Exactly, it's not like the dems have a history of creative passwords kekw
It could just be "admin" or "password" or "12345" because those tend to be the default passwords, and, lets be real, do we think they bothered to change that?
It looks like it probably wasn't about rigging the HC election (not even a crime probably, just an expulsion). It was about them hacking the other students to do it lol.
That said, they hacked the big election too, so lots of life sentences abound!
It's a form of media like television, painting, art, novels, etc.
The rhetoric is definitely because it's not something they have a monopoly over. On top of that, games tend to teach people problem solving skills and keep their brains active. Obviously we can't have unthinking sheep playing them!
The left loves to blame guns, and the "right" (fox) loves to blame games instead of sticking to their guns (literally).
One big one that Fox in particular targeted was called "Six Days in Fallujah". The developers consulted heavily with veterans that survived Fallujah and were going to tell the story as accurately and detailed as possible; the gameplay was to try and give even the slightest glimpse of the kinds of moment-to-moment decisions and fears the troops faced when clearing buildings. Obviously it'd still be a game, and as such wouldn't really compare to the real thing, but just like many movies, it still would have told the story fantastically.
Of course Fox, knowing that anything showing the reality of the war would be bad for business (military industrial complex, that is), targeted it and actually got it shut down before it could be completed thanks to the bad press. They claimed it was "disrespectful to veterans" despite that it was basically veterans making it (or having significant input). Now, 10 years later, a rebooted attempt to make it is set to release Q4 2021! It is said that it will include details from people interviewed form all angles of the conflict; US soldiers, civilians in the city at the time, and, I believe even insurgents (could be wrong on that).
That's just one example. Now that you mention the early attempts to ban, though, that made a connection in my mind: One of the earliest games they tried to ban was "Doom". If you don't know, Doom is/was a very graphic/gory shooter in which you're basically a soldier blessed by God sent to hell (and other places) to kill all of the demons/stop demonic invasions. The excuses to ban it were for it's inclusion of satanic imagery and it's gore, but I don't wonder if there might have been an alternate motive... maybe it made the satanists uncomfortable, having a game about killing demons?
Edit: The most recent one also got in trouble with the woke police for it's trailer parodying leftspeak applying it to a literal demonic invasion: (these are messages broadcasted around the environment in the game) "Remember, 'demon' can be an offensive term, refer to them as 'mortally challenged'", "Earth is the melting pot of the universe", "Please remain calm, you may notice a slight change in the environment! [pans to absolute hellscape] Fear not, it's all part of the plan!", and "My brothers and sisters, lets help to make our friends' transition into their new world a comfortable one!". Top kek!
And they charge top buck for them at release!
I love video games, but c'mon man, if you're just playing a sport game just go play the bloody sport already! One of the few games where you can actually do the thing in real life without like, serious health concerns lol
Most people doing games have soft boycotted EA since they started charging obscene amounts for broken and woke-infested products lol
That said, they're starting to realize that they can't sell turds, so they're starting to reconcile with people more. Doubt the wokeness is gone though, just a little bit hidden.
Video gaming has been one of the major front-lines of the culture war for at least the past 15 years. "Gamergate" really escalated things, too.
It's mainly because it's a form of entertainment/media that doesn't require massive capital/companies to get things made, published, and distributed. Many of the best games started as one or two people working on a project for fun. Because of this, the woke patrol have to compete with legitimate products, which is obviously pretty difficult as wokeness produces only garbage.
What?!
Did you read the post? This was a totally voluntary, fully chain-of-custody transplant that saved a life. There are tons of legitimate organ donors that save many lives.
We just need far more accountability, chain of custody, and transparency in the process. People considering donating should get psych evaluations to be sure they aren't doing it for some kind of profit motive or because they're being trafficked. People should know who, where, and why their organs got to them. Donors or family of donors should know where it goes.
How the fuck would he know?
People seem to be forgetting:
- He's not an insider
- He's got a fairly sketchy history (and a particularly sketchy father)
- He cooperated with MSM in the creation of a hitpiece
- He likes to pretend he's in the know but when stuff gets tough it's pretty clear he's just guessing like the rest of us (nothing wrong with guessing, everything wrong with pretending to be in the know)
- Other things I'm forgetting (didn't he call some meh reliability news source article a "bombshell" back in January?)
