a person invent industry? At least an overseer automaton, the Alexandrians managed that but were otherwise not very industrial. They also invented coin operated vending machines.

Although someone needs to fix the automata, it does avoid having to mix with peasants, not something the guy with the $100K debt can do in the burger joint. Why don't they get their hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of education and then go and live somewhere else? Perhaps economics is not covered in-depth in their post-doctoral gender identity development studies journey. When Jesus was advising on managing investment portfolios, He promoted high return strategies. Liberals seem to prefer the negative return. Replacing electricity generators with trees you can't cut down but driving electric cars. There would be a technological solution to that but liberals don't see that as progressive enough.

What happens when everyone's "moved beyond" hi-tech building materials and all the houses have fallen down simply doesn't figure in their Venn diagram. It's not even on the same page. But when you turn over, there it is in a set all of it's own.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

the left hates technology is because it competes with their inferior products, and drives them out of business by actually solving the problems. They hate Nuclear power and Elon Musk. Why? Because the left already has a competing climate change plan, which is to socially engineer everybody to enjoy lives of grinding medieval poverty.

That's not a response to climate change, it's just what they wanted to do anyway, with climate change as the excuse that they tacked on.

To understand their mentality, think of what it's like to be a clever, bookish, educated person in a non-industrial world:



Looks like fun. Point the stick at the gruntwork, listen to the grunts grunting. The sense of superiority is so intense I can almost smell it, over the smell of the human manure they are ankle-deep in.

But how can a clever person get that sense of superiority today? They try their hardest, they do the smuggiest smuggery than can be smugged, but the facts are too obvious:

"I've got $100,000 of student debt and I'm barely qualified to serve coffee. But I'm still better than you."



"I'm a farmer. Science, biatch."

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

I always supposed there was a reason why zentai suits were invented.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

I've heard a lot of talk about the dangerous of androgenous weapons, and how androgenous machines will take our jobs. For example, when we have androgenous trucks, we can't have trucker convoy protests because the androgenous trucks don't need vaccines.

So that's one technology the liberals support. Imagine looking into your rear-view mirror and seeing this thing roaring up behind you:

Yuck! This would be much better.

[Sally Paulson]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

I've heard a lot of talk about the dangerous of androgenous weapons, and how androgenous machines will take our jobs. For example, when we have androgenous trucks, we can't have trucker convoy protests because the androgenous trucks don't need vaccines.

So that's one technology the liberals support. Imagine looking into your rear-view mirror and seeing this thing roaring up behind you:

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

I can just imagine maniacs in fancy dress showing off to that excuse for music. Earlier I was discussing with a family member who occasionally has ideas that aren't completely ridiculous: Does 3rd World Overpopulation Offer Solutions? (To things like pollution, oxygen and tree worship.)

We decided that No, it doesn't. I think the 2nd party agreed but more importantly is And Why Not?

Third World superstition neither offers solutions nor presents examples of the savage way to dynamic living because, well, have you ever been there? I'm not here to promote Darwinism but starting with whatever came before humans chimps and gorillas how could any population wind up storing massive piles of rotting vegetation and infecting themselves with cholera, dysentery, gallstones and the pox over and over again?

Well, we decided, they are not complete idiots. I didn't necessarily agree with this. One machine can replace 100 superstitious nutters any time you like (just ask the robots on Mars) but they want more nutters hourly AND the machines. We make the machines in exactly those factories liberal policy wants banned, one (or 50) per superstitious nutter, each factory having chimneys OR WORSE if you listen to greentards which we don't but that's what they say resulting in manatee devastation and habitat loss for chipmunks. But we already solved this problem. Less babies, more machines, automated factories and a reducing population. Simples! (I forgot about meerkats, revolting urine-drenched vermin that they are, obviously beloved by liberals.)

The alternative to new technology is Somalia but how many liberal policies are implemented there? It's the new equal.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

I'm not sure if hyperbole can be exaggerated but (looking for a suitable video to post and not finding one) why do all the hyperboles have such whiny voices?

I don't know, but while looking for videos I did find ONE attempt by a liberal to make jiggle-tit pajama-boys attractive. Ladies and Gentlemen, one-and-a-half cheers for the indecisively-named "Fatboy Slim":

Real Men Have Curves! Except for the real men who don't. And the fake ones who do.

...


You know, back when our birthrate was not on an extinction-trajectory, people had sex with the lights out. There might be a clue right there.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

That's exaggerated hyperbole, right?

I'm not sure if hyperbole can be exaggerated but (looking for a suitable video to post and not finding one) why do all the hyperboles have such whiny voices?

[Sally Paulson]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

cosmetic surgery.... the leatherface/frankenstien/spraytan nightmare...

That's exaggerated hyperbole, right?

...

Right?

Wow...I'm definitely not going to go for the "Total Recall" boob-job after all.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

Their plan is to have feminists use nagging to socially engineer men into believing that fertile women are ugly. "Real women have curves" they say, usually shouted by women have....Not so much "curves", as one single "diameter".

