yeahIsupporttrump

-13

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

Im being told the goal is to eliminate whites.

how should one respond when being told not just him but his entire race being eliminated is the goal?

also, yes. its demonstrable that the middle east is a very inbred place and that inbreeding lowers IQ. couple that with having children like rabbits instead of trying to create a better culture and yes, barbarians is the right word here.

-6

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

hey no problems. ban me if you want, I expect no less.

my goal here is to understand what the goal of antia is - all ive gotten, and you can read for yourself, are insults.

if you feel im not being civilized here compared to your readers then please ban me from this group.

as I stated earlier to another person, everything im seeing so far is living up to the stereotype that what this place is is a place for people to destroy what they see as a problem but have no solutions for what to do after they destroy.

-7

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

what im trying to do is get someone to explain intelligently what antifa is trying to do. clearly this entire site is a bubble for that, so it seems to be a good idea to venture into it to discuss.

instead all ive gotten are insults and the notion that white genocide is the goal.

this is a very informative event for me. you guys are living up to your stereotypes.

a man without an argument resorts to insult, afterall.

-3

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

interesting about alabama - if you believe in the idea that a man is innocent until declared guilty by a court of law then consider the following:

  • other politicians have resigned without even going to court

  • but the alabama senator claims innocence all the way, and oddly enough the people who claimed against him disappeared after the election, after waiting literally decades to go after him when this moment appeared.

a man is innocent until proven guilty. you need to be consistant in your views if you make a claim like this.

0

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

no but it was a socialist act. a common act of government to bring the economy up is to massively spend on infrastructure. its what hitler did too in an effort to bring his own economy up. this does not change the fact that the act was socialist in nature, and that hiter identified himself as a socialst and did other socialist things (he was the first to create anti-animal cruelty laws on the planet which is a good thing) so we have to accept him at his word when he both acts and says he is a socialist.

im sorry, but thats history for you. its a bitch. it doesnt mean you guys are wrong, it means that we need to be accurate about history in order to create proper arguments about the present.

-19

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

i hate to break it to you, but if you look at history you will find that the whites are the best at colonizing, invading, and occupying other areas of the planet.

piss us off if you want. we may represent only %8 of the worlds population which makes us a minority, and yet we dominate the barbarians time and time again.

go ahead, push us to the limit and watch history repeat. intelligence beats brute violence every time.

0

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

I totally understand and its why I picked the name I did. I want there to be no illusion that im here to try to learn from you and challenge at the same time.

if this place is meant to be a bubble then so be it, but the internet is the one place left for plebs like us to discuss our ideas and try to figure everything out. lets take advantage of it!

-5

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

if im not mistaken, it was under hitler that the following happened:

  • the creation of the peoples car, or volkswagon, as a cheap means of transport for the german people

  • the creation of the autobahn, a massive social labour project that helped the economy

  • the creation of the very first animal abuse laws. hitler was a massive animal rights advocate.

im NOT trying to defend hitler here, im simply pointing out that hitler was indeed a socialist by actual definition, and re-writing history because it doesnt fit the current worldview you might hold doesnt change that.

-2

yeahIsupporttrump wrote

interesting. im curious, given the definition above, what is it about a person that lets you identify an individual as a fascist in the first place?

noting that it is only in the western world that women not only can vote but have the same opportunities as men (despite certain drawbacks which are too complex for this venue), how is it that this civilization more than others is misogynist?