Misterio

Double_R wrote:

Most people actually don’t, in fact the people who love to accuse everyone else of being socialists a most tend to be the people who understand the word the least. But I’m not interested in litigating what the word actually means, it’s obvious you have no idea and for some reason even with google right there you still can’t be bothered. All I’m asking you to do is provide your working definition, which is a really easy and basic ask for anyone who wants to argue in good faith, but you don’t so you continue to tap dance around it.

This thread and this conversation in particular is about our national politics, why do you think telling me what one mayor of one city wants to do is relevant?

What a way to run away from a discussion. I've just explained what socialism is about but you keep giving excuses to shake off the debate, like this one where you state that Mandami has nothing to do with the national politics. He's so irrelevant to you that he went to visit Trump to have a talk. I mean, you are supposed to live in New York conducting tours for many visitors and you tell me that New York is not relevant for the United States? For fk sake, New York is the financial heart of the world, no less, along with London. It's not a coincidence that a socialist Democrat like Mandami chose New York as his lab to experiment with the evil socialism. Don't be surprised to find Mamdani running for governor or even for president. You might have already seen his website, he says there that he and his socialist pals want to extrapolate what he does in New York to the whole country.

Anyways. You wanted a definition of socialism from google? There you have your definition to break it down together. It's the typical definition you will hear from your favourite socialist politicians and it's not different to what I've explained many times. They call it Democratic Socialism, as if the word 'Democratic' could downplay the evil inherent in socialism.

...democratic socialism is a system where ordinary working people—rather than wealthy elites or corporations—democratically control the economy, workplaces, and society to meet human needs instead of maximizing private profit.

As you can see it's no different to what I've explained so far. Socialists hate the wealthy, they can't stand people that make financial progress, they can't deal with the envy that the rich provokes them. So, for terminating the wealthy people they propose a collective system where everybody owns everything, a collective economy.

But let me explain why socialism is a bad idea, I'll explain it as if you were a toddler. Imagine that you are in charge of a class in a high school, you will have good students with A grades and bad students with F grades, it's very common. And one day you wake up with this stupid idea to fix the inequality that exists in your class, so you say 'from now on we're gonna distribute the grades equally among all the class'. So, in the next exam, you add up the grades of all your students and distribute it equally so you grade all your students the same. Of course, your bad students will be happy but not your good students. Next exam something strange happen, the average grade falls to D or even E and you'll ask yourself what it's going on? It's simple, the good students didn't study for the exam because they know they will not have the grade they deserve. This is socialism at its finest, it doesn't work, it never worked, it will never work.

I thought he was just the 'son of God' but there is a brit user who debunked this lie stating that 'son of God' is just a title, as well as the 'Christ' which is also a title.

Double_R wrote:

If wasting words was really your concern then you would make an actual argument instead of playing these silly little games. There’s hardly anything more wasteful than typing words that say absolutely nothing.

You claim I am dodging you by not responding to what you said about Mamdani, but you didn’t say anything at all. You just invoked his name as if it speaks for itself. Well I hate to break it to you but that’s not how reasoned argument works, you actually have to make real points, and yes that requires typing words.

It is of course obvious what you’re really doing here. For months now I have challenged you to define socialism since it is you that keeps invoking it as some kind of evil of the Democratic Party and you just refuse to do it. That is breathtakingly dishonest of you.

You will not define it because as soon as you do one of two things happen; either you make it clear that what you’re calling socialism doesn’t exist in any meaningful way in American politics, or you define it in such a way that is not scary at all or even controversial, and in fact enjoys wide support among the electorate. Either way, your attempts to demonize and fear monger completely falls apart.

So I’ll ask you again and can’t wait to hear your latest excuse… define socialism. Clearly. Explicitly. Not by naming a bunch of fantasy things you claim democrats are doing that they’re not. An actual working definition that we can apply to democratic proposals and assess whether the proposals meet the definition you provided. Then we can have a real, adult conversation.

