NATION

PASSWORD

Left-Wing Discussion Thread III

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

What type of leftist are you?

Left-leaning Centrist
105
13%
Left/Social Liberal
74
9%
Social Democrat
115
14%
Democratic Socialist
139
17%
Marxist Communist
139
17%
Social Anarchist
50
6%
Individualist Anarchist
38
5%
Revolutionary Syndicalist
39
5%
Communalist
27
3%
Other (Please Post)
71
9%
 
Total votes : 797

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:09 pm

Genivaria wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
They were fairly irrelevant by the time of the Louisiana Purchase, and only really saw a brief minor increase in popularity towards the beginning of the War of 1812.

It's also worth noting that their pacifism and near-defeatist rhetoric during the War of 1812 is what killed them as a party, with them holding barely any sway outside of New England by the end of the war, and going completely extinct as a party by the mid-1820's.

If by Federalists he mean't the Whigs then he might have a point, the Whigs supported Manifest Destiny.
But wait he previously said he supports the Whigs.


I assumed he meant the actual political party.

Either way, if he meant the Whigs in general than that's a bit odd, considering how they weren't pacifistic in the slightest.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:09 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:Federalists (who were the moralist party for the most, often coming from Puritan stock) strongly opposed it.


They were fairly irrelevant by the time of the Louisiana Purchase, and only really saw a brief minor increase in popularity towards the beginning of the War of 1812.

It's also worth noting that their pacifism and near-defeatist rhetoric during the War of 1812 is what killed them as a party, with them holding barely any sway outside of New England by the end of the war, and going completely extinct as a party by the mid-1820's.

1812 was a war to annex Canada, total, bs. The Federalist Party later reorganized into the Whigs, though, and then later the Republican Party, which kept largely to the same ideals until the 70's
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:11 pm

Genivaria wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
They were fairly irrelevant by the time of the Louisiana Purchase, and only really saw a brief minor increase in popularity towards the beginning of the War of 1812.

It's also worth noting that their pacifism and near-defeatist rhetoric during the War of 1812 is what killed them as a party, with them holding barely any sway outside of New England by the end of the war, and going completely extinct as a party by the mid-1820's.

If by Federalists he mean't the Whigs then he might have a point, the Whigs supported Manifest Destiny.
But wait he previously said he supports the Whigs.

Northern Whigs tended to oppose it, which is what ended Lincoln's first foray into politics.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:12 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
Genivaria wrote:If by Federalists he mean't the Whigs then he might have a point, the Whigs supported Manifest Destiny.
But wait he previously said he supports the Whigs.


I assumed he meant the actual political party.

Either way, if he meant the Whigs in general than that's a bit odd, considering how they weren't pacifistic in the slightest.

Ironic that the 'Party of Peace' was also the party of protecting slavery.
*BREAK THE CHAINS*
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:12 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
Genivaria wrote:If by Federalists he mean't the Whigs then he might have a point, the Whigs supported Manifest Destiny.
But wait he previously said he supports the Whigs.


I assumed he meant the actual political party.

Either way, if he meant the Whigs in general than that's a bit odd, considering how they weren't pacifistic in the slightest.

They were not pacifist, but were anti imperialist unlike the Jacksonians
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:17 pm

Genivaria wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
I assumed he meant the actual political party.

Either way, if he meant the Whigs in general than that's a bit odd, considering how they weren't pacifistic in the slightest.

Ironic that the 'Party of Peace' was also the party of protecting slavery.
*BREAK THE CHAINS*


You think the Jacksonians were the party of peace?
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:18 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Ironic that the 'Party of Peace' was also the party of protecting slavery.
*BREAK THE CHAINS*


You think the Jacksonians were the party of peace?

Considering how broad your definition of 'imperialism' is.
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:20 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
They were fairly irrelevant by the time of the Louisiana Purchase, and only really saw a brief minor increase in popularity towards the beginning of the War of 1812.

It's also worth noting that their pacifism and near-defeatist rhetoric during the War of 1812 is what killed them as a party, with them holding barely any sway outside of New England by the end of the war, and going completely extinct as a party by the mid-1820's.

1812 was a war to annex Canada, total, bs. The Federalist Party later reorganized into the Whigs, though, and then later the Republican Party, which kept largely to the same ideals until the 70's


I... can't really disagree since I'm both Canadian and nationalist as all hell, but at least from the American perspective, I can't rightly condemn a nation for seeing what appears to be low-hanging fruit and attempting to snatch it, only to get mauled by a passive-aggressive beaver.

As for supposed Republican passivity prior to the 70's, remind me which party was running the show when these events happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_Panama_from_Colombia

Nevermind the events of the American Civil War or the handling of the Cold War during Eisenhower's presidency.

