⚠️ This post has been marked as offensive.
Imagine believing in equality in a world based on "eat or get eaten" gameplay. Its like believing in equality in CS:GO or League of Legends. Whats the point?
Some people are bots tho, thats why they believe in human rights which objectively dont exist outside their imagination.
America wasnt built on ideological equality, read the constitution, it says all men are created equal.
So equality is not in ideology, but in creation.
Meaning i have as much right and liberty as any other person. That race, gender and color should not be a factor in what my value is.
All men are created equal.
This is a demonstrably inaccurate statement.
Men are not created, they develop...As do women actually.
And none are equal
Clones educated and nurtured under laboratory conditions, might end up as very very similar men or women.
Monozygotic twins perhaps also, in a controlled environment.
Referring to language of the constitution. Not as a philosophical talking point.
Context is king, when someone asserts what america was "founded" on, then we look at the foundation.
At the time, actual kings and actual nobility by birth were a real thing, where special laws and rights applied.
Saying men were equal back then is the equivalent of Americans today saying, "No man is above the law."
Well, language is as language attempts to assert.
Nationally, all women didn't get to vote until 1920...So the constitution clearly was literally written with the equality of all American citizens in mind.
Nor I'm guessing was equal consideration given to anyone not "white" European.
Women overwhelmingly vote more for violence, welfare, and for tyranny because biologically, those traits are preferrable in a mate (family protection, providing for the family, and projecting dominance). It's no surprise America's government skews that way because women live longer and thus have more votes. Power and dominance within the context and confines of an unfeeling government axiomatically descends into tyranny instead of actual security in the context of an emotionally invested family paradigm. Conversely, men will often vote to sacrifice personal comfort for the sake of the progeny of their children and wives because they are wired biologically to do so on the family level. That voting pattern skews toward more pragmatic leaders over emotional grifters in the government.
There are surprisingly many based American women who see this trend and actually regret the 19th amendment. This is just a humble observation about an evolutionary mismatch. America is a civilization expecting women to function like men under pressure with all the necessary sacrifices when their biological instincts and incentives evolved around cooperation, nurturing, and security.
Again. You seem to be missing the point lynch. Read this slowly.
Equality of creation.
Not power, not libery (as applied to politics) not fiances, not voting.
Creation.
Which I responded to earlier, when I clearly proposed that "equality of creation" is a demonstrably inaccurate statement.
At which, you went off at a critical tangent.
At which, I replied accordingly.
At which, you returned to the initial premise.
Where I repeated my initial and appropriate response.
I forgot to add at the end personal security, not just security in general.
The statement "all men are created equal" is viewed as an illusion by some because of the historical context and ongoing realities of inequality, though others argue it means all people are equal in their inalienable rights, not in their circumstances
. While the original meaning was exclusionary, with early American interpretations limited to white, landowning men, modern understandings often emphasize the principle that everyone is born with equal dignity and rights. The idea is interpreted as a philosophical and moral ideal rather than a literal, factual description of people's lives.
And now America is deFacto run by a Matriarchy, where women steer their chauffeur men from the back seat.
America was founded on equality (ideological equality, meaning facsism and human rights were on an equal playing field).
This is one of the dumbest things you’ve ever posted.
The framers created the constitution explicitly to fight back against authoritarianism (which is a tenet of fascism), so the idea that the framers held fascism in equal regard to any other ideology is absurd.
The most important (first) amendment protects freedom of speech
Correct… from the government. The 1A doesn’t exist to protect ideologies, it exists to prevent government officials from using state power to silence critics.
All right wing things are dumb to you
All? No. Most? Uh… yeah, that’s why I’m not on the right.
None of this is relevant to the fact that you literally just tried to argue that fascism and human rights are on the same level according to the constitution. That’s a remarkably dumb thing to say regardless of how much of a political hack you wish to accuse me of being.
The framers were fascists; they had slaves.
So you don’t know what a fascist is. Got it.
Some governments have 340 million people; others 10 million; others 1 million; others 100k people; others 10k people; others 10 people, others 1 person. Every person is their own government.
If you don’t have something serious to say why bother?
All government is authoritarian to a degree, as is a constitution, as were it's framers...It's how things work.
If it were not the case, society would be chaotically inert.
For sure, everything is relative to sensory ability.
Antarctic penguins always amaze me.
Name a smart right winger.
There are a lot of smart right wingers, Ben Shapiro is the first that comes to mind.
My issue isn’t that wingers are stupid people, it’s that they hold and defend stupid political views. I watched a debate with Shapiro and Destiny where Shapiro explained his defense of Trump by saying he doesn’t hold his 9 year old to the same standards as his 5 year old. In other words, he’s arguing that because Trump hasn’t shown himself to be up to the standards of other presidents, it’s reasonable to hold him to a lesser standard. That’s insanely stupid.
The issue isn’t intelligence, it’s the way bias warps the human mind into accepting a different cognitive approach to a particular issue that we wouldn’t apply anywhere else in life.
Fascism = scary word for right wing politics.
The power of connotations should be removed.
Fascism isn’t being uttered against Trump and MAGA because it sounds scary. It’s being uttered because that’s what Trump and his movement is.
The connotation shouldn’t be removed, the connotation was created by the horror of the very things Trump is doing right now, it’s just a question of whether you are able to see it. But because of things like the Shapiro example above, once your mind is that warped, you won’t.
You guys already have fascism. But you let the corporations run your country instead of elected leaders.
Trump wants to sell visas to new immigrants after putting tariffs on their countries.
The price of immigrants is low due to market saturation.
Thought the slave trade was outlawed.
But hey, if they are going cheap, I'll have half a dozen nubile babes.
Must be 16 or over.
Slave labor is alive and well in the States.
Who else is going to pick the strawberries.
Americans already have too many strawberries.