Remember: Charlie Kirk wasn't killed by a gun, he was killed by a jew. If there were no jews, there would be no gun deaths
It's Afraid.
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
1757539091.png (249.1 KB, 1073x1456, Screenshot_20250910-140507~2.png)
>>397299
Before jews children in every school across the country could bring their gun to school and practice shooting AT SCHOOL with OTHER CHILDREN using GOVERNMENT SUPPLIES AMMUNITION. There were never any deaths or casualties. The only thing that has changed since then is the jew and it's nigger hordes
Before jews children in every school across the country could bring their gun to school and practice shooting AT SCHOOL with OTHER CHILDREN using GOVERNMENT SUPPLIES AMMUNITION. There were never any deaths or casualties. The only thing that has changed since then is the jew and it's nigger hordes
1757539188_3.jpg (100.5 KB, 640x962, gun-safety-being-taught-in-an-rural-school-indiana-1956-v0-e4cgj1lckr4b1.jpg)
>>397301
Shortly after jews forced through the "Civil Rights Movement" and enacted desegregation by gunpoint, and guess what happened? The first school shooting threat in American history. Only every student and every teacher was armed to the teeth and well trained so it failed miserably. Thus began the decades long war of the jew against the American firearm.
Shortly after jews forced through the "Civil Rights Movement" and enacted desegregation by gunpoint, and guess what happened? The first school shooting threat in American history. Only every student and every teacher was armed to the teeth and well trained so it failed miserably. Thus began the decades long war of the jew against the American firearm.
>>397303
They sacrifice their own children to the fire, there isn't a price they aren't willing to pay
They sacrifice their own children to the fire, there isn't a price they aren't willing to pay
Turning Point USA has been increasingly critical and apathetic towards Israel lately. The Jews know that they are at risk of losing their Republican golems if young people on the right stop worshipping the chosen people.
>>397307
It's shooting the hand that feeds them though. He's a Heritage Foundation agent, HF is load bearing for Zionist occupation of the US and adjacent countries. If HF pulls out or dies off than that's farewell to AIPAC, bye bye to Trump, adios to the 24/7 news cycle as it currently exists, etc...
Israel isn't /that/ retarded.
It's shooting the hand that feeds them though. He's a Heritage Foundation agent, HF is load bearing for Zionist occupation of the US and adjacent countries. If HF pulls out or dies off than that's farewell to AIPAC, bye bye to Trump, adios to the 24/7 news cycle as it currently exists, etc...
Israel isn't /that/ retarded.
>>397299
>a human killed by an animal
I mean, if you take just only pro-abortion laws enacted by jews, they are definitely the enemy of humanity so this isn't really a new thing.
>a human killed by an animal
I mean, if you take just only pro-abortion laws enacted by jews, they are definitely the enemy of humanity so this isn't really a new thing.
1757547704_1.jpg (166.9 KB, 1096x1230, tumblr_04ed883d783066a27865c1c5c62de5a8_b6907178_1280.jpg)
1757547704_2.jpg (250.5 KB, 1200x675, tumblr_fb0c77f89daeee68d1e35dabbc638e54_9fa653d9_1280.jpg)
Correction: a jew was killed by a pagan
>>397343
Kirk was not a literal Jew. He was just a shabbos goy. It's important not to conflate the two, lest you lose grasp of who your enemies are.
Kirk was not a literal Jew. He was just a shabbos goy. It's important not to conflate the two, lest you lose grasp of who your enemies are.
Honestly, I believe it was a distraction from the murder of Iryna Zarutska. They're afraid of racial solidarity between White people.
>>397343
That last word has a specific meaning. You clearly do not know, nor comprehend, what that meaning is.
That last word has a specific meaning. You clearly do not know, nor comprehend, what that meaning is.
>>397299
If there were no guns, there would be no gun deaths. Even in the most recent stabbing, it wouldn't have happened if we had Medicare for All and just handled mental illness better, it wasn't a racially motivated attack - which is something right wingers seem insistent on forgetting even though the mother did everything she could to get him help and he tried to get help himself on multiple occasions because even he knew something wasn't right in his head.
If there were no guns, there would be no gun deaths. Even in the most recent stabbing, it wouldn't have happened if we had Medicare for All and just handled mental illness better, it wasn't a racially motivated attack - which is something right wingers seem insistent on forgetting even though the mother did everything she could to get him help and he tried to get help himself on multiple occasions because even he knew something wasn't right in his head.
>>397543
>If there were no guns, there would be no gun deaths
So then we'll just have deaths to cars, car bombs, samurai swords, and illegal AK47s like they do over in Europe.
But nevermind that. You can't just magically snap your fingers and poof all of the guns out of the United States. No one knows how many there are, but it's likely over 300 million. There is no going back. There is no elimination of all guns in the United States. There is no such thing as "no guns" in the US. There will always be tens of millions of guns in the US, no matter what you do.
>Medicare for All
Does not have anything to do with mental health. Mentally ill people are already eligible for Medicare, and it doesn't matter because the problem isn't that it's impossible to get medication, it's because they need to be constantly looked after to make sure they have medication. That's why we used to have asylums. That's why we need asylums again.
>it wasn't a racially motivated attack
He said he "got that white girl."
>even though the mother did everything she could to get him help and he tried to get help himself on multiple occasions because even he knew something wasn't right in his head.
We need asylums
>If there were no guns, there would be no gun deaths
So then we'll just have deaths to cars, car bombs, samurai swords, and illegal AK47s like they do over in Europe.
But nevermind that. You can't just magically snap your fingers and poof all of the guns out of the United States. No one knows how many there are, but it's likely over 300 million. There is no going back. There is no elimination of all guns in the United States. There is no such thing as "no guns" in the US. There will always be tens of millions of guns in the US, no matter what you do.
