Right-Wing Discussion Thread

[Visegradian Poland]

I was talking about Trump.
TrumpStump

Well, he's giving Oompa Loompas a bad name.

Don't you start being racist to oranges now.
But seriously, what did he do that was so hateful?

[Geilinor]

Well, he's giving Oompa Loompas a bad name.

Don't you start being racist to oranges now.
But seriously, what did he do that was so hateful?

Don't be dense.
Calls Hispanic immigrants "rapists" and "criminals"
Says that Muslims were celebrating on 9/11
Wants to ban Muslim travel
Insulted women and disabled people

[Quokkastan]

Don't you start being racist to oranges now.
But seriously, what did he do that was so hateful?

Don't be dense.
Calls Hispanic immigrants "rapists" and "criminals"
Says that Muslims were celebrating on 9/11
Wants to ban Muslim travel
Insulted women and disabled people

And have you seen his TV show?

[The Greater Aryan Race]

Well, he's giving Oompa Loompas a bad name.

Trumpa stumpa trumpety doo
I've got a perfect puzzle for you
Trumpa stumpa trumpety dee
If you are wise you'll listen to me

What happens when you put a wig on a stump?
You get a vulgar racist like Donald J Trump
He and his fetish for building a wall
Gotta get down and deport 'em all
I don't like the look of it

Trumpa stumpa trumpety da
If you're not a sexist, you will go far
You will live in happiness too
Unlike the Trumpa Stumpa Trumpety do
Trumpety too

[Visegradian Poland]

Don't you start being racist to oranges now.
But seriously, what did he do that was so hateful?

Don't be dense.
Calls Hispanic immigrants "rapists" and "criminals"
Says that Muslims were celebrating on 9/11
Wants to ban Muslim travel
Insulted women and disabled people

He called the illegals rapists and criminals
They were
How is that racist? It's for extra security, not to make them feel bad.
Where?

[Jochistan]

Don't be dense.
Calls Hispanic immigrants "rapists" and "criminals"
Says that Muslims were celebrating on 9/11
Wants to ban Muslim travel
Insulted women and disabled people

He called the illegals rapists and criminals
They were
How is that racist?

Really.
Besides, are illegal immigrants from Mexico really causing a spike in crime nationwide?
And are you really saying they're all rapists and criminals?

[Visegradian Poland]

He called the illegals rapists and criminals
They were
How is that racist?

Really.
Besides, are illegal immigrants from Mexico really causing a spike in crime nationwide?
And are you really saying they're all rapists and criminals?

No. He said they bring rape and crime, which they do. Unless you think America should let in all the illegals. Who might be involved in the drug trade and cartels.

[Jochistan]

Really.
Besides, are illegal immigrants from Mexico really causing a spike in crime nationwide?
And are you really saying they're all rapists and criminals?

No. He said they bring rape and crime, which they do. Unless you think America should let in all the illegals. Who might be involved in the drug trade and cartels.

I didn't suggest that. But do they lead to an increase in rape. Really.

[Visegradian Poland]

No. He said they bring rape and crime, which they do. Unless you think America should let in all the illegals. Who might be involved in the drug trade and cartels.

I didn't suggest that. But do they lead to an increase in rape. Really.

Perhaps, but that's misinformation on Trump's part, not hate. And crime, probably.

[New confederate ramenia]

How SJW of you! It's race seperatism, not race supremacy. *goes off on a tangeant about how Aryans are culturally advanced compared to all other races*

Wait, Europeans are not fully Aryans...

A lot of Aryans aren't even white.

[New confederate ramenia]

Question for the monarchists in the thread. Can anyone be a king, or do you need to have noble blood? How do you define nobility?

[Italios]

Don't be dense.
Calls Hispanic immigrants "rapists" and "criminals"
Says that Muslims were celebrating on 9/11
Wants to ban Muslim travel
Insulted women and disabled people

He called the illegals rapists and criminals
They were
How is that racist? It's for extra security, not to make them feel bad.
Where?

