by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:28 am
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Kannadrickium » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:29 am
by Liriena » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:31 am
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by The South Falls » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:31 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Right now, the western world is making babies regardless of the environmental consequences, partly because they want to, but partly to compete with Middle Eastern immigrants who are making babies of their own.
Some have suggested that the alternative is to stop taking in Middle Eastern immigrants in the first place. But this would doom them to a life of poverty and war. Why not just place limits on the number of children you can have, regardless of race, so that the Middle Eastern immigrants can't outbreed the locals, and the environment will be better protected from us humans?
by Kenmoria » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:32 am
by The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:33 am
by United Muscovite Nations » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:34 am
Liriena wrote:I guess I should have seen this coming... "muh great replacement" leading people to embrace Maoist reproductive policies.
by Liriena » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:34 am
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:No beacuse there's a bunch of unused unsettled land.
Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, Northern Ontario.
Hell even the South Ontario still has whole load of nothing.
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by The South Falls » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:34 am
Kenmoria wrote:A one child, or two child policy simply wouldn't work, just look at what happened in China.
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:No beacuse there's a bunch of unused unsettled land.
Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, Northern Ontario.
Hell even the South Ontario still has whole load of nothing.
by The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:35 am
by Liriena » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:36 am
United Muscovite Nations wrote:Liriena wrote:I guess I should have seen this coming... "muh great replacement" leading people to embrace Maoist reproductive policies.
Great replacement isn't a meme, there are large parts of Europe where demographic trends have non-natives replacing natives within a few generations. Though I don't think this is all due to Middle Eastern migration, but also due to Polish and Eastern European migration.
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Valrifell » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:36 am
United Muscovite Nations wrote:Liriena wrote:I guess I should have seen this coming... "muh great replacement" leading people to embrace Maoist reproductive policies.
Great replacement isn't a meme, there are large parts of Europe where demographic trends have non-natives replacing natives within a few generations. Though I don't think this is all due to Middle Eastern migration, but also due to Polish and Eastern European migration.
by Liriena » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:36 am
The South Falls wrote:The Entire Canadian North is just... nothing...
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Len Hyet » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:36 am
by Valrifell » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:38 am
Len Hyet wrote:It's also morally objectionable to force people to have more or fewer children at gunpoint.
Why has this point not been raised?
by The South Falls » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:38 am
by San Marlindo » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:45 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Right now, the western world is making babies regardless of the environmental consequences, partly because they want to, but partly to compete with Middle Eastern immigrants who are making babies of their own.
"Cold, analytical, materialistic thinking tends to throttle the urge to imagination." - Michael Chekhov
by United Muscovite Nations » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:46 am
Liriena wrote:United Muscovite Nations wrote:Great replacement isn't a meme, there are large parts of Europe where demographic trends have non-natives replacing natives within a few generations. Though I don't think this is all due to Middle Eastern migration, but also due to Polish and Eastern European migration.
Eeeeh...
(Germany)In 2015 36% children under 5 years old had migrant background.[43]
[In 2010, the proportion of migrant families in all families was 32% in the former territory of the Federal Republic. This figure was more than double that in the new Länder (incl. Berlin) where it stood at 15%.[42]/quote](Frankfurt)According to data from the city register of residents, 51.2% of the population had an immigrant background as of 2015. For the first time a majority of the city residents had a non-German background.[26] Moreover, three of four children in the city under the age of six had immigrant backgrounds.[27] Moreover, about 27.7% of residents had a foreign citizenship.[28]The scope of foreign origin can be estimated by the National Screening Program for Sickle Cell Disease because the genetic disease very rarely affects European people. Under government rules, newborn babies are screened when their backgrounds place them at risk of inheriting two copies of the sickle-cell gene, with the following criteria:[33]
Both parents are known to originate from a risk region.
If the identity of one parent (i.e., the father) is unknown, the other (the mother) originates from a risk region.
There is a family history of sickle-cell disease, regardless of the above.