>Medicare for All
Does not have anything to do with mental health. Mentally ill people are already eligible for Medicare, and it doesn't matter because the problem isn't that it's impossible to get medication, it's because they need to be constantly looked after to make sure they have medication. That's why we used to have asylums. That's why we need asylums again.
>it wasn't a racially motivated attack
He said he "got that white girl."
>even though the mother did everything she could to get him help and he tried to get help himself on multiple occasions because even he knew something wasn't right in his head.
We need asylums
>>397547
your logic:
>we can't have laws against murder robots because it doesn't prevent deaths by drowning. so long as death isn't 100% preventable, we shouldn't try to extend lifespans.
your logic:
>we can't have laws against murder robots because it doesn't prevent deaths by drowning. so long as death isn't 100% preventable, we shouldn't try to extend lifespans.
>>397543
>If there were no guns, there would be no gun deaths
Countries with strict gun laws do not have significantly lower rates of homicide then the United States, so lack of guns does not prevent murder.
>just handled mental illness better
I agree. Reopen the asylums.
>it wasn't a racially motivated attack - which is something right wingers seem insistent on forgetting
Huh? You're the first person on this site to say anything about the attack being racially motivated.
>If there were no guns, there would be no gun deaths
Countries with strict gun laws do not have significantly lower rates of homicide then the United States, so lack of guns does not prevent murder.
>just handled mental illness better
I agree. Reopen the asylums.
>it wasn't a racially motivated attack - which is something right wingers seem insistent on forgetting
Huh? You're the first person on this site to say anything about the attack being racially motivated.
>>397553
the response was to the OP saying that jews are responsible for all gun deaths. suddenly we have to have nuance when we say no guns mean no gun deaths, but the statement "no jews means no gun deaths" gets zero scrutiny - showing nobody actually gives a damn about gun deaths in the first place.
the response was to the OP saying that jews are responsible for all gun deaths. suddenly we have to have nuance when we say no guns mean no gun deaths, but the statement "no jews means no gun deaths" gets zero scrutiny - showing nobody actually gives a damn about gun deaths in the first place.
>>397554
>the response was to the OP saying that jews are responsible for all gun deaths
I low-key agree with that, but this shooting wasn't racially motivated, but politically motivated.
>suddenly we have to have nuance when we say no guns mean no gun deaths, but the statement "no jews means no gun deaths" gets zero scrutiny - showing nobody actually gives a damn about gun deaths in the first place
But you just gave it scrutiny just now?
Anyways, lots of problems in society would be alleviated if we removed Jews, but nobody said this attack was racially motivated.
>the response was to the OP saying that jews are responsible for all gun deaths
I low-key agree with that, but this shooting wasn't racially motivated, but politically motivated.
>suddenly we have to have nuance when we say no guns mean no gun deaths, but the statement "no jews means no gun deaths" gets zero scrutiny - showing nobody actually gives a damn about gun deaths in the first place
But you just gave it scrutiny just now?
Anyways, lots of problems in society would be alleviated if we removed Jews, but nobody said this attack was racially motivated.
>>397548
No dumbass, I'm pointing out that gun control would be completely ineffective in the American context in a way that it wouldn't be in, say, Australia. Criminals and everyone who doesn't care to abide by the new laws will still have guns.
No dumbass, I'm pointing out that gun control would be completely ineffective in the American context in a way that it wouldn't be in, say, Australia. Criminals and everyone who doesn't care to abide by the new laws will still have guns.
The jews want to bait us into striking back because they know once things settle down in a day or two they're just going to look even worse than they have been. First the poor blonde girl gets murdered now some psycho shoots a nonviolent Christian in broad daylight. The left are political extremists, domestic terrorists, and fascists that openly call for violence and murder on public platforms on a daily basis.
Hold strong and keep a level head, we can use the law to our advantage and begin putting the pressure on them now.
Hold strong and keep a level head, we can use the law to our advantage and begin putting the pressure on them now.
>>397746
Yeah, avoid the fedposters trying to bait you into crime. Leftists are losing in the court of public opinion.
Yeah, avoid the fedposters trying to bait you into crime. Leftists are losing in the court of public opinion.
>>397746
>the left are fascists
I feel like no one actually knows what that word means anymore, an often use it in place of authoritarian.
>the left are fascists
I feel like no one actually knows what that word means anymore, an often use it in place of authoritarian.
>>397800
What if I told you that the word has always been meaningless? The term was coined about a century back as a name for a semi-authoritarian political party in Europe that arose in response to a widespread perception that democracy had run its course and failed. It was a Third Way/Radical Centrist movement that borrowed as much from Marx as it did from monarchists and it was quite some time before Western (((intellectuals))) noticed its success and began to smear it as "far-right" and "extreme" when it never even had concentration camps. "Far-right" in Italy a century ago wasn't Mussolini. It was Corradini and the ANI. Nonetheless... well, the term is meaningless. Especially since around 1930 it's been an empty curse word shitlibs use to describe anything they don't like. Even Orwell noticed, and he was a shitlib himself, just a self-aware one who wasn't enthusiastic about Stalin.
What if I told you that the word has always been meaningless? The term was coined about a century back as a name for a semi-authoritarian political party in Europe that arose in response to a widespread perception that democracy had run its course and failed. It was a Third Way/Radical Centrist movement that borrowed as much from Marx as it did from monarchists and it was quite some time before Western (((intellectuals))) noticed its success and began to smear it as "far-right" and "extreme" when it never even had concentration camps. "Far-right" in Italy a century ago wasn't Mussolini. It was Corradini and the ANI. Nonetheless... well, the term is meaningless. Especially since around 1930 it's been an empty curse word shitlibs use to describe anything they don't like. Even Orwell noticed, and he was a shitlib himself, just a self-aware one who wasn't enthusiastic about Stalin.