He imitated a reporter who has a joint disability.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34930042

[Diopolis]

Question for the monarchists in the thread. Can anyone be a king, or do you need to have noble blood? How do you define nobility?

A king should ideally be of noble blood, the higher in nobility the better. Circumstances are not always ideal, however, and if it's impossible to find noble blood for the position, it is acceptable to create your own nobility.
Nobility is people whose families have been high in status for a long time and have acquired that status by reputable means. So no crime families, usurers, vice peddlers, etc. Land ownership, administrative talent, or military prowess being ideal for the task.

[Legitimists]

Question for the monarchists in the thread. Can anyone be a king, or do you need to have noble blood? How do you define nobility?

In my mind Monarchy serves to place Constitutional principles in an embodied incarnational form. The standards of legitimacy of Monarchy is anyone who can claim on compelling non-rational grounds to represent those principles. The reason must be non-rational as rationalistic arguments are easily arguable and therefore do not serve as a unifying role. Rather rational arguments serve a demonstrative role for a particular point of political policy and are thus unfit to justify the implementation of a unifying monarchy under which a consensus can be built. The easiest way to do this is to choose a family who has been influential throughout the history of a particular nation, in a role of public service - usually these families are noble and should be given preferential treatment in the establishment of a monarch; though this is not to say that nobles are metaphysically superoir they are not they just have the backing of history. Anybody though will do as long as they have strong values of public service and a history of acting as such. The reason for this is again the monarchy's role in unifying people of disparate opinions into one group, therefore a certain level of selflessness is needed. Businesses interests and the like are automatically disqualified due to the pursuit of personal profit , rather than national interest: capitalist arguments to the altruism apparently inherent in capitalism aside.

[Conscentia]

Question for the monarchists in the thread. Can anyone be a king, or do you need to have noble blood? How do you define nobility?

In my mind Monarchy serves to place Constitutional principles in an embodied incarnational form. The standards of legitimacy of Monarchy is anyone who can claim on compelling non-rational grounds to represent those principles. The reason must be non-rational as rationalistic arguments are easily arguable and therefore do not serve as a unifying role. [...]

Non-rational arguments are even more easily arguable. They're weak - if the argument is arbitrary, then it can be arbitrarily rejected just as easily.

[Legitimists]

In my mind Monarchy serves to place Constitutional principles in an embodied incarnational form. The standards of legitimacy of Monarchy is anyone who can claim on compelling non-rational grounds to represent those principles. The reason must be non-rational as rationalistic arguments are easily arguable and therefore do not serve as a unifying role. [...]

Non-rational arguments are even more easily arguable. They're weak - if the argument is arbitrary, then it can be arbitrarily rejected just as easily.

Rational arguments can be debated for objective truth value in fact Liberalism applied government institutions (heretofore accepted) to abstract epistemological scrutiny, causing several wars, millions of deaths and something called The Rights of Man, a state disagreeing with them can cause much pain and suffering indeed when the democracy promoters come around to noticing them. I'm not arguing against rational arguments per se, only abstract rationalist political philosophy being used to justify institutions. Historical constitutions are rational in the sense that they use empirical history and a certain type of historiography in order to justify then, it's just a stronger argument than a philosophical one since life as it is lived is taken into account rather than the results of a contractual thought experiment.

[New confederate ramenia]

Nobility is people whose families have been high in status for a long time and have acquired that status by reputable means. So no crime families, usurers, vice peddlers, etc. Land ownership, administrative talent, or military prowess being ideal for the task.

Oh, so a political family could be noble, even in a democracy? And banking families (usurers) can't be noble?

[New confederate ramenia]

Non-rational arguments are even more easily arguable. They're weak - if the argument is arbitrary, then it can be arbitrarily rejected just as easily.

Rational arguments can be debated for objective truth value in fact Liberalism applied government institutions (heretofore accepted) to abstract epistemological scrutiny, causing several wars, millions of deaths and something called The Rights of Man, a state disagreeing with them can cause much pain and suffering indeed when the democracy promoters come around to noticing them. I'm not arguing against rational arguments per se, only abstract rationalist political philosophy being used to justify institutions. Historical constitutions are rational in the sense that they use empirical history and a certain type of historiography in order to justify then, it's just a stronger argument than a philosophical one since life as it is lived is taken into account rather than the results of a contractual thought experiment.