If there is any doubt as to the three preceding criteria, the baby is tested.[34]
The screening suggests that in 2000, 19 percent of all newborn babies in Metropolitan France had at least one parent originating from one of the risk regions. The figure for 2007 was 28.45 percent, for 2010 31.5 percent, for 2012 34.44 percent, for 2013 35.7 percent,[35] and for 2015 38.9 percent.[33] These percentages vary widely among French regions; for example, in 2015, screening suggested that only 8.1% of children born in Brittany had a parent originating from a sickle-cell risk region, while 73.4% of children born in Île-de-France (which includes Paris) did.[36] The percentage for Île-de-France was a significant increase from 54.2% in 2005.[33] However, a 2014 story in Le Monde suggested that the testing figures for Île-de-France were distorted by the practices of some hospitals in the region, which choose to test all babies whether or not they have parents with ancestry from an endemic sickle-cell region.[37]
by Novowarsawianka » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:56 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Right now, the western world is making babies regardless of the environmental consequences, partly because they want to, but partly to compete with Middle Eastern immigrants who are making babies of their own.
Some have suggested that the alternative is to stop taking in Middle Eastern immigrants in the first place. But this would doom them to a life of poverty and war. Why not just place limits on the number of children you can have, regardless of race, so that the Middle Eastern immigrants can't outbreed the locals, and the environment will be better protected from us humans?
by Essu Beti » Sat Jan 13, 2018 11:11 am
National News Radio: A large-scale infrastructure project will soon be underway. During this time, for safety reasons, the island will be closed to tourists and foreign news agents. We do expect a minor loss in revenue due to this, but this will be greatly offset by both the long and short-term benefits of the infrastructure project. If your job is negatively impacted by the island closure, please send a letter or verbal message via courier to the Council so that we can add you to the list of beneficiaries of foreign aid.
by Purpelia » Sat Jan 13, 2018 11:19 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Right now, the western world is making babies regardless of the environmental consequences, partly because they want to, but partly to compete with Middle Eastern immigrants who are making babies of their own.
Some have suggested that the alternative is to stop taking in Middle Eastern immigrants in the first place. But this would doom them to a life of poverty and war. Why not just place limits on the number of children you can have, regardless of race, so that the Middle Eastern immigrants can't outbreed the locals, and the environment will be better protected from us humans?
by Greed and Death » Sat Jan 13, 2018 11:41 am
Kannadrickium wrote:If we learned anything from Prohibition it's that people will just make babies in their bathtubs.
by United Imperial Systems » Sat Jan 13, 2018 11:46 am
United Muscovite Nations wrote:
There are already parts of Europe (like Frankfurt) where the majority is immigrant, and in the United States, the trend is pretty much irreversible already, with whites no longer being a majority of births.(Germany)In 2015 36% children under 5 years old had migrant background.[43][In 2010, the proportion of migrant families in all families was 32% in the former territory of the Federal Republic. This figure was more than double that in the new Länder (incl. Berlin) where it stood at 15%.[42]/quote]
(Frankfurt)
(France)
Independent Carolina wrote:They got space ninja assassins with teleportation and freakin' light sabers man.
Would not fuck with them/10
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:56 pm
The South Falls wrote:LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Right now, the western world is making babies regardless of the environmental consequences, partly because they want to, but partly to compete with Middle Eastern immigrants who are making babies of their own.
Some have suggested that the alternative is to stop taking in Middle Eastern immigrants in the first place. But this would doom them to a life of poverty and war. Why not just place limits on the number of children you can have, regardless of race, so that the Middle Eastern immigrants can't outbreed the locals, and the environment will be better protected from us humans?
Well, that would be
1. Hard to Enforce: I mean, are we going to have a single officer in every single house, to see how many times couples have sex?
2. Baby Genocide (Sexist Baby Genocide): Boys would probably be placed over girls, meaning that a whole bunch of babies would be killed
and
3. Crazy: The Human race would eventually die out, because one child, producing one child is a reverse pyramid, where there will eventually be only one left.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:00 pm
Novowarsawianka wrote:Besides, giving a cap to breeding is wrong. But we should encourage poorer people to have less children, and educated and wealthy people to have more. Poor people can't afford to send 5 kids to college really, but 1 or 2 would be doable. Sexual education, affordable protection and so on are the key.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Corporate Collective Salvation, Eahland, Experina, Ifreann, Ineva, La Xinga, Marxist Mississippi, Norse Inuit Union, Trump ALMIGHTY, Umeria
Advertisement