I don't really see how the party could rightly be considered pacifistic pre-1970's.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:25 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:1812 was a war to annex Canada, total, bs. The Federalist Party later reorganized into the Whigs, though, and then later the Republican Party, which kept largely to the same ideals until the 70's


I... can't really disagree since I'm both Canadian and nationalist as all hell, but at least from the American perspective, I can't rightly condemn a nation for seeing what appears to be low-hanging fruit and attempting to snatch it, only to get mauled by a passive-aggressive beaver.

As for supposed Republican passivity prior to the 70's, remind me which party was running the show when these events happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_Panama_from_Colombia

Nevermind the events of the American Civil War or the handling of the Cold War during Eisenhower's presidency.

I don't really see how the party could rightly be considered pacifistic pre-1970's.

Canada and the US should be one, we are brothers divided by a British monarch. *nods* :D
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:26 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
I assumed he meant the actual political party.

Either way, if he meant the Whigs in general than that's a bit odd, considering how they weren't pacifistic in the slightest.

They were not pacifist, but were anti imperialist unlike the Jacksonians


They certainly gave zero fucks about tearing the Iroquois Confederacy to shreds.

Or the initial US attempt to capture Canada towards the beginning of the War of Independence, for that matter.

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:30 pm

Genivaria wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
I assumed he meant the actual political party.

Either way, if he meant the Whigs in general than that's a bit odd, considering how they weren't pacifistic in the slightest.

Ironic that the 'Party of Peace' was also the party of protecting slavery.
*BREAK THE CHAINS*


I guess liberty and freedom only applied to whitey. :p

Genivaria wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
I... can't really disagree since I'm both Canadian and nationalist as all hell, but at least from the American perspective, I can't rightly condemn a nation for seeing what appears to be low-hanging fruit and attempting to snatch it, only to get mauled by a passive-aggressive beaver.

As for supposed Republican passivity prior to the 70's, remind me which party was running the show when these events happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_Panama_from_Colombia

Nevermind the events of the American Civil War or the handling of the Cold War during Eisenhower's presidency.

I don't really see how the party could rightly be considered pacifistic pre-1970's.

Canada and the US should be one, we are brothers divided by a British monarch. *nods* :D


tfw, you're anti-monarchy but also fiercely nationalist.

Sorry mate, but no can do. You had your two chances during the War of Independence and 1812.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:32 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Ironic that the 'Party of Peace' was also the party of protecting slavery.
*BREAK THE CHAINS*


I guess liberty and freedom only applied to whitey. :p

Genivaria wrote:Canada and the US should be one, we are brothers divided by a British monarch. *nods* :D


tfw, you're anti-monarchy but also fiercely nationalist.

Sorry mate, but no can do. You had your two chances during the War of Independence and 1812.

Your flag is a leaf. A LEAF.
We're all Americans some by continent some by country, lets just make it one and the same yeah? :p

As an aside I just took a Pew Research Political quiz and even after saying that I supported the military, foreign intervention, and American nationalism I'm still a liberal democrat.
Funny, since my fellow liberals would accuse me of being a fascist.
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16583
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:34 pm

Genivaria wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
I guess liberty and freedom only applied to whitey. :p



tfw, you're anti-monarchy but also fiercely nationalist.

Sorry mate, but no can do. You had your two chances during the War of Independence and 1812.

Your flag is a leaf. A LEAF.
We're all Americans some by continent some by country, lets just make it one and the same yeah? :p

As an aside I just took a Pew Research Political quiz and even after saying that I supported the military, foreign intervention, and American nationalism I'm still a liberal democrat.
Funny, since my fellow liberals would accuse me of being a fascist.

That's because you're a neoliberal, and most people don't know what fascism is.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism.
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:35 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Your flag is a leaf. A LEAF.
We're all Americans some by continent some by country, lets just make it one and the same yeah? :p

As an aside I just took a Pew Research Political quiz and even after saying that I supported the military, foreign intervention, and American nationalism I'm still a liberal democrat.
Funny, since my fellow liberals would accuse me of being a fascist.

That's because you're a neoliberal, and most people don't know what fascism is.

Aren't neo-liberals all about laissez-faire capitalism and no regulations?
*Hiss!*
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:36 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:1812 was a war to annex Canada, total, bs. The Federalist Party later reorganized into the Whigs, though, and then later the Republican Party, which kept largely to the same ideals until the 70's


I... can't really disagree since I'm both Canadian and nationalist as all hell, but at least from the American perspective, I can't rightly condemn a nation for seeing what appears to be low-hanging fruit and attempting to snatch it, only to get mauled by a passive-aggressive beaver.

As for supposed Republican passivity prior to the 70's, remind me which party was running the show when these events happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_Panama_from_Colombia

Nevermind the events of the American Civil War or the handling of the Cold War during Eisenhower's presidency.

I don't really see how the party could rightly be considered pacifistic pre-1970's.

Fortunaty I never said they were pacifists.

No doubt Roosevelt was a very abnormal Republican, which is why he broke with the party.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:37 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
I... can't really disagree since I'm both Canadian and nationalist as all hell, but at least from the American perspective, I can't rightly condemn a nation for seeing what appears to be low-hanging fruit and attempting to snatch it, only to get mauled by a passive-aggressive beaver.