I think you could be arguing against positivism more than just rationalism.

[Diopolis]

Nobility is people whose families have been high in status for a long time and have acquired that status by reputable means. So no crime families, usurers, vice peddlers, etc. Land ownership, administrative talent, or military prowess being ideal for the task.

Oh, so a political family could be noble, even in a democracy? And banking families (usurers) can't be noble?

Yes, a political family could be noble if they did a good job. Banking families not so much; usury is problematic. Although we can't get rid of it right now, that doesn't mean we should view it as a good thing- more like a necessary evil.

[The Grey Wolf]

Question for the monarchists in the thread. Can anyone be a king, or do you need to have noble blood? How do you define nobility?

A king should ideally be of noble blood, the higher in nobility the better. Circumstances are not always ideal, however, and if it's impossible to find noble blood for the position, it is acceptable to create your own nobility.
Nobility is people whose families have been high in status for a long time and have acquired that status by reputable means. So no crime families, usurers, vice peddlers, etc. Land ownership, administrative talent, or military prowess being ideal for the task.

Why is birth preferable to accomplishment?

If one were a Frenchmen in the 19th century, why should they have supported the incompetent House of Bourbon over the wildly successful House of Bonaparte who's founder brought an end to political chaos, defeated much of the European world, and turned France into an empire?

[Taosanga]

A king should ideally be of noble blood, the higher in nobility the better. Circumstances are not always ideal, however, and if it's impossible to find noble blood for the position, it is acceptable to create your own nobility.
Nobility is people whose families have been high in status for a long time and have acquired that status by reputable means. So no crime families, usurers, vice peddlers, etc. Land ownership, administrative talent, or military prowess being ideal for the task.

Why is birth preferable to accomplishment?

If one were a Frenchmen in the 19th century, why should they have supported the incompetent House of Bourbon over the wildly successful House of Bonaparte who's founder brought an end to political chaos, defeated much of the European world, and turned France into an empire?

Bigger, better, and more competent army policy. I like that.

[The Greater Aryan Race]

snip

Forgive me but aren't you a Legitimist? I was under the impression you leaned more towards the sort of absolute monarchy divine-right-of-kings concept that the House of Bourbon embodied.

[Old Tyrannia]

Question for the monarchists in the thread. Can anyone be a king, or do you need to have noble blood? How do you define nobility?

My belief is that the legitimacy of a monarch is determined by the laws and customs of the nation in question, which can differ quite significantly from one culture to another. In China, for example, anyone able to overthrow the current government and establish a new imperial dynasty could claim to possess the Mandate of Heaven and thus be a legitimate emperor. Social class is irrelevant- the Hongwu Emperor, founder of the Ming dynasty, was a peasant before he became leader of the resistance movement that overthrew the Mongol Yuan dynasty. By contrast, in Japan the legitimacy of the Imperial House is determined by descent from the first emperor, Jimmu, and through him from Amaterasu-Omikami, Goddess of the Sun. Consequently only those who can claim imperial lineage and thus descent from the first emperor are eligible to sit on the Chrysanthemum Throne.

[Kauthar]

He called the illegals rapists and criminals
They were
How is that racist?

Really.
Besides, are illegal immigrants from Mexico really causing a spike in crime nationwide?
And are you really saying they're all rapists and criminals?

no, only in areas they make up a large minority or majority

[Jochistan]

Really.
Besides, are illegal immigrants from Mexico really causing a spike in crime nationwide?
And are you really saying they're all rapists and criminals?

no, only in areas they make up a large minority or majority

I mean, my hometown really wasn't that crime ridden. It was actually one of the safest communities in America. And if I had to guess, like half the town was Latino.

Sure you had punks that liked to talk big. But just as many of those types where "white".