If you make fun of cheeseneck's acking the kikes will fire you. That should tell you the power dynamics at play here. Homeschool your kids if you have any.
((( >>397836 )))
kikes aren't making an exception allong right-left lines: a heritage foundation ghoul got what he deserved and they're using it to crack down on anti-israel, anti-heritage foundation sentiment.
kikes aren't making an exception allong right-left lines: a heritage foundation ghoul got what he deserved and they're using it to crack down on anti-israel, anti-heritage foundation sentiment.
>>397837
Charlie Kirk, a jew asset? Really, someone that moderate? That milquetoast? Get away from me, you sociopath, before you infect me with your evil thoughts.
Charlie Kirk, a jew asset? Really, someone that moderate? That milquetoast? Get away from me, you sociopath, before you infect me with your evil thoughts.
>>397837
Turning Point USA had been growing increasingly anti-Zionist for the past two years. At one of their events a couple months ago crowd speakers were saying "Google Dancing Israelis".
Turning Point USA had been growing increasingly anti-Zionist for the past two years. At one of their events a couple months ago crowd speakers were saying "Google Dancing Israelis".
>>397841
>enemy of my enemy
So you see israel as a lesser enemy than hallucinated "shitlibs," got it.
>>397846
Making fun of a politician or think tank agent dying isn't calling for killing someone. Making a 9/11 joke isn't a call to action to commit 9/12: electric boogaloo.
>>397846
>someone that moderate
The Heritage Foundation covers it's bases by having agents that appeal to varying political tastes as sensitivities. Where he lands on the political Scoville Scale is irrelevant.
>>397847
Political parties will always have contrarians and splinters, but Turning Point is still fundamentally a Heritage Foundation project, that's where their money comes and goes. The primary Turning Point party line would never oppose Israel in a way that mattered.
It's like WWE, colleages trash talking eachother because it's entertaining, not because they legit hate eachother. (except Hulk Hogan for being a rat)
Turning Point is a bunch of news addict zoomers, they need constant hype or they stop caring and pick a new ideological hat to wear from their RSS reader.
>enemy of my enemy
So you see israel as a lesser enemy than hallucinated "shitlibs," got it.
>>397846
Making fun of a politician or think tank agent dying isn't calling for killing someone. Making a 9/11 joke isn't a call to action to commit 9/12: electric boogaloo.
>>397846
>someone that moderate
The Heritage Foundation covers it's bases by having agents that appeal to varying political tastes as sensitivities. Where he lands on the political Scoville Scale is irrelevant.
>>397847
Political parties will always have contrarians and splinters, but Turning Point is still fundamentally a Heritage Foundation project, that's where their money comes and goes. The primary Turning Point party line would never oppose Israel in a way that mattered.
It's like WWE, colleages trash talking eachother because it's entertaining, not because they legit hate eachother. (except Hulk Hogan for being a rat)
Turning Point is a bunch of news addict zoomers, they need constant hype or they stop caring and pick a new ideological hat to wear from their RSS reader.
>>397859
And yet no one said they were going after libs in particular, only people joking about the death of their golem Charlie Kirk. You added that bit yourself.
And yet no one said they were going after libs in particular, only people joking about the death of their golem Charlie Kirk. You added that bit yourself.
>>397858
>israel as a lesser enemy
That's not what he said.
>Making fun of a politician or think tank agent dying isn't calling for killing someone.
Looks at the screenshots of what libs are posting right now. They're calling for more assassinations.
>>397862
It's really only liberals and a handful of groypers celebrating.
>israel as a lesser enemy
That's not what he said.
>Making fun of a politician or think tank agent dying isn't calling for killing someone.
Looks at the screenshots of what libs are posting right now. They're calling for more assassinations.
>>397862
It's really only liberals and a handful of groypers celebrating.
>>397862
I actually do not understand what your point is here. You're trying to argue that there's a "muh both sides" thing going, but anyone who gives two shits about politics (already a low percentage of the population) is plainly seeing that it's one side of the spectrum doing most if not all the psycho shittalking.
Also, far as I know, heritage foundation is pretty by the books as much as a lobbying firm goes. Have they ever been up to schenanigans like ActBlue and friends? I'm asking out of disrespect toward you but also cuz I'm genuinely curious.
I actually do not understand what your point is here. You're trying to argue that there's a "muh both sides" thing going, but anyone who gives two shits about politics (already a low percentage of the population) is plainly seeing that it's one side of the spectrum doing most if not all the psycho shittalking.
Also, far as I know, heritage foundation is pretty by the books as much as a lobbying firm goes. Have they ever been up to schenanigans like ActBlue and friends? I'm asking out of disrespect toward you but also cuz I'm genuinely curious.
>>397865
>You're trying to argue that there's a "muh both sides" thing going
I don't get where you're getting that from.
>but anyone who gives two shits about politics (already a low percentage of the population)
We have a news addiction crisis, but if you mean "studies it in an intelligible way" then yeah fair.
>is plainly seeing that it's one side of the spectrum doing most if not all the psycho shittalking.
But it's not solely the shittalking, even "insensitive comments" such as bringing up Charlie Kirk's zionism is enough to get someone fired.
>You're trying to argue that there's a "muh both sides" thing going
I don't get where you're getting that from.
>but anyone who gives two shits about politics (already a low percentage of the population)
We have a news addiction crisis, but if you mean "studies it in an intelligible way" then yeah fair.
>is plainly seeing that it's one side of the spectrum doing most if not all the psycho shittalking.
But it's not solely the shittalking, even "insensitive comments" such as bringing up Charlie Kirk's zionism is enough to get someone fired.
>>397866
Failing to read the room is one thing, but what you continue to keep doing is simply put: desecrating a corpse. Sure, you can do that (you sick fuck), just know that everyone around you will process what you just said and react accordingly, commonly with emotions like "concern" and "indignation", perhaps a dash of "disgust". Then, through the mental cascade of cause and effect, they look at you, then to your family, then peers (place of employment is this level), then community (anyone of similar ideology to you), then nation (if you're a foreigner), and they proceed to reason that since these larger sets associate with you and you associate with them, thus, something about them is also as fucked up as you.
I don't make the rules mate, go ask God why he programmed us that way.
Failing to read the room is one thing, but what you continue to keep doing is simply put: desecrating a corpse. Sure, you can do that (you sick fuck), just know that everyone around you will process what you just said and react accordingly, commonly with emotions like "concern" and "indignation", perhaps a dash of "disgust". Then, through the mental cascade of cause and effect, they look at you, then to your family, then peers (place of employment is this level), then community (anyone of similar ideology to you), then nation (if you're a foreigner), and they proceed to reason that since these larger sets associate with you and you associate with them, thus, something about them is also as fucked up as you.
I don't make the rules mate, go ask God why he programmed us that way.
>>397883
Getting mad at someone for "digital corpse desecration" (jokes and discussion about the life of a public figure) is woke.
Like you are telling people not to do microaggressions against a dead zionist. That's political correctness.
God™️ didn't program you to be like that, (unless you're abrahamic) the woke media you consume did.
Getting mad at someone for "digital corpse desecration" (jokes and discussion about the life of a public figure) is woke.
Like you are telling people not to do microaggressions against a dead zionist. That's political correctness.
God™️ didn't program you to be like that, (unless you're abrahamic) the woke media you consume did.
>>397889
>Waaaah! Why don't people want to interact with me after I sperg out like an edgelord?!
You are like a child. Go ahead and impotently fling your labels at us. It makes no difference.
>Waaaah! Why don't people want to interact with me after I sperg out like an edgelord?!
You are like a child. Go ahead and impotently fling your labels at us. It makes no difference.
>>397890
If you're proud to be woke then so be it, but wokes like you working to take away someone's job for being edgy is a problem. The 1st ammendment should be immune to moralism.
If you're proud to be woke then so be it, but wokes like you working to take away someone's job for being edgy is a problem. The 1st ammendment should be immune to moralism.
>>397898
Don't be obtuse: this line of conversation started with several teachers and professors losing their jobs over "insensitive comments." If you're woke enough to think that's acceptable under any context than you are complicit in and contribute to the kind of wokeness that took those people's jobs.
Don't be obtuse: this line of conversation started with several teachers and professors losing their jobs over "insensitive comments." If you're woke enough to think that's acceptable under any context than you are complicit in and contribute to the kind of wokeness that took those people's jobs.
>>397907
I really don't care what you think of me. Nor do I care about a handful of leftoids getting themselves fired.
I really don't care what you think of me. Nor do I care about a handful of leftoids getting themselves fired.
>>397909
>Nor do I care about a handful of leftoids getting themselves fired.
>I don't care that those who have been using their positions of influence to make shit horrible are losing that influence
If you "don't care" about politics, then maybe you should get off of the politics board
>Nor do I care about a handful of leftoids getting themselves fired.
>I don't care that those who have been using their positions of influence to make shit horrible are losing that influence
If you "don't care" about politics, then maybe you should get off of the politics board
>>397915
First of all, the politics board is also a ponies board. Second of all, I've been here for 8 years, and I'm not about to leave.
First of all, the politics board is also a ponies board. Second of all, I've been here for 8 years, and I'm not about to leave.
>>397909
Again with this additional factor of "oh but what if it's lefties, that makes it okay even if some righties are caught in the crossfire" as though this was a right-vs-left thing in the first place. I don't give a shit, you're complicit in the mechanisms of wokeness being employed under any pretenses, by hallucinating a pretense ex nihilo.
You have no reason to care what *I* think of you, of course, but understand that you are objectively woke: ruminate on that and determine for yourself if you're okay with that. If not, change.
Again with this additional factor of "oh but what if it's lefties, that makes it okay even if some righties are caught in the crossfire" as though this was a right-vs-left thing in the first place. I don't give a shit, you're complicit in the mechanisms of wokeness being employed under any pretenses, by hallucinating a pretense ex nihilo.
You have no reason to care what *I* think of you, of course, but understand that you are objectively woke: ruminate on that and determine for yourself if you're okay with that. If not, change.
>>397923
I need to inform her of how cute and beautiful she is. I need to make sure she understands that she's very desirable as a friend and mate because of her polite and reserved nature. She will like to hear that her wish to stay home and help her family's farm is a sign that she will provide for her own foals and friends.
I need to inform her of how cute and beautiful she is. I need to make sure she understands that she's very desirable as a friend and mate because of her polite and reserved nature. She will like to hear that her wish to stay home and help her family's farm is a sign that she will provide for her own foals and friends.
>>397916
Damn, 8 years with that attitude? I think we can be friends, but boy would I hate to confide in you.
Damn, 8 years with that attitude? I think we can be friends, but boy would I hate to confide in you.
>>397301
Another factor to consider is that fewer parents hit their kids. I'd argue that there's a strong connection between that and the amount of delusional children we see now. They've never had to face punishment, so it's only natural that they don't expect their actions to have consequences.