The plan also involves employing lots of people with infinite job security, six-figure incomes, and the worst photoshopping skills I've ever seen:

BBC: Spain's equality ministry...said physical expectations affected not only women's self-esteem, but denied them their rights.

And as for unattractive men...You can't have any rights denied if you don't have any rights in the first place.

[Social Construct]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

Brilliant idea!

Which one? The eugenics, manslavement, child-euthanizing, or the puppy-vampirism?

Me, I would have been happy enough just to have seen bloomers being worn by every basic bitch.

But instead we got toasters.

[its_faith]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

Brilliant idea!

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

What about unproven technology - "Questions have been raised," and of course if they haven't, just raise one.

I like that line.

I think the main reason the left hates technology is because it competes with their inferior products, and drives them out of business by actually solving the problems. They hate Nuclear power and Elon Musk. Why? Because the left already has a competing climate change plan, which is to socially engineer everybody to enjoy lives of grinding medieval poverty.

Versus:

Guess which one most people choose? So, now you know why the left hates markets.

Now, people may talk about climate change like it would drive us to extinction, but what's really going to extinctify us is that the fact that most humans just aren't sexually attracted to most other humans.

The closest thing to an answer the left has come up with is....Uncompetitive. Their plan is to have feminists use nagging to socially engineer men into believing that fertile women are ugly. "Real women have curves" they say, usually shouted by women have....Not so much "curves", as one single "diameter".

They don't complain about Ken Dolls being unrealistically chiseled, or demand that Hollywood give more representation to pudgy, jiggle-tit pajama boys, in hopes of socially engineering women into finding THEM attractive. Therefore the movement doesn't even count as a serious attempt to address the extinction-by-pickiness problem.

"Real Dodos have curves, you disgusting neckbeard! I wouldn't date you if you where the last male dodo on earth! The Future is female! 3 WORD CHANT! 3 WORD CHANT!"

South Korea, which doesn't have enough obesity to cause feminism to gain critical mass, (see what I did there?) found a technological solution.

It turns out that, with enough development, cosmetic surgery doesn't have to be the leatherface/frankenstien/spraytan nightmare of western infamy. In Korea they use cosmetic surgery like makeup.

The left complains about "unnerving uniformity", as if ugly people should live miserable lives in the name of providing varied crowd scenery for yuppy clickbait writers.

"Too many Barbie dolls, not enough Garbage Pail Kids!"

The left might accept cosmetic surgery if you tell them that trannies like it, but they'll just come up with another demographic double standard. After all, socially engineering human sexual attraction is the same as gay conversion therapy. So can you socially engineer human sexual attraction or not? Well, it depends on if you're talking about a political pander-target or not.

Feminists don't want to repeat the mistake they made when they failed to ban labor-saving home appliances. This outcompeted their proposal, which was to build the utopias described in feminist science fiction.

Some highlights:

eugenics...a narrow waist is considered a "disgusting deformity"...state socialism. Men are allowed to live on the island, but cannot hold political office... euthanasia, eliminating malformed children — and bastards. They maintain their superiority by practicing "nerve-rejuvenation," in which the life energy of dogs is transferred to humans....

...a women-only world...no longer enslaved by pregnancy and childbirth thanks to artificial incubators...asexual creation...growth and development of embryos occur without fertilization by sperm...

...a single-sex world... men are locked away...slave-owning monarchy...unable to reproduce, so infants are purchased from a neighbouring tribe...

...an all-female "utopia"...practice eugenics; all of them are blonde "Aryans," who disdain people of darker skin...The remaining men were mostly slaves...no experience or cultural memory of romantic love or sexual intercourse....

Uh, thanks but no thanks, I'll take the Maytag washer/dryer combo and the Dyson vac, thanks.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: How to get all liberal policy BANNED: call it "new technology"

They have this word, "Progressive."

Progressing from what? To where? From a world with no AIDS or Simian Foamy Virus to one where randoms go around kissing one another bringing down the next plague? I was going to suggest calling things "the new AIDS," yet even here mocking from progressives has a preemptive strike in place.

What about unproven technology - "Questions have been raised," and of course if they haven't, just raise one. "Questions have been raised concerning the impact of [whatever] on cancer rates," or some species they like, as you've already suggested. Something else I find useful in discussions is asking them to define words, or one word they use a lot, usually they can't. They also like "other ways of knowing" (ask them what ways?) but obviously my way of knowing is excluded. "Energy" such as from crystals or meditation. Ask them how much? I've looked up a few units for measuring energy:

1• erg
2• picocurie
3• joule
4• electronvolt
5• Rydberg unit
6• kiloKaiser
7• foe
8• becquerel

Eight's enough. This alone won't get all liberal policy BANNED but if asked often enough and finding themselves repeatedly unable to explain, they may ask the guru and get their standing in the cadre revoked. Without that support for their special ways of knowing, other options, real options, real knowledge can be explained. Liberal and progressive policies after all are based in the wildest back alleys of the imagination.