top

YearOfGlad #wingnut #psycho datasecretslox.com

This is going out on a ledge, but ...

SOME people. Some people, very right-wing people, have articulated the idea that the US is currently in a kinetic Civil War. The left wing is FAR more willing and organized to commit political violence. That's actually a feature of left-wing communist revolutions. They know they can attack the populace, normal people, with impunity. They will riot and bomb and assassinate until they get their desired outcome, which is terror/anarchy, revolution, then total authoritarian martial law.

I will describe this (not endorse it) one response as FIVE-TO-ONE [521]

When Trump is killed, true Republicans need to rise up, load their guns, and go out and kill five (5) registered Democrats. Voting and donor rolls are a matter of public record, you can easily get a list of people near you. Go kill them. It's the only way. Rwanda, Spain are the models here.

I do not endorse this, but it is a thought that is out there. Some think that a Rwanda-level total civilian massacre is the way to end this once and for all. They think this because they truly believe that the Left would herd them into death camps without blinking an eye. Go pay a visit to Lucy and Larry Lefty down the street and kill them before they kill you.

Some are saying this, 10x are thinking this.

educationhero #sexist datasecretslox.com

But even suggesting [the importance of relative status in dating] to women this runs afoul of multiple modern sacred cows, including:

1. Men and women are the same (except sometimes women are better).
2. High partner counts generally signify an attractive man (women find him attractive) and an unattractive woman (men won't commit to her).
3. Women should pursue whoever they want and commenting on her choices constitutes misogynistically judging her.
4. Every woman is a wonderful 10/10, perfect just the way she is.
5. Every woman is a princess who deserves a 6'9" billionaire vampire king and should never settle for less.
6. Women become more beautiful with age, so no reason to rush.
7. To increase marriage rates, men need to shape up.

Alexander Turok #racist datasecretslox.com

Imagine the following immigration policy, crafted by taking commonly cited objections to immigration at face value. It would include.

1. Open borders for white people, defined as anyone with 7/8ths or greater European ancestry, provable by genealogical records or a DNA test. (I imagine the latter would be commonly used in Latin America.) Justification: obvious.

2. Open borders for middle-Eastern Christians. Justification: they won’t sympathize with the Muslim world or other non-whites.

3. Open borders for Japanese and Koreans. Justification: proven ability to build wealthy, high-trust societies.

4. Open borders for Taiwanese and Hong Kongers who descend from those on the island before 1997. Justification: will be more likely than not to oppose America’s geopolitical enemy.

5. Open borders for non-black women willing to marry and have children with non-Leftist white American men. Justification: such women and their children are unlikely to be anti-white.

6. Immigration quotas for groups like Cubans, whose American co-nationals show a record of pro-capitalist, anti-ethnic bloc voting. Justification: allows people who will probably be good voters into the country, while allowing the flow to be cut off if the new immigrants turn out different from the old immigrants.

7. Immigration quotas for those unlikely to join any existing ethnic bloc-voting constituency or sympathize with geopolitical enemies (Sri Lankan Buddhists, Indonesian and Indian Christians, Yezidis, Indigenous Siberians, etc) Justification: weakens the existing ethnic blocs in the United States.

8. Immigration quotas for atheists in the Muslim world, with atheists of such origin be charged with selecting who will receive the spots and discovering fakers. Justification: while some fakers would slip through, most would be genuinely opposed to Islam and this would drain the Islamic world of human capital.

While you could protest that this agenda would not be politically popular and risks getting struck down as unconstitutional, it need not win any elections.