Another factor to consider is that fewer parents hit their kids. I'd argue that there's a strong connection between that and the amount of delusional children we see now. They've never had to face punishment, so it's only natural that they don't expect their actions to have consequences.
>>400084
I used to kinda buy that idea too, but let's be real: beating kids wasn't the "solution", it was just a lazy side effect.
Yeah, old gen had way more dignity and brains, but didn't come from getting smacked around. That whole beating was just a shortcut for parents who didn't want to deal with the real problem and just wanted instant obedience from a kid who wasn't even old enough to think yet. By the time the kid grew up and got a brain, the beating stopped because it was pointless anyway.
Beating was never the fix, actual awareness is.
And don't forget: today's "non-beater" parents are literally the same kids who got their asses beaten back then.
Maybe hitting a kid made them scared enough to try to act smarter and figure things out, but the beating itself was never an actual solution.
I used to kinda buy that idea too, but let's be real: beating kids wasn't the "solution", it was just a lazy side effect.
Yeah, old gen had way more dignity and brains, but didn't come from getting smacked around. That whole beating was just a shortcut for parents who didn't want to deal with the real problem and just wanted instant obedience from a kid who wasn't even old enough to think yet. By the time the kid grew up and got a brain, the beating stopped because it was pointless anyway.
Beating was never the fix, actual awareness is.
And don't forget: today's "non-beater" parents are literally the same kids who got their asses beaten back then.
Maybe hitting a kid made them scared enough to try to act smarter and figure things out, but the beating itself was never an actual solution.
>>400085
A beating is best reserved for something really fucked, like petty crime. Then again, if your kid got to that point, you definitely messed up parenting a long time ago and the kid's already grown up too fast to feel its intended effects.
A beating is best reserved for something really fucked, like petty crime. Then again, if your kid got to that point, you definitely messed up parenting a long time ago and the kid's already grown up too fast to feel its intended effects.
>>400086
>A beating is best reserved for something really fucked, like petty crime.
There's an old village story:
Apprentice works for a grumpy blacksmith. Every day the dude slaps the kid before sending him to fill a water jug, screaming 'DON'T BREAK IT'
One day, jug finally did break by accident. Kid returns, so terrified. Whole village gathers, expecting a murder scene, cause they knew that a man who slapped a child just for a warning would probably kill him now that the jug was actually broken. When they arrived, blacksmith walks out calm, kid still alive. Everyone's confused. blacksmith shrugs and says:
'I hit him to prevent the screw up. Now that it's already screwed, what's the point of hitting him?'
TL;DR: Punishment is for prevention, not for pointless rage after the damage is done.
>Then again, if your kid got to that point, you definitely messed up parenting a long time ago and the kid's already grown up too fast to feel its intended effects.
Yeah, that's right.
A thief stealin' apples'll be stealin' wagons next, and there ain't no way to turn a rotten apple fresh again.
And if the whole batch's gone bad, ya gotta blame the farmer and them pesky bats, not the apples themselves!
-AJ
P.S: btw, I have no idea why we're talking about beating kids in a Charlie Kirk thread.
>A beating is best reserved for something really fucked, like petty crime.
There's an old village story:
Apprentice works for a grumpy blacksmith. Every day the dude slaps the kid before sending him to fill a water jug, screaming 'DON'T BREAK IT'
One day, jug finally did break by accident. Kid returns, so terrified. Whole village gathers, expecting a murder scene, cause they knew that a man who slapped a child just for a warning would probably kill him now that the jug was actually broken. When they arrived, blacksmith walks out calm, kid still alive. Everyone's confused. blacksmith shrugs and says:
'I hit him to prevent the screw up. Now that it's already screwed, what's the point of hitting him?'
TL;DR: Punishment is for prevention, not for pointless rage after the damage is done.
>Then again, if your kid got to that point, you definitely messed up parenting a long time ago and the kid's already grown up too fast to feel its intended effects.
Yeah, that's right.
A thief stealin' apples'll be stealin' wagons next, and there ain't no way to turn a rotten apple fresh again.
And if the whole batch's gone bad, ya gotta blame the farmer and them pesky bats, not the apples themselves!
-AJ
P.S: btw, I have no idea why we're talking about beating kids in a Charlie Kirk thread.
>>400089
>P.S: btw, I have no idea why we're talking about beating kids in a Charlie Kirk thread
Thread's been done a while ago, and I reckon >>400084
didn't see the thread's been so for the past month.
I don't mind much, board's slow and I prefer to lurk than make threads, and normal /pol/ is plain unusable on account of 4chan's oldfags being dead and all, meaning it's all immature children in there.
>P.S: btw, I have no idea why we're talking about beating kids in a Charlie Kirk thread
Thread's been done a while ago, and I reckon >>400084
didn't see the thread's been so for the past month.
I don't mind much, board's slow and I prefer to lurk than make threads, and normal /pol/ is plain unusable on account of 4chan's oldfags being dead and all, meaning it's all immature children in there.
>>397800
That is true but they quite literally want to be a centralized government authority that crushes any opposition be it physical, verbal, or even imagined.
That is true but they quite literally want to be a centralized government authority that crushes any opposition be it physical, verbal, or even imagined.
>>397868
Reminder: they wanted to do this to Trump before the election, robbing us of our rightful president and then spend the next decade blasting the footage in our faces to demoralize us.
Reminder: they wanted to do this to Trump before the election, robbing us of our rightful president and then spend the next decade blasting the footage in our faces to demoralize us.
>>400085
> People who were beaten as children
Every single historical figure of note, nearly every living politician, and every single human being from the dawn of humanity until about 1996.
> People who weren't beaten as children
Literally one and a half generation of kids that are now the biggest and most dysgenic faggots whom have ever existed and to such a degree that it was previously thought impossible.
The question really answers itself.
> People who were beaten as children
Every single historical figure of note, nearly every living politician, and every single human being from the dawn of humanity until about 1996.
> People who weren't beaten as children
Literally one and a half generation of kids that are now the biggest and most dysgenic faggots whom have ever existed and to such a degree that it was previously thought impossible.
The question really answers itself.
>>400310
This could literally apply to both sides. The right claims to respect individual freedom, but that's also been a slogan of the left. On the other hand, communists have shown how they can be oppressive and anti freedom, and the same goes for the right.
People need to understand that libertarianism and authoritarianism are separate variables from being left or right wing, they can exist on either side.
That's the problem: right wingers call the left communists or liberals, while the left calls the right fascists or corrupt capitalists. It's as if none of them really understand what any of those words really mean.
>>400314
Important point: there's a difference between beating as a constructive form of punishment and "BEATING"used as a parenting shortcut. I never said physical punishment should never happen. In principle, spanking and punishing a child can be part of constructive parenting, but only with proper conditions and limits.
Whether it's part of a carrot and stick system or a reward and punishment approach isn't the issue. The real problem is that many parents' overall parenting is incomplete, and they try to fill that gap by hitting their children, using punishment instead of doing the other parenting work they didn't do. That's a big mistake.
Yes, parenting without any punishment at all can be incomplete, like a building with no plaster, but you can't build part of a house only with plaster. That's the big error many parents have made over the years. Many parents used physical punishment over time, but only as a supplement to solid, constructive parenting, and those children grew up well. Certainly parenting with zero punishment can also be flawed, as you mentioned about today's generation. But my point is that punishment should never be the main factor in raising a child, and people shouldn't be judged only for using or not using it.
Maybe, even in Tyler Robinson's ass, you can still see where his father used a belt, or maybe he was spoiled and coddled. Whether he got hit as a child or not can't by itself explain the foolish things he does or other terrorists or school shooter. The people you mentioned from the past either had punishment as a supplement to their parenting, and in those cases they were often more successful, or punishment was part of the core of their upbringing, in which case they were often less successful. Even the most successful people from that group often show childhood traumas later in life, through sadistic or masochistic stories, or, in extreme cases, by committing mass violence. In short, punishment itself is not the root cause.
Personally, I believe punishment and spanking can be a useful supplement in parenting, but I'm against letting it dominate the upbringing. More hitting doesn't help. My problem is that most people who support beating want to build many parts of "the parenting house" using only "the plaster of hitting".
This could literally apply to both sides. The right claims to respect individual freedom, but that's also been a slogan of the left. On the other hand, communists have shown how they can be oppressive and anti freedom, and the same goes for the right.
People need to understand that libertarianism and authoritarianism are separate variables from being left or right wing, they can exist on either side.
That's the problem: right wingers call the left communists or liberals, while the left calls the right fascists or corrupt capitalists. It's as if none of them really understand what any of those words really mean.
>>400314
Important point: there's a difference between beating as a constructive form of punishment and "BEATING"used as a parenting shortcut. I never said physical punishment should never happen. In principle, spanking and punishing a child can be part of constructive parenting, but only with proper conditions and limits.
Whether it's part of a carrot and stick system or a reward and punishment approach isn't the issue. The real problem is that many parents' overall parenting is incomplete, and they try to fill that gap by hitting their children, using punishment instead of doing the other parenting work they didn't do. That's a big mistake.
Yes, parenting without any punishment at all can be incomplete, like a building with no plaster, but you can't build part of a house only with plaster. That's the big error many parents have made over the years. Many parents used physical punishment over time, but only as a supplement to solid, constructive parenting, and those children grew up well. Certainly parenting with zero punishment can also be flawed, as you mentioned about today's generation. But my point is that punishment should never be the main factor in raising a child, and people shouldn't be judged only for using or not using it.
Maybe, even in Tyler Robinson's ass, you can still see where his father used a belt, or maybe he was spoiled and coddled. Whether he got hit as a child or not can't by itself explain the foolish things he does or other terrorists or school shooter. The people you mentioned from the past either had punishment as a supplement to their parenting, and in those cases they were often more successful, or punishment was part of the core of their upbringing, in which case they were often less successful. Even the most successful people from that group often show childhood traumas later in life, through sadistic or masochistic stories, or, in extreme cases, by committing mass violence. In short, punishment itself is not the root cause.
Personally, I believe punishment and spanking can be a useful supplement in parenting, but I'm against letting it dominate the upbringing. More hitting doesn't help. My problem is that most people who support beating want to build many parts of "the parenting house" using only "the plaster of hitting".
>>400322
1st point: I can agree to that, and I do believe a lot of political arguments would be much different if people could keep in mind the idea of the political quadrants (authoritarian left/right, libertarian left/right) in more mainstream discussions. I merely point it out because as you said the "Left's" main talking points at the moment is mainly declaring anyone that opposes them fascists or "Nazis" which is ridiculous given their own platform and actions. I also feel the overexposure to world war two history and nothing else has left people with too stunted a frame of reference. All the "Nazi" talking points that people supposedly stand against are all implemented and practiced currently in the nation of Belarus and not only doesn't anyone opposed them they most likely consider them one of those unoteworthy coming ntries that they forget even exists. On top of that theyre one of the only countries in the world today that's still 99% White and Christian and theyre doing just fine. All this end of the world hysteria is exactly that. Its all the more ridiculous when you don't see any explicitly national socialist talking points coming from any of these people: no ending of Central banking, no outlawing of usury, no domestic manufacturing and/or labor backed currencies, no farming and environmental reform, no race based immigration policies. What they are is simply standard conservative talking points and have nothing to do with National Socialism.
2nd point: I agree with your points and also think spanking should be used as a supplemental technique and people should be told that there's more to being a parent than simply spanking. I just feel it's important to take a bit of a hard lined stance on it because the current environment is usually an overwhelming wave of hysterical appeals to emotion claiming it's inherently wrong with baseless claims to its supposed negative effects that's a byproduct of a general attitude that violence is never O.K. and can never be the answer. Making men's ability to physically disciplone their wives and children taboo is one of the foundations of jewry to destroy societies.
1st point: I can agree to that, and I do believe a lot of political arguments would be much different if people could keep in mind the idea of the political quadrants (authoritarian left/right, libertarian left/right) in more mainstream discussions. I merely point it out because as you said the "Left's" main talking points at the moment is mainly declaring anyone that opposes them fascists or "Nazis" which is ridiculous given their own platform and actions. I also feel the overexposure to world war two history and nothing else has left people with too stunted a frame of reference. All the "Nazi" talking points that people supposedly stand against are all implemented and practiced currently in the nation of Belarus and not only doesn't anyone opposed them they most likely consider them one of those unoteworthy coming ntries that they forget even exists. On top of that theyre one of the only countries in the world today that's still 99% White and Christian and theyre doing just fine. All this end of the world hysteria is exactly that. Its all the more ridiculous when you don't see any explicitly national socialist talking points coming from any of these people: no ending of Central banking, no outlawing of usury, no domestic manufacturing and/or labor backed currencies, no farming and environmental reform, no race based immigration policies. What they are is simply standard conservative talking points and have nothing to do with National Socialism.
2nd point: I agree with your points and also think spanking should be used as a supplemental technique and people should be told that there's more to being a parent than simply spanking. I just feel it's important to take a bit of a hard lined stance on it because the current environment is usually an overwhelming wave of hysterical appeals to emotion claiming it's inherently wrong with baseless claims to its supposed negative effects that's a byproduct of a general attitude that violence is never O.K. and can never be the answer. Making men's ability to physically disciplone their wives and children taboo is one of the foundations of jewry to destroy societies.
1762297469.png (248.8 KB, 500x451, tumblr_85c31ae4ce58b34b03bf673d32faca0e_f7673971_500.png)
>>400322
>I believe punishment and spanking can be a useful supplement in parenting
Don't forget the women inhabiting your home, they much need discipline too.
>I believe punishment and spanking can be a useful supplement in parenting
Don't forget the women inhabiting your home, they much need discipline too.
>>400352
Most people don't know it, but even in the 50s the practice of spanking and slapping wives was common and recommended to correct women's character.
Most people don't know it, but even in the 50s the practice of spanking and slapping wives was common and recommended to correct women's character.
>>400348
Personally, I still haven't fully reached a conclusion that makes sense to me, so I usually avoid talking about it in discussions until I do, because there might be some liberal left idiots who'll ignore everything I say just because of that one part. Maybe because I don't have a wife yet, I haven't been in a situation where I could understand that... I don't know.
>>400352
I'm curious to know, does it actually work? How does she react after being hit? Does she understand it or not?
>>400354
Yeah, that's what I'd heard too. But as far as I remember, something like that hasn't really been accepted as a norm in society, at least not in the last hundred years.
Personally, I still haven't fully reached a conclusion that makes sense to me, so I usually avoid talking about it in discussions until I do, because there might be some liberal left idiots who'll ignore everything I say just because of that one part. Maybe because I don't have a wife yet, I haven't been in a situation where I could understand that... I don't know.
>>400352
I'm curious to know, does it actually work? How does she react after being hit? Does she understand it or not?
>>400354
Yeah, that's what I'd heard too. But as far as I remember, something like that hasn't really been accepted as a norm in society, at least not in the last hundred years.
1762404228.jpg (116.9 KB, 840x951, the_conqueror__mlp_by_hedgie_samma_d48bfhl-pre.jpg)
>>400357
>But as far as I remember, something like that hasn't really been accepted as a norm in society
Correct, simping has gone too far and reestablishing the old ways is the way forward. The future is the past.
>But as far as I remember, something like that hasn't really been accepted as a norm in society
Correct, simping has gone too far and reestablishing the old ways is the way forward. The future is the past.
>>400357
> [...] does it actually work? How does she react [...]? Does she understand it [...]?
Well, yeah, she understands it. She's a grown woman and we met specifically at a mixer for people who were interested in that sort of relationship.
I will say sometimes she acts up on purpose just to get punished but usually she does that in a more playful way. The regular things will be things like drinking a healthy amount of water each day, taking her vitamin supplements for a health issue, staying on top of the cleaning & dishes, not spending half the day on her phone scrolling TikTok/Tumblr and instead doing something productive like a hobby or just being present in the moment, not using vulgar language, etc. She'll do really good for awhile but gradually over the course of two months (sometimes more, sometimes less it's an average) she gradually start letting things slip until she winds up back in her bad habits. It usually starts small and innocuous so that I don't even notice at first (she's also conciously aware that she's doing something wrong and will hide it but gradually get more blaisé if I ain't notice) so eventually I'll start verbally correcting her or giving her warnings, which will work too some degree but are more like bandaid. Eventually I've just had to scold her too many times, especially when they're in rapid succession, so I'll have to put her over my knee and spank her bare bottom. Sometimes on an easy chair, sometimes on our bed.
