Separating urban and rural America.

[Senkaku]

Ask the French.

The French haven't been fashionable since Napoleon.

I believe Hugo Boss is out of the uniform business for the most part these days, but they do have an impeccable design reputation on that front if you were to request some sketches...

[Soufrika]

Speaking of, a liberal has the same idea, and a conservative has an interesting critique of it.
Of course, there are others who think it's bullshit. Agree to disagree.

[Torrocca]

Robespierre, no!

The kings must die so the country can live.

No true liberty to liberty-loving people everywhere 'til the chains of poverty are forever vanquished from this earth!

[Donut section]

The kings must die so the country can live.

No true liberty to liberty-loving people everywhere 'til the chains of poverty are forever vanquished from this earth!

Pretty sure you would need to enslave other planets to do that.

[Torrocca]

No true liberty to liberty-loving people everywhere 'til the chains of poverty are forever vanquished from this earth!

Pretty sure you would need to enslave other planets to do that.

Share the wealth, my man.

[Donut section]

Pretty sure you would need to enslave other planets to do that.

Share the wealth, my man.

Earn the wealth comrade.

[Torrocca]

Share the wealth, my man.

Earn the wealth comrade.

If only labor was properly valued, then that'd be feasible.

[Donut section]

Earn the wealth comrade.

If only labor was properly valued, then that'd be feasible.

I'd say it is, as a day labourer.

Would you rather have our bi monthly spat over tg instead of derailing the thread?

[MGTOWia]

"Atrocity"? Talk about chud-level discourse. Not to mention a massive trivialization of the term "atrocity".

It doesn't really work when a /pol/ster says it. You're going to need to find your own cool words and stop stealing ours.

The genocide of Christians in the Middle East at the hands of ISIS and its ilk is an atrocity.

Oooooh, you got to the fallacy of relative privation fast.

Here's a little bit of wokeness for you: two horrible things can be atrocities without being equally horrible. An atrocity is not negated simply because another one has more casualties. That's not rational.

"Wokeness"? Spare me the SJW jargon. I'm not "negating" one atrocity "because another one has more casualties." I'm denying that the 3/5 Compromise was an "atrocity" at all. You are conflating the 3/5 Compromise, which dealt with Congressional representation and was indirectly an anti-slavery measure, with the institution of slavery itself, and claiming that since slavery was bad, so was the compromise. That's not rational.

The 3/5 Compromise was exactly that. COMPROMISE. And one that eventually disappeared with the end of slavery. Which refusal to enact the compromise likely would have prolonged. So what was the "atrocity" again?

The continued dehumanization of countless innocent people. Oh, it was "kinder" dehumanization, sure, and more "pragmatic" too.

Yeah, right, sure. And you, with your 21st-century morality and supreme, irrefutable virtue, would have just waved your hands and, voila! Slavery would have disappeared, because you wanted it to. It really is fascinating that some people actually think that way. Because it is your thinking that likely would have led to the southern states not joining the union, and thus to even more "dehumanization" of even more innocent people for an even longer time. And that would have been an even bigger "atrocity".

Btw: here's some "wokeness" for you. Slavery was imposed on the American colonies by the British. It took us 87+ years to get rid of it, through the efforts of many men far better than you or me and only after much violence and bloodshed. Oh, and who brought the first civil case in which a court recognized lifetime slavery? Anthony Johnson. Born Antonio. In Angola. A black man. And himself a former slave. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Johnson_(colonist) So while you're righteously slinging guilt at people over slavery, send some to the ones who got it going.

[Conserative Morality]

It doesn't really work when a /pol/ster says it. You're going to need to find your own cool words and stop stealing ours.


Oooooh, you got to the fallacy of relative privation fast.

Here's a little bit of wokeness for you: two horrible things can be atrocities without being equally horrible. An atrocity is not negated simply because another one has more casualties. That's not rational.

"Wokeness"? Spare me the SJW jargon. I'm not "negating" one atrocity "because another one has more casualties." I'm denying that the 3/5 Compromise was an "atrocity" at all. You are conflating the 3/5 Compromise, which dealt with Congressional representation and was indirectly an anti-slavery measure, with the institution of slavery itself, and claiming that since slavery was bad, so was the compromise. That's not rational.

