Make a new governemnt type!!!!!

Think up a form of governance (real or imaginary) and describe how it functions. Provide historical examples (or modern) if you wish or simply imagine some form of utopia/dystopia. You got this.

Ok make

Serbism.
All world should accept this government.

Speciesm.

Description: Extreme Fascism to Homo Sapiens Sapiens. All other Sentients are sub-thinking entities.

Nazism.
It's not new tho its good..

Humantism the idea that we are all one people who share common ancestry and all current and past conflicts of race religion and culture where made up by individuals with superiority complex and or genes that cause "alpha pack" like traits that force them to take advantage of there fellow man eventually causing devides in our species as they try to convince there followers that there wars taxes and corruption are justify ablr to keeping there state stron and supperior to it neighbors. The goal of this government is to destroy falsified history and corruption in the global world while accepting any creed into its borders as long as they are willing to leave the worst parts of there cultures behind to start there new life not as a Russian or a german or Arab but as a human amongst brothers all showing the entire world how dumb and how far we have fallen.

Skrivet av Helly, 19.01.2016 at 04:52

Humantism the idea that we are all one people who share common ancestry and all current and past conflicts of race religion and culture where made up by individuals with superiority complex and or genes that cause "alpha pack" like traits that force them to take advantage of there fellow man eventually causing devides in our species as they try to convince there followers that there wars taxes and corruption are justify ablr to keeping there state stron and supperior to it neighbors. The goal of this government is to destroy falsified history and corruption in the global world while accepting any creed into its borders as long as they are willing to leave the worst parts of there cultures behind to start there new life not as a Russian or a german or Arab but as a human amongst brothers all showing the entire world how dumb and how far we have fallen.

fuck,new unleashed

Skrivet av Kromn, 19.01.2016 at 05:17

Skrivet av Helly, 19.01.2016 at 04:52

Humantism the idea that we are all one people who share common ancestry and all current and past conflicts of race religion and culture where made up by individuals with superiority complex and or genes that cause "alpha pack" like traits that force them to take advantage of there fellow man eventually causing devides in our species as they try to convince there followers that there wars taxes and corruption are justify ablr to keeping there state stron and supperior to it neighbors. The goal of this government is to destroy falsified history and corruption in the global world while accepting any creed into its borders as long as they are willing to leave the worst parts of there cultures behind to start there new life not as a Russian or a german or Arab but as a human amongst brothers all showing the entire world how dumb and how far we have fallen.

fuck,new unleashed

Your mistaken my friend unleashed was the old me. My final rise from the ashes will come, this time I'll focus more on being myself rather then my hunger for recognition. Expect me :

Communitarianism.
The idea that all peoples of the world can unite behind a single idea and raise the human consciousness above previous limits. This has been attempted by many dictatorial states since, but it is my belief that what leads to oppression is the fact that these ideologies put society above individual. Let us return to the republics of old where the individual is the essence of the state and that the state is there only to serve the individual in representing the nation outwards. A state comprising of this ideology would have the following base characteristics, of course altered to fit in with every culture since we how much we try can't eradicate the heritage of a person:

- Full Freedom of Speech
One is able to say whatever it wishes to say, even things offending others. For example, a holocaust denier/antisemite in this society will not be at risk for legal repercussions if he wishes to voice his idea. It is the essence of the community that the offended party or oppositional party will be able to step up and argue against the idea(s) and resolution(s) of the first person in a civilized and non-violent manner.
- Minimal Government Involvement
The government exists solely to represent the peoples of the nation. The government should be as decentralized as possible with only a few offices whom are elected directly by the people, that means that if for example party A recieves 30% of the vote and party B 25% they will not be able to ally to get their candidates on the stage. Largest share wins, fair and square, with the representational power coming directly from the people. Most branches of government will be devolved or destroyed, for example the executive and judiciary branches shall be very devolved compared to our society today. The government does not have power vested in it to change the laws of the nation.
- Localism
Instead, the judiciary and executive branches only exist at a local level. Each part of the nation will be split into small communities with no more than 5,000 members as to have a workable chunk to deal with. These local governments does have control over laws and courts. Individuals can run for office in the local parliament so long as they have citizenship in the nation. Party affiliations will be outlawed and only campaign funding associations will be allowed. This might seem oppressive, but in truth this is to prevent the creation of a large-scale centralization and seizure of power by the outlined party. Officials are elected for 5-year periods. Seats will be assigned by the calculation of
Number of votes/250. Individuals may form a political group with no more than 10 people running for an office. These groups are only to exist in local communities to alleviate some of the electoral burdens of the people. The number of seats will yet again be one per 250 voting individuals in the locality.
- Principle
The head of the local police force will sit for a term of 5 years and be elected by the locals. The police will only punish laws that are in the constitution. The laws implemented by the local government will be constricted to the administrative and economical fields only and will not require police involvement unless violence commences first.
The police is there to protect the people and the punishable laws that the police will abide to are outlined in the constitution written by the founder of the relevant society.
The main guiding principle on this is that each and every person is allowed their freedom as long as they do not physically harm another human.
- Constitutionalism
The constitution of the nation is however not the sole power in the society. The people have the power to change it. Through a combination of atleast 30% support in local parliaments and a two-thirds majority vote(66%) from the people with 85% or larger vote participation the localities constitution may be amended so that the society can develop with the technological advances. This type of vote may also handle the reorganization of the districts, should a community grow above 8,000 people it shall be reorganized automatically by decree.
- Liberal Citizenship
All who see themselves as a part of the nation and participate in its workings are considered citizens of the nation. Of course this is too vague for an actual administrative system, so more precisely the requirements for citizenship are as follows; Either you acquire citizenship by birth, which means you are born within the nation, or you have been employed and working within the nation for atleast a two-year period.
- Economical Freedom
Today our societies regard personal, political and economical freedoms as totally different. This notion is to be eliminated in this society. Taxes will be the absolute minimum to keep government employees paid and may all in all not exceed 10% of an individuals income and expenses. This tax is something that stands unless the nation is under a direct invasion, in which case the taxes may be raised up to 20% to feed the organization of the people into a military force.
- Gun laws
All people in our nation above the age of 16 have a fundamental right to be armed in the name of self-protection. This is also a block towards the government not needing an extensive military branch and said branch not being able to control the people without opposition. The nation will be protected by its people in wartime since they are already armed.
- Foreign Policy
Our nation will only promote peace around the globe. We are not to station our troops(If the government decides to build up a symbolic force) in other nations under any circumstances. The governments armed force is only there to protect the people from foreign threats. In effect, our nation will be moderately isolationist.