There's been a small handful of times where a spanking has either failed to correct her or she's given me quite an attitude or for resistance during her spanking so I'll have her touch her toes or bend over the back of the couch and I'll spank her with a small wooden paddle or my leather belt, but those are more infrequent, about once a year to eighteen months. I usually wasn't one for implements but there are times when they come in handy and if nothing else work very well on a psychological level to let them know they're in deep trouble time. The belt especially is one I thought I'd never use but I've started implementing because she told me that her Father spanked her bent over the back of their couch with his belt a few times as a child when she was really bad and so it has quite the psychological effect on her and makes her rather obedient. I obviously have to be more careful with an implement but I've grown to like it as well as the hand. One time I actually ejaculated without stimulation while belting her.
I would say it probably shouldn't be a weekly thing or more unless you're also doing it for sex or play. One thing about the real life aspect of it is there will be times when it's inconvenient or interrupts something fun or important and feels like a chore but you force yourself to address the issue because it's your responsibility and you tan that behind. I think it's those moments the most that makes the most impact and really cement the relationship.
When we first started it was all concensual with a lot of check-ins and me making sure she knew she had a safe word but as we've grown in our relationship she just defers to my judgement now even if she disagrees with it. The last time I spanked her it was actually late at night and she had to work early in the morning but I knew she was feeling like she got away with being disobedient so I spanked her anyway. She fought me quite a bit and I really had to wrestle her into place and even use the belt but she ultimately took her spanking. She told me the next day she was upset because she really did want to get to early and would've been cooperative in taking her punishment the next day but didn't try to use her safe word because ultimately she was deferring to my judgement and authority. On the flip side when I'm scolding her for being disobedient her logic is usually that it's my job to make her listen so if she's being disobedient it's MY fault for "not making her listen" so I suppose that's the give and take of it.
After having this relationship I'm of the mind that it's the only way to be I notice the amount of discord in women's lives that don't have this sort of dynamic as well as the level of intimacy that's more common in these types of relationships. When you realize that this type of dynamic really was the norm for the majority of human history it's really a no-brainer.
Obviously when it comes to kids you have to be a lot more gentle and should really use it as a last resort. While I reserve the right to change my mind once we have our own children I do think that if nothing else society would be a much better place if the reality of a spanking was an actual, widely accepted possibility for women and children. Even if no one ever actually were to be spanked for the rest of all time knowing it's an option would still cause a marked improvement in my opinion.
> [...] does it actually work? How does she react [...]? Does she understand it [...]?
Well, yeah, she understands it. She's a grown woman and we met specifically at a mixer for people who were interested in that sort of relationship.
I will say sometimes she acts up on purpose just to get punished but usually she does that in a more playful way. The regular things will be things like drinking a healthy amount of water each day, taking her vitamin supplements for a health issue, staying on top of the cleaning & dishes, not spending half the day on her phone scrolling TikTok/Tumblr and instead doing something productive like a hobby or just being present in the moment, not using vulgar language, etc. She'll do really good for awhile but gradually over the course of two months (sometimes more, sometimes less it's an average) she gradually start letting things slip until she winds up back in her bad habits. It usually starts small and innocuous so that I don't even notice at first (she's also conciously aware that she's doing something wrong and will hide it but gradually get more blaisé if I ain't notice) so eventually I'll start verbally correcting her or giving her warnings, which will work too some degree but are more like bandaid. Eventually I've just had to scold her too many times, especially when they're in rapid succession, so I'll have to put her over my knee and spank her bare bottom. Sometimes on an easy chair, sometimes on our bed.
There's been a small handful of times where a spanking has either failed to correct her or she's given me quite an attitude or for resistance during her spanking so I'll have her touch her toes or bend over the back of the couch and I'll spank her with a small wooden paddle or my leather belt, but those are more infrequent, about once a year to eighteen months. I usually wasn't one for implements but there are times when they come in handy and if nothing else work very well on a psychological level to let them know they're in deep trouble time. The belt especially is one I thought I'd never use but I've started implementing because she told me that her Father spanked her bent over the back of their couch with his belt a few times as a child when she was really bad and so it has quite the psychological effect on her and makes her rather obedient. I obviously have to be more careful with an implement but I've grown to like it as well as the hand. One time I actually ejaculated without stimulation while belting her.
I would say it probably shouldn't be a weekly thing or more unless you're also doing it for sex or play. One thing about the real life aspect of it is there will be times when it's inconvenient or interrupts something fun or important and feels like a chore but you force yourself to address the issue because it's your responsibility and you tan that behind. I think it's those moments the most that makes the most impact and really cement the relationship.
When we first started it was all concensual with a lot of check-ins and me making sure she knew she had a safe word but as we've grown in our relationship she just defers to my judgement now even if she disagrees with it. The last time I spanked her it was actually late at night and she had to work early in the morning but I knew she was feeling like she got away with being disobedient so I spanked her anyway. She fought me quite a bit and I really had to wrestle her into place and even use the belt but she ultimately took her spanking. She told me the next day she was upset because she really did want to get to early and would've been cooperative in taking her punishment the next day but didn't try to use her safe word because ultimately she was deferring to my judgement and authority. On the flip side when I'm scolding her for being disobedient her logic is usually that it's my job to make her listen so if she's being disobedient it's MY fault for "not making her listen" so I suppose that's the give and take of it.
After having this relationship I'm of the mind that it's the only way to be I notice the amount of discord in women's lives that don't have this sort of dynamic as well as the level of intimacy that's more common in these types of relationships. When you realize that this type of dynamic really was the norm for the majority of human history it's really a no-brainer.
Obviously when it comes to kids you have to be a lot more gentle and should really use it as a last resort. While I reserve the right to change my mind once we have our own children I do think that if nothing else society would be a much better place if the reality of a spanking was an actual, widely accepted possibility for women and children. Even if no one ever actually were to be spanked for the rest of all time knowing it's an option would still cause a marked improvement in my opinion.
77 replies | 23 files | 27 UUIDs | Archived