So, you're using the 'define that for me' old trick to keep avoiding the subject when you perfectly know what socialism is. I mean, you're a socialist, how could you not know about it? Of course, everybody here knows about socialism except you, go figure.

But anyway, I'm sincerely not willing to explain something I did many times in this forum. What I'm going to do though is to tell what Mamdani plans to do in the US since he's a true socialist, but don't come later off to say that he's not because he identifies himself as such. In fact, he's a member, if not the leader, of the 'Democratic Socialists of America' political movement. You can see it in their webpage (https://socialists.nyc/).

It's really amazing the amount of bullshit you can find in this webpage. It summarizes what a socialist aims in terms of economy. It's terryfing. Mind you, you can be impressed at first by all the moral exhibitionism of these people but the truth is that their goverment plan has failed miserably in the past. I still don't understand how they keep promoting the same failed proposals over and over again when there are several countries that broke up just because of those socialist policies. And that's the most sounding characteristic of socialists, they are sectarians, they don't learn or accept from experience but only repeat the same shit as if it were a worldwide success.

If you keep surfing in their webpage, you can see something that you will find in every socialist speech, the hatred and resentment toward the rich, the wealthy. And I'd like to explain why rich people are necessary. In this world there are two ways to create wealth, collectively (socialism) and individually (capitalism). You can ask any economist which one is the most efficient for an economy, they will tell you that it's the individual promoted by capitalism. It's a matter of efficiency, whether give the means of production to a smart, qualified guy that will create thousands of jobs or give it to the ignorant masses that will fuck it all up. The statistics are very clear, the countries that adopted a libertarian economy, meaning zero socialism, are the wealthiest. Even so, Mandami and his friends promote collectivism as the panacea. Just see what their webpage reads: 'In the United States, we're told that we live in a democracy, but that isn't true: Our workplaces are managed by bosses, who determine how we work and how much we make, even if it's not enough to make ends meet. Our landlords raise our rents unjustifiably...' 

I can go on and on explaining about control of prices, high taxes, open borders, and a long list of best wishes for our society that socialists will fulfill with other people's money, but I think that's enough to have a broad idea of what socialism is.

Shoresy wrote:

There is no doubt that MAGA brought a Bill Clinton-type president to solidify socialism as part of the American GOP. What the USA has now, and going forward, are two socialist parties: one on the right that is headed toward nationalist socialism and one on the left that caters to globalist socialism.

Because globalist socialism is failing very hard in the EU and other places like Canada due to cultural tribalism, it's very easy to predict where the USA will be in 10 years.

Well, if you reduce the context to that, I prefer a thousand times the nationalist socialism. I guess the man of the quirky mustach was right in certain things.

Double_R wrote:

I’ll keep waiting for your definition.

You dodge, as usual, responding about Mandami who is the most socialist Democrat elected in the States.

Do you want to know what socialism is? See what Mandami is either doing or trying to do. I'm not going to waste words to explain something you are reluctant to understand. So,...

Double_R wrote:

I can only imagine how freaked out you would be if she were offering them $5k

I guess you must be walking on air for what happened to Republicans, but you say absolutely nothing about the danger that represents some Democrats in some positions of authority, like for example Mamdani.

You don't give a shit about your own country, which means you don't care about the fate of your own family. You only care about Democrats winning no matter if this political party brings hunger, misery and destruction to the US. You're just a political tribalist, a yellow dog Democrat who can't see past the end of your nose.

I'm not denying Trump has been a populist by promising five grand to people but I prefer a populist than a socialist who is going to destroy a neighbor, a city, a state or the whole country.

Double_R wrote:

Can you please define socialism?

Socialism is what you subscribe to.

Socialism is what the communist Gina Hinojosa will apply in Texas, like giving $1.5k to every family, increase the salaries to bureaucrats (typical of socialism), price control (no surprise), stop the investment on data centers or relax the tough migration policies that brought good results.

Sidewalker wrote:

It isn't political, it's just the right thing to do.

I'm not saying the US has the perfect system. I understand you have serious issues with the health system. What I disagree with is that you can't propose socialism to solve that. The cure can be worse than the disease.

SergeantLynch wrote:

And who knows how many times the chef spits into the sauce.

Well, that's a bit exagerated but there are other things that I found out happen in a restaurant. Like for example when a chef handles money and then proceeds to go on with his cooking without washing his hands, or even worse when he comes back from the restrooms. That's disgusting.

I also found hair in my sauce, bugs and stones when the chef doesn't wash the ingredients very well.

So it's way much better to cook your own meals and bring it to the office.

RexFavilla wrote:

Then why did Republicans mention Trump all the time during the primary but specifically NOT mention him in ads during the general? Why were Trump rallies held in the leadup to the election statistically associated with a DROP in support? Maybe you're a bit out of touch and just want him to still be popular here for whatever reason, but the man is electoral poison and has nobody to blame but himself.

Democrats are tired of Trump no matter if the US strives or not, that's different to being tired of the economic situation and therefore punishing the person who is in charge who is Trump.

Trump is not popular now but after 2028 he'll be as popular as he used to be, except for the Democrats.

Cook your own meals, problem solved.

Sidewalker wrote:

I didn't think Uruguay was a real place, isn't it imaginary like Atlantis, Shangri-la or Neverland?

When nobody has ever been there or even seen it, it's really hard to believe it's a real place.

I know you say you live there, but I figured you were kidding around, saying you live there like SatanLucy says he lives in Bosnia.

You're not so far from reality. I've been an expat for 20+ years and the population there is decreasing because it's boring. All the small countries are boring and nobody cares about them, that's true.

But don't go off on a tangent, we're talking about how socialism is taking over the US. I really wonder at what moment your clone DoubleFknR come on the scene.

RexFavilla wrote:

People are absolutely tired of Trump. He hasn't delivered on any of his promises. The only issue he is polling above water on is immigration, and he even fucked that up by not going after the people hiring illegals and publishing those dumb tonedeaf music videos. Oh and by putting a retarded bimbo in charge of DHS. His response to getting electorally raped was to drone on about the marble he's installing in his new ballroom. The man is cooked. Now he's talking about escalating again in Iran. If he keeps going like this he will get the Thatcher treatment, as his own party will have no choice but to stab him in the back to save their own skins.

No, the ones who are tired of Trump are the Democrats but the average people are tired of the economic situation that is caused by the conflict with Iran.

SergeantLynch wrote:

So, was it factually necessary to show the catastrophic final events of nine people on TV?...Or was it actually just macabre mass entertainment?

Isn't ones internal reaction to a chosen entertainment an inevitable and therefore necessary outcome?

Again, it's not entertainment. The TV broadcasters are just exploiting the human desire to know everything. I'm not sure if it's gossip because that happens when you pry into private matters, but people always want to know the details of every extraordinary event. That explains why humans want to know if there is life beyond Earth. That explains how Cristobal Colon discovered America. And that explains why people record with their phones everything they consider extraordinary.

Sidewalker wrote:

I don't get it, you are from a province in Argentina,

I'm not sure if you say that out of ignorance (very typical of Americans) or sarcams but some regions of Uruguay are more related to Brazil than to Argentina.

why are you so involved in American politics?

The whole world depends on what it's going on in the US. I don't know how much this result will limit the 'Shield of the Americas' coalision but if the Democrats do something against it, the US will pay the consequences.

Besides, the non-American people like me don't live in a bubble as the Americans. We ackwoledge there is a big world beyond our countries, which means we are interested in what it's going on in the whole world.

Sidewalker wrote:

SatanLucy wrote:

Yeah, Trump lost badly. Too bad he is still president.

"In fact, if people ever got tired of me in the U.S., I'll move to Israel, and become prime minister" - Donald Trump (yesterday)

The midterms made it pretty clear the American people are tired of Trump; it's time for him to move on to be Israel's Prime Minister.

People are not tired of Trump, they are tired of the war with Iran and the impact on their economy.

Sidewalker wrote:

Misterio wrote:

I guess Trump will drop the nuke over Iran's underground nuclear facilities before knowing the results.

Poor US, they will have a dose of socialism from now on.

Just what the doctor ordered, a dose of socialism to cure authoritarianism and stave off fascism.

Trump gave is the first black female Governor, the first Muslim Senator, and the measles.

Delusion.

Trump is helping the hispanic America to get rid of socialism and the yankees start to embrace it. What a stupid way to spoil a country.

I knew the US will fall into decline anytime soon but I never thought it would be due to socialism.

Can you imagine Mexico embracing libertarianism and the US doing otherwise? The yankees will be the ones to jump the wall this time. Lol.

SergeantLynch wrote:

Yep great stuff, but my primary question remained unanswered, because you preferred to elaborate my secondary question for dramatic purposes.

So should the dramatic death of a family be aired on TV and social media as entertainment?...Because there was nothing factually necessary for the wider audience to gain, only macabre entertainment, which by definition is obviously enjoyed as such....Aren't "Feeling the terror" and "It was painful to watch" just facile justification for your enjoyment of the macabre...In all honesty, it was aired on BBC news and I saw it, and I was neither pained nor terrorised...I made a flippant comment to my wife and carried on eating my dinner....In fact, news programmes tend to be mostly a series of macabre clips and details of crashes, murders, rapes, bombings and general human anguish, finished off with an obligatory feel good article...Vital information or temporary entertainment?

Well, most TV channels advice discretion to the viewers which means the content can be shocking. It's not just the audio, it's also the crash video that is fkn disturbing. I was adviced and I saw it anyway out of curiosity and not out of entertainment. I remark that because not everyone looks for entertainment in the news. For entertainment, I watch movies and TV series.

But let's talk about if it's necessary to show violent events on TV. Some studies suggest that for people to avoid risky events they need to watch the terrible consequences of those events. So, for example, if you want to reduce car accidents on the road the government usually announces TV commercials showing a story about an imbecil going fast on the road and having a terrible accident. For the TV commercial to take effect, it needs to show how the driver suffers in the accident, maybe it shows how he's crushed by a truck or how he's thrown from the car and dies on the road bleeding like a woman in her period. That explains why the government forces the cigarette manufacturers to put on the cigarrete pack the raw image of a guy with lung cancer.

SkepticalOne wrote:

dose of socialism from now on.

The US has a mixed system which includes aspects of the dreaded 'socialism'.

Every socialist country starts with aspects of 'dreaded socialism'. It's part of the process.

When you see the government increase taxes you've got to start worrying about it.

I guess Trump will drop the nuke over Iran's underground nuclear facilities before knowing the results.

Poor US, they will have a dose of socialism from now on.

SergeantLynch wrote:

You "felt the terror" but can you honestly say that you didn't enjoy the feeling of terror.

Wtf are you talking bout? I listened to it only once.

It was more painful to know that there was an entire family in the crew, the parents, two kids and the nanny. I'm really sorry for it.

Everybody is talking about it.

Plane Crash Video

You can feel the terror in the communication between the pilot and the control tower.

While it was a quick death, the moments before the crash must have been horrifying.

RIP all the crew.

So you named yourself after this sort of scientific framework?

Interesting.

I like the times I'm living in. It's the time where the truth comes out and we all are going to see that the jewish history about the messiah and the chosen people is just a hoax, because Satanyahu is basing his actions on the jewish prophecies about the coming of their messiah which is like saying the judaism is the only source of truth. That's bullshit.

The only winner in that election is Satanyahu, he was saved from prison.

Unfortunately, that's only going to speed up the destruction of Israel. If the predictions go as it is expected, Israel will dissappear and Satanyahu voters will regret.

I also heard other predictions where some jews realize what it's going to happen and they will gather soon to find another place to settle Israel. I've always considered that jews are very complicated people, so it's going to be difficult for them to find a country that accept them. That's crazy shit.

SatanLucy wrote:

I'm starting to think that the root of your problems resides on the wealth of your family.

You have so much money that you ended up on a couch scratching you ball all day long. Remember that the iddle hands are the devil's workshop. You've been destroying yourself because you get used to the lazyness, that explains all the shit in your head.

I suggest you to move the fkn ass and do something useful. But it should be an exhausting work, somthing that makes you want to go to bed inmediatly.

So, BK thinks that the only way to be with a girl is to have a monstrous penis. If he knew that there are a lot of tomboys out there fking with beautiful chicks he would change his mind.

Come on. Life is not only about sex. There is always a way to jump over life problems. The example of the tomboy is very telling, they don't have penis but enjoy sex anyway and make their sexual partners enjoy as well.

I can give my honest opinion. I don't know whether BK is handsome or not because only a woman can tell about that. What I can say though is that he seems to be a nice guy. I have friends that I don't deem as handsome but to my surprise they seem attractive for some women. So, attraction is very subjective.

I would say that BK shouldn't stress over things that are not worth it. I don't have a micro penis but I am not either after having a wife. There are a lot of people that unfortunately follow the crowd trying to have a wife, children and all this shit, but they suffer if they can't because they are not pleasing the people around. That's sad.

If BK is legitly looking for having a family, I don't think it's complicated. It's just a matter of finding the correct woman. And a micro penis shouldn't be an obstacle.

SatanLucy wrote:

only a stylised image of your face

That's because I am ugly so I told AI to make me slightly more handsome. My real face is a disgrace to humanity:

My eyes don't match, my face is asymmetrical, my facial hair looks like pubes and only more so the more they grow.

I also cut my own hair for past 5 years, so it looks a bit ugly.

So, if you're truly a Boznian, why did you pass yourself off as a Korean?

SergeantLynch wrote:

Do you think that the human propensity to obsess about dick length, is indicative of a highly advanced intellectual species.

Or is it time for Asexual Intelligence to take over.

The only person in this forum that is obssesed with the size of his dick is Lucy, or BK.

I think it's understandable that a man cares about his dick, his hair, his beard,... his look in general. I do it as well. The issue with BK is that he had the bad luck of having a micro penis. Honestly, if I were him I would take advantage that his family is filthy rich and would have penis enlargement surgery. Gaining some lenght could improve his self-steem, but I think it's not necessary.

I once met a man who have micro penis and he's ok with his wife. Before you make some stupid jokes about that, I've gotta say that I used to go to the gym in the university and it was very common to take a shower in communal showers, like in prison or in the army, so it was very easy to know who has the biggest and the smallest. I used to make fun of it.

The problem of BK is that he lives in a fucked up society like South Korea. Korean women are really materialistic and very mean when they don't have what they want. So, it's not worth trying to date a korean girl. And if he really is Boznian, I would say the same thing. I met a lot of Europeans who told me that women in Europe look for the perfect men, which means a model-like loaded man, almost a prince.

SergeantLynch wrote:

And for some reason Misterio has an in depth knowledge of Asian penises...One can only guess...And they are also very fond of extra-terrestrial visitors....Perhaps they have the hots for you...I think that they are chatting you up.

depth knowledge? It's called general knowledge, you pirate. Everybody should know about that.

It seems to me that SatanLucy, aka Best Korea, suffers from multiple personality disorder. Today he's a Slavic, tomorrow he'll be an African of a 12-inch cock.

The Balkans, mostly like everywhere else is a mish mash of people of various origins and variable penis size...And I'm guessing that your chief data source in this respect is online porn...I'm also guessing that BK AKA Lucy, is not around 30 and is stylistically disingenuous, typically someone much younger.

Victor, I based my comments on statistics, not porn. I'm a man of science so I would never throw a statement if I have no scientific evidence.

https://as1.ftcdn.net/jpg/00/73/79/34/1000_F_73793428_83HQTZdE4wMqegUqjE3RaROZLdmF2Da1.jpg

The data says Asians have the shortest dick. If you see the map, the only short-dick men in the Balkans are the Romanians, not as short as the Asian but short afterall. Par contre, the Boznians have an average dick, which is at odds with what BK said. The dicks with legs are the Hungarians, those muthafvckas are very lucky. Lol.