UGH, they wanted to grind up all the kittens into a smoothie but we only let them grind HALF the kittens into a smoothie. Don't you see how good grinding half the kittens into a smoothie is? smh it's like these people don't even understand the benefits of half of all the world's kittens being ground up into smoothies.

[Jerzylvania]

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

So according to this, it's more so rural districts (than "red states") that voted Trump.

It talks about rural America being forgotten and ignored... so was Atlantic Canada, you wouldn't see them vote anyone like Trump.

Why, then, should rural districts be entitled to urban money after screwing over urban America? Is there any way to rearrange the USA so as to treat rural America as a new country and urban America as a collection of city-states?

Build an inland sea by draining off part of the Atlantic into Flyover Country. The salty air might do 'em some good. Better solution for everybody.

[Liriena]

It doesn't really work when a /pol/ster says it. You're going to need to find your own cool words and stop stealing ours.


Oooooh, you got to the fallacy of relative privation fast.

Here's a little bit of wokeness for you: two horrible things can be atrocities without being equally horrible. An atrocity is not negated simply because another one has more casualties. That's not rational.

"Wokeness"? Spare me the SJW jargon.

Nothing says "rational" like throwing the SJW pejorative around at random people in a relatively serious political discussion.

The continued dehumanization of countless innocent people. Oh, it was "kinder" dehumanization, sure, and more "pragmatic" too.

Yeah, right, sure. And you, with your 21st-century morality and supreme, irrefutable virtue,

Pfff, there's nothing supreme or irrefutable about my "virtue". I'm just a doofus with a very absolutist view about dehumanization.

would have just waved your hands and, voila! Slavery would have disappeared, because you wanted it to.

Cool strawman. It kind of makes the rest of your paragraph worthless, inaccurate garbage, though, which is sad.

Btw: here's some "wokeness" for you. Slavery was imposed on the American colonies by the British.

That's not "woke". That's just basic history, as far as slavery is concerned. You're off to a pretty bad start if your intent was to "own" me with a clever gotcha.

It took us 87+ years to get rid of it, through the efforts of many men far better than you or me and only after much violence and bloodshed.

I strongly, wholeheartedly agree with the underlined. ;3

Oh, and who brought the first civil case in which a court recognized lifetime slavery? Anthony Johnson. Born Antonio. In Angola. A black man. And himself a former slave. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Johnson_(colonist) So while you're righteously slinging guilt at people over slavery, send some to the ones who got it going.

I learned about Anthony Johnson years ago, so that's another failed "gotcha" on your part. Also... yeah, sure. Anthony Johnson and the British were a bunch of slaver dicks, just like American slavers and their apologists.

So, what else do you have, slavery apologist?

[Jerzylvania]

Widen the Mississippi to accommodate the Gulf of Mexico. Then bring the sharks and maybe get a few Sharknados down tornado alley. That'll keep'em busy.

[MGTOWia]

So, what else do you have, slavery apologist?

Nothing says "rational" like throwing the "slavery apologist" pejorative around at random people in a relatively serious political discussion.

About what I'd expect from the left end of the political spectrum. When your arguments are exposed as specious, invent some inflammatory accusation, without the slightest factual basis and preferably including the race card, and expect to intimidate your opponent.

As to "what else" I have: for you, nothing. In trying to get through to you, the term "neutronium" comes to mind. Have a blissful life.

[MGTOWia]

UGH, they wanted to grind up all the kittens into a smoothie but we only let them grind HALF the kittens into a smoothie. Don't you see how good grinding half the kittens into a smoothie is? smh it's like these people don't even understand the benefits of half of all the world's kittens being ground up into smoothies.

Please.

What, exactly, would have been your solution? And how would it have worked? And how would it have NOT led to even worse results?

Moral posturing is no substitute for reasoned policy.

[Torrocca]

So, what else do you have, slavery apologist?

Nothing says "rational" like throwing the "slavery apologist" pejorative around at random people in a relatively serious political discussion.

About what I'd expect from the left end of the political spectrum. When your arguments are exposed as specious, invent some inflammatory accusation, without the slightest factual basis and preferably including the race card, and expect to intimidate your opponent.

As to "what else" I have: for you, nothing. In trying to get through to you, the term "neutronium" comes to mind. Have a blissful life.

I mean, your entire argument read like textbook slavery apologia.

UGH, they wanted to grind up all the kittens into a smoothie but we only let them grind HALF the kittens into a smoothie. Don't you see how good grinding half the kittens into a smoothie is? smh it's like these people don't even understand the benefits of half of all the world's kittens being ground up into smoothies.

Please.

What, exactly, would have been your solution? And how would it have worked? And how would it have NOT led to even worse results?

Moral posturing is no substitute for reasoned policy.

"Reasoned Policy"

"By Jove, chaps! Adolf Hitler of Nazi Germany has publicly declared his nefariously ill intent to systematically slaughter all Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, disabled persons, and other racial, religious, and ethnic minorities unfit for the Aryan image! What ever shall we do to stop this wanton tyranny?"

"Ooh, ooh, I know! Let us come to a compromise with ol' Adolf, good sir! We want none of the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, disabled persons, and other racial, religious, and ethnic minorities systematically slaughtered, and he wants all of them systematically slaughtered! Let us, then, being people of reasonable policies, declare by consensus a compromise meeting right in the center and allow Mr. Hitler the right to systematically slaughter half of the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, disabled persons, and other racial, religious, and ethnic minorities!"

"Dear God, sir! As a person of reasoned policies, I dare say I must agree! After all, compromise always leads to the best results!"

"Hurrah to compromise!"

"Hurrah!"

[The Parkus Empire]

The kings must die so the country can live.

No true liberty to liberty-loving people everywhere 'til the chains of poverty are forever vanquished from this earth!

Absolute poverty is the default state, not an imposed chain.

[Torrocca]

No true liberty to liberty-loving people everywhere 'til the chains of poverty are forever vanquished from this earth!

Absolute poverty is the default state, not an imposed chain.

By being a default state, does it not therefore become an imposed chain by extension, particularly when it could become anything but the default state?

[The Parkus Empire]

Absolute poverty is the default state, not an imposed chain.

By being a default state, does it not therefore become an imposed chain by extension, particularly when it could become anything but the default state?

No, and it will always be the default state. You never come out of the womb holding bags of money, it always has to be furnished you. Chains are something furnished against you.

[Torrocca]

By being a default state, does it not therefore become an imposed chain by extension, particularly when it could become anything but the default state?

No, and it will always be the default state. You never come out of the womb holding bags of money, it always has to be furnished you. Chains are something furnished against you.

I mean, are you sure I didn't come out of the womb holding bags of money?

... You're not my doctor, are you?

[Liriena]

So, what else do you have, slavery apologist?

Is that the only sentence of my post that you'll be responding too?

Geesh, if I'd known calling things by their name was such effective bait for you, I'd have pointed out your thinly veiled slavery apologism from the get-go.

Nothing says "rational" like throwing the "slavery apologist" pejorative around at random people in a relatively serious political discussion.

It's not a "pejorative", though. It's perfectly descriptive of your behavior.

About what I'd expect from the left end of the political spectrum. When your arguments are exposed as specious, invent some inflammatory accusation, without the slightest factual basis and preferably including the race card, and expect to intimidate your opponent.

You were the one who tried to get a "gotcha" in by pointing out that one of the earliest slave owners in the British colonies in the Americas was black, so you talking about "the race card" is pretty hilarious.

If strawmen and generalizations are what do it for ya, I ain't kink-shaming.

As to "what else" I have: for you, nothing. In trying to get through to you, the term "neutronium" comes to mind. Have a blissful life.

Your retreat is duly noted. ;3

[Jerzylvania]

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

So according to this, it's more so rural districts (than "red states") that voted Trump.

It talks about rural America being forgotten and ignored... so was Atlantic Canada, you wouldn't see them vote anyone like Trump.

Why, then, should rural districts be entitled to urban money after screwing over urban America? Is there any way to rearrange the USA so as to treat rural America as a new country and urban America as a collection of city-states?

Spread out!!

[Tekeristan]

Cooperation works nicely.
Ideally, I'd be fine if farming was, you know, calmed down a good lot, or centralized to more specific areas, etc. It means more terrain can be returned to the wild.

The issue is, we live in a system where in order to have a roof over your head and food in your stomach, you need cash moneys. And our crumbling infastructure, farm markets, etc, don't exactly paint a good light on that.
If people talked, they'd realize they have a lot more in common than they think. Rural and urban aren't enemies, or rivals.