He's not been working this audit. Near as I can tell he hasn't been helping with this audit in any way. He's just resurfaced after a few months of people shying away from him after the HBO documentary.
MAGALogic here seems to be correct, at least purely on a time-basis. IIRC they said 40 days, and even recently they said that they were looking on schedule. It's been over two weeks; if nothing else, we should be far more than 17% complete.
The audit has been very lips-sealed. They've had contingencies planned for every step of the way thus far, including the possibility of something being put on the same grounds. They've been fighting a cryptic but so far successful legal strategy. I believe they would have seen this coming miles away.
You're fairly correct, though they're not typically referred to as "races". There are distinct genetic groupings among humans, but they're very numerous and do not fall along the same boundaries of the societal understandings of "race".
Can take a look here: https://humanphenotypes.net/
It's really fascinating and really gives you a fresh take on the beauty of humans of all kinds!
"Race" isn't real. It is a social construct; there is no genetic clumping that aligns with the common perceptions of race, period.
There ARE however genetic phenotypes. This gets into genetic groupings which aligns more with ethnic groups than race.
https://humanphenotypes.net/ is a fantastic resource for learning about human genetic groupings, the traits associated with those groupings, comparisons between theories of past and present, and way more.
LMFAO it's the exact same response he gave the other reporter!
"oh you mean BlueAnon?!"
It's a perfect response, because nobody outside of our circles knows what the hell a "blueanon" is because it never caught on! It jabs at them while simultaneously winking at us.
Could take it a step further, like he refuses to acknowledge "Qanon" because it's like the guy is asking "do you believe the truth?".
We all know it's not "qanon". There's Q posting on an anonymous board. If all is as they say, Flynn would know it's not some kind of movement, or some kind of conspiracy, it'd just be normal, just like looking up and seeing the sun. Naturally, then, the only conspiracy would be blueanon, which includes the conspiracy that qanon even exists!
I mean Trump has been talking about this long before Lindell did, and I don't see anything wrong with two (or really three) good social media sites.
I mean does Torba (Gab) feel undercut by either of them?
Also, so far Lindell has not dished out anything serous with regards to a social media platform. Everyone that's looked at the web code of what he has so far has said that it looks like it was made by complete and absolute amateurs; that isn't exactly something that you want for a social media system.
I'm not dooming and I'm not dissing Mike Lindell, I think it's fantastic that he's trying and I pray he gets some good competent developers on the job, but it's very possible he has gotten in over his head on that front.
I don't know who wrote that description of CRT, but respectfully, I don't think it's exactly right. The way CRT is formally defined is way more insane than that and far more derivative from plain critical theory (from which critical gender theory and others stem) than many people realize.
Basically, critical theory as a whole is a philosophy that espouses that "social problems are influenced and created more by social structures and cultural assumptions than by individual and psychological factors" (Wikipedia's Critical Theory article). In other words, people's actions are more influenced by society than by themselves (individual and psychological factors being the brain and any semblance or driver of free will).
It's easy to see how this is a relatively short leap to both nihilism and total disregard for individuality and personal responsibility. THIS is how they wage their arguments, derived from critical theory applied to "race" (in other words, critical race theory), that someone can be racist without being racist, or that math or anything else is racist.
Even Wikipedia admits in it's listing of criticisms that "A primary criticism of the theory is that it is anti-scientific, both for its lack of the use of the scientific method, and for its assertion that science is a tool used for oppression of marginalized groups of people."
And these are the same people that say "trust the science"!
It may seem like I'm being knit-picky here, but it is absolutely vital we know and understand our opposition as much as possible.
Some final (additional) notes;
"...race is not natural, but socially constructed to oppress and exploit people of color"
Scientifically, "race" in the popular sense is not natural. It is not backed by any of the sciences. That isn't to say there aren't groups of people that have different commonalities in traits and genetics, it's just to say that the "races" commonly referred to do not match the genetics or other data of the situation. That said, the assumption that race was devised solely to exploit and oppress people of color is absurd; far more likely, race is merely a result of the human tendency to classify people based on observable factors.
If you want to read more about the science behind what I've described, go ahead and check out humanphenotypes.net, a quality website that contains and compares over a century of research into race, ethnicity, genetics, and human history in general. You can see a pre-globalization map of human phenotypes world-wide, as well as traits associated with those phenotypes, and descriptions of those traits alongside more detailed explanations of possible trait origins and evolutionary connections. You can also take a look at the comparisons between various researches and theories that have either held up or since been found inaccurate. It is some truly fascinating work!
Can you direct me to the fatalities data per chance? Been looking for that for a while now because I remember seeing a graph with barely any increase, but I can't find it anymore and I wanted to use it to redpill someone.
Thanks!
It's just people that don't understand it or the capability of determined saboteurs that are pushing for this. It's well known in cyber security that security hinges not on advanced technologies or anti-virus, but the people operating the machinery itself. That's why security is so much more about designing network systems architecture with regards to users and their levels of access, I.E. don't give people permissions or accesses they don't need.
Elections need maximum possible transparency, not more layers of tech that will confuse 90%+ of the populace and make votes impossible to measure.
Engineering such an election system is a highly challenging task, to be sure. Security isn't about preventing ALL threats, however, it's about minimizing threat impact and size. A few lost ballots is a lot better than someone being able to change a few thousand with ease.
I'm no legalpede, but I heard the AZ senate is in process of securing their autonomy over the audit with the AZ supreme court. It's possible that he knows he just can't stop it; he could order a halt, sure, and then the AZSC could overrule. Just like they did to us during the fraud (ignoring judges/selective listening to rulings) our auditors can go ahead and continue on the authority of the AZSC and ignore the other rulings.
I honestly don't know if this is true, but I think this whole legal thing has been taken so slowly because they know there's a good chance they'll get overruled and fighting it too hard will just keep them looking worse and worse.
I totally see what you're saying and wasn't accusing you of being pro-nazi, just explaining why a lot of people that aren't programmed still get the visceral reaction.
I actually think we need less militarism right now. Putting some kind of boot down to make them "toughen up" will probably just cause resistance and self-destruction. I think instead, we need to just cut off the corrupt entities from influencing them and give them a taste of real freedom, real liberty, and the responsibilities that are accompanying (in other words, justice). Given their own eyes and ears back, and a wide world of opportunity and responsibility, I think many will find their way and return to resilience.
Glad to discuss these things!
General reactions to Hitler / nazi germany are strongly programmed in most people, makes most discussion as neo-Nazi or antisemitic as default.
That isn't because of programming as much as because most literal nazis (the kinds that wank to hitler and shit) usually take a really mild opening approach and only open up on you slowly. They'll start with "Hmm, there sure are a lot of jews in positions of power, aren't there?" and "Well, what if hitler was smeared by the globalists?" or the likes.
Questioning the narrative is in and of itself not inherently bad, but many of us have had enough arguments with the more extreme folk to react pretty harshly to what appears to be their doings.
Here's a comparison: How would you react if someone started musing about Putin's relationship with Trump, like such: "Putin seemed to like having Trump in office, and Trump seemed to like Putin a lot... Then there's Trump's calls with Ukraine..."? You'd sniff out a "blueanon" right away, and you'd probably kick in to curb and cull their arguments before they even start.
Anyway. Nazi Germany's system was not good for the typical citizen. Hitler couldn't be voted out if he wasn't performing well. There were no guarantees that you could avoid spontaneous arrest or "disappearing".
Really, when you remove region, Nazism was remarkably similar to most implementations of socialism/communism. Given that they're all a sham by a despot (or group of despots), of course they'll wear different paints, and of course they'll hate each other's guts. It's hard to say what the long term layout of Nazi Germany would have been had no wars been declared; many of the famines and the likes that are so characteristic of communist regimes either started prior to initial founding or many years into the governing.
In general, short term growths and booms are not totally difficult to trigger. Sustainability is a much greater factor at determining governmental efficacy, and, given a lot of the German economy growth went into fueling a war machine, it is possible if not probable that Germany's economy under Nazism would not have been sustainable.
Finally, even removing the genocidal component, you still have a highly militarist component that involves picking fights and feeding your populace to the carnage. That, too, is not particularly good for the typical citizen.
It is interesting and good to discuss this nonetheless. I would recommend a different approach to the subject down the line, should you seek to open discussion. Questioning specific things like "the economics of Hitler's Germany" or the likes tends to be clearer and avoid an aggressive reaction!
Ehhhhhhhh that's a stretch. Most northerners I know like dumping on the south because it's funny; it's like dumping on someone that supports a different sports team. It's been going on for ages, too; probably since the civil war even.