You know the story of the naked king who got swindled?
In reality, the story ends with a child saying "the king is naked" and that child being put to death along with his entire family and everyone else pretending that the king isn't naked even though he clearly is.
Courage is a rare and dangerous trait and we are all lacking.
Really. That story is written by a stupid, thirsty lesbian broad with degenerate rape fantasies. It has nothing to do with reality in principle because that's just not the way reality works and it's knee-jerk idiocy to think otherwise.
A million things are named Gilead because it's a biblical name of significance.
I'm sorry, but that is really, really, really very stupid. About as stupid as anything could be.
Imagine if fertility becomes extremely rare. What would a fertile woman be worth to men of wealth and power?
Answer: everything. Fertile women would become the most valuable, coveted things in the world.
What do men of wealth and power do with valuable things they own? Think rare cars and paintings.
They put them under lock and key, care for them like a mother with a newborn, never, ever share them with anyone.
In a world where fertility is extremely rare, every single fertile woman would be imprisoned in a palace, surrounded by unimaginable luxury, spoiled beyond belief, but guarded 24/7 by a regiment of security and never allowed to even talk to another man. And all the infertile women would be spending 365 days every year trying to trick a man into believing they were fertile.
That show is literally retarded, conceived by a person with sick rape fantasies who doesn't understand anything about how the world works. No one should be watching it, let alone thinking that it has anything to do with the future.
There is no better illustration of the decrepitude of Western civilization than the deification of a washed-up junky just because of the circumstances around his OD death. A man who lived like he died: worthless. But buried in a golden casket in a farcical clown-show mockery of the solemn ceremonies of death.
It's actually kind of great, to be honest. Its like we get to see Rome burn in slow motion from front row seats.
Ars is a woke cesspit and has been for a long time.
Anyway, they call it that because while it's technically physically the same substance, the statement 100% bullshit because it didn't say Comirnaty on the bottle and you won't be able to sue Pfizer if your dick falls off after the injection.
Remember the clique of popular kids in highschool? That's the cabal.
While their unified goal of any group of aristocrats is to become more an aristocratic (i.e. a person who has zero accountability who has complete control of someone else's survival), the inner sphere is always it's own crab bucket of betreyal and villainy
The only thing a cabal hates more than us plebs is each other, and only external threats like the threat to globalism from Trump forces them to unify their unimaginably powerful forces.
Turn the other cheek means something completely different.
Hitting on the cheek is what a superior does to an end inferior to put him in his place.
Turning the other cheek is to accept the pain of the hit as an equal instead of accepting your position as an inferior.
It's not just that.
Covid is the pharm industry's gravy train for years to come. First the vaccines, then the vaccine 2.0 boosters, then the "miracle" drug suddenly discovered just in time for the normie realization that the vaccines killed thousands of people and aren't safe or effective. And you know this miracle drug will just be a patentable molecule with the same mechanism of action as ivermectin. Maybe a derivative of some sort. Literally hundreds of billions of dollars on the table
But no one is getting anything if the disease is cured by common generics.
The business isn't a person and can't care about anything.
The people running the business obviously care about money, but they get fistfuls regardless.
Once you have shitloads of money, more money is rarely a motivation for anything. It's more about power, status, access, adulation from the plebs etc. etc.
Leftism can give you all those things on a personal level. Making a business profitable cannot.
Oh there's absolutely no point in trying to figure out which bullshit definition of "racism" is being used or what the implications are.
That's the whole point. You have to reject the entire thing outright, at the root. Not because the construct is illogical or irrational, it isn't. But because the construct is useless bullshit with no practical or functional purpose outside the personal increase of wealth and power for those insidious bullshit-smiths who crafted the thing in the halls of academia.
Again, you're looking at this mess and thinking "this makes no sense" and thinking there is no logic here.
But there is. It's just that the words "empowered" and "misogyny" aren't defined the way you think they are, as fixed, discrete and continuous concepts defined once.
No, misogyny isn't a fixed value. Misogyny is a function. Misogyny = f(x,y,z). And the actual value you get depends entirely on the context and value of the variables (which are themselves functions)
Whether or not something is misogyny depends on who did the action being judged, their social status, their location in space and time, their nationality, their race, their sexuality, their prior actions and adherence to the faith etc etc etc. And this is by definition.
Within this definition, a man killing women because he hates them can be totally non-misogyny (think trans male POC muslim attacking TERF women at a Trump rally) while a woman buying a dress for her daughter can be totally misogyny.
Trying to argue logic within this framework is useless. You need to argue semantics.
Neither logic nor rationale work. They argue with feelings as if ours don’t matter
That just isn't true.
Starting with Marx himself, all the ideas are rational, logical and analytical. This is largely why the ideas became so popular. People turned away from religious thinking towards "scientific" thinking.
The problem isn't that it's not logical. The problem is that the definitions and axioms that serve as the foundation of the (rational and logical) models lead to models that don't work as such.
The point is that you shouldn't be arguing logic. The logic is fine. You should be pointing out that their models completely fail to predict reality every single time (which what a model does) and the reason this happens is because their definitions are useless bullshit.
Leftism is basically like solving a physics problem by placing yourself in a randomly accelerating point of reference. The math to solve this could be completely fine even though the result will be bullshit.
You don't even need the practice.
First of all, the nice man at the pharma company will be more than happy to help with a proper methodology. Second, you can publish absolute dogshit as long as it fits the narrative. "Lancetgate" happened because it was beyond the pale and completely fake, and even then it was just a retraction without any real long-term consequences. If you make a paper without blatantly fake data you'll be fine.
"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgement of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine"
- Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine
Like all antivirals, Remdesivir is completely useless by that stage of the illness. All the virus is already dead