As for supposed Republican passivity prior to the 70's, remind me which party was running the show when these events happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_Panama_from_Colombia

Nevermind the events of the American Civil War or the handling of the Cold War during Eisenhower's presidency.

I don't really see how the party could rightly be considered pacifistic pre-1970's.

Fortunaty I never said they were pacifists.

No doubt Roosevelt was a very abnormal Republican, which is why he broke with the party.

There is a reason that Teddy is a Meme-lord.
\
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16583
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:40 pm

Genivaria wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:That's because you're a neoliberal, and most people don't know what fascism is.

Aren't neo-liberals all about laissez-faire capitalism and no regulations?
*Hiss!*

Neoliberals are about spreading capitalism. They're the NeoCons of the Liberal world.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism.
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:40 pm

I would also say if Huey Long were elected President, the Democrats would have maintained a strong continuity with their Jacksonian, Jeffersonian heritage. But FDR reforged the party.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:42 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Aren't neo-liberals all about laissez-faire capitalism and no regulations?
*Hiss!*

Neoliberals are about spreading capitalism. They're the NeoCons of the Liberal world.

Then that's not me.
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

User avatar
Estonian Republic of Uzumakistan
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 42
Founded: Dec 13, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Estonian Republic of Uzumakistan » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:44 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:I would also say if Huey Long were elected President, the Democrats would have maintained a strong continuity with their Jacksonian, Jeffersonian heritage. But FDR reforged the party.

True. Don't forget about this Diabolical Bastard right here.

Image

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16583
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:44 pm

Genivaria wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:Neoliberals are about spreading capitalism. They're the NeoCons of the Liberal world.

Then that's not me.

If you're a "liberal democrat" who supports American imperialism in the world, then that very much sounds like neoliberalism. I mean, the only thing really separating you from a Neocon is that you're pro-regulation.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism.
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:48 pm

Genivaria wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
I guess liberty and freedom only applied to whitey. :p



tfw, you're anti-monarchy but also fiercely nationalist.

Sorry mate, but no can do. You had your two chances during the War of Independence and 1812.

Your flag is a leaf. A LEAF.
We're all Americans some by continent some by country, lets just make it one and the same yeah? :p

As an aside I just took a Pew Research Political quiz and even after saying that I supported the military, foreign intervention, and American nationalism I'm still a liberal democrat.
Funny, since my fellow liberals would accuse me of being a fascist.


A maple leaf, the most glorious of all the leaves.

And at any rate, we make up for the lackluster patriotic symbolism with our wildlife:

Image


Sort of...

Image


In terms of your political orientation, I figure it's your economic beliefs that more or less peg you liberal rather than moderately conservative. At any rate, liberals historically have tended to be fairly patriotic, even nationalist. It's just the modern socialized crap that's neutered the entire ideology.
Last edited by Sanctissima on Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:49 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Then that's not me.

If you're a "liberal democrat" who supports American imperialism in the world, then that very much sounds like neoliberalism. I mean, the only thing really separating you from a Neocon is that you're pro-regulation.

Not imperialism just not opposed to intervention.
If you want to use those terms synonymously then we're of course going to differ.
And besides if the big names behind neo-liberalism are Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and Alan Greenspan then it is a serious stretch to try and put me under that label.
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16583
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:50 pm

Genivaria wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:If you're a "liberal democrat" who supports American imperialism in the world, then that very much sounds like neoliberalism. I mean, the only thing really separating you from a Neocon is that you're pro-regulation.

Not imperialism just not opposed to intervention.
If you want to use those terms synonymously then we're of course going to differ.
And besides if the big names behind neo-liberalism are Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and Alan Greenspan then it is a serious stretch to try and put me under that label.

Where do you differ on them besides economics?
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism.
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62034
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:51 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Your flag is a leaf. A LEAF.
We're all Americans some by continent some by country, lets just make it one and the same yeah? :p

As an aside I just took a Pew Research Political quiz and even after saying that I supported the military, foreign intervention, and American nationalism I'm still a liberal democrat.
Funny, since my fellow liberals would accuse me of being a fascist.


A maple leaf, the most glorious of all the leaves.

And at any rate, we make up for the lackluster patriotic symbolism with our wildlife:

Image


Sort of...

Image


In terms of your political orientation, I figure it's your economic beliefs that more or less peg you liberal rather than moderately conservative. At any rate, liberals historically have tended to be fairly patriotic, even nationalist. It's just the modern socialized crap that's neutered the entire ideology.

Yes shame that.
If not for the damn Red Scare we might have a decent Social Market Economy.
General Sherman did nothing wrong, fact.
Liberal Social Democrat.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Australian rePublic, Dooom35796821595, Dumb Ideologies, Idzequitch, Sane Outcasts, The New California Republic, Vassenor, Yahoo [Bot]

Advertisement

Remove ads