As you can clearly see, this government type and ideology is based on the notion that every person is aware of themselves and through that have respect for others.
EDIT: Also, we need to remove banking institutions. That's something that should actually be handled by the state to prevent seizure by the judeo-bolsheviks.

Skrivet av 5th SS Wiking, 19.01.2016 at 09:50

EDIT: Also, we need to remove banking institutions. That's something that should actually be handled by the state to prevent seizure by the judeo-bolsheviks.

you could have started and finished with just this sentence. but your dedication to fixing the finer details is impressive.

Skrivet av 5th SS Wiking, 19.01.2016 at 09:50

snip

I also think citizenship should be given to those who serve in the military or law enforcement after a certain amount of time. ANyone wounded in the line of duty may automatically apply for citizenship. Anyone willing to fight and bleed for a country in order to protect others is a citizen in my book.


Thoughts?

Skrivet av Pheonixking929, 19.01.2016 at 16:58

Skrivet av 5th SS Wiking, 19.01.2016 at 09:50

snip

I also think citizenship should be given to those who serve in the military or law enforcement after a certain amount of time. ANyone wounded in the line of duty may automatically apply for citizenship. Anyone willing to fight and bleed for a country in order to protect others is a citizen in my book.


Thoughts?

Employment under state services is still employment. However you're right about being wounded in the line of duty should make you eligble for citizenship.

Skrivet av Netre, 19.01.2016 at 16:06

Skrivet av 5th SS Wiking, 19.01.2016 at 09:50

EDIT: Also, we need to remove banking institutions. That's something that should actually be handled by the state to prevent seizure by the judeo-bolsheviks.

you could have started and finished with just this sentence. but your dedication to fixing the finer details is impressive.

The purpose of the post was an idea in order to turn an utopian ideology(anarchism) into something more possible and less overhauling. The finer details have been added as such to provide for a framework which will prevent the widespread corruption that has been hitting the democratic societies of the world since the 50's. They are also there to prevent attempts at centralizing the state by possible social democrats and authoritarian ideologists.

Skrivet av 5th SS Wiking, 20.01.2016 at 05:50

Skrivet av Netre, 19.01.2016 at 16:06

Skrivet av 5th SS Wiking, 19.01.2016 at 09:50

The purpose of the post was an idea in order to turn an utopian ideology(anarchism) into something more possible and less overhauling. The finer details have been added as such to provide for a framework which will prevent the widespread corruption that has been hitting the democratic societies of the world since the 50's. They are also there to prevent attempts at centralizing the state by possible social democrats and authoritarian ideologists.

hey i'm not trying to argue you here i agree with what your saying(the finer detials) in the long run its all ideal just impossible to get when banks exist in the form that they do.
The only way you could realistically reach a perfect society, or at least your one, now would be to burn everything to the ground then start over. because banking system is hardwired into society nowadays just like the church was a thousand years ago, the difference is and as hard as it is for some people to believe the bank is bad for the majority of society in comparison the religions ran around putting flowers in guns, and there is no way that its going to be removed easily.
Not saying it'd be hard for you to believe but i know people who are so gullible they are willing to give a guy all there money and the pay him to take it back cause he said he was a cool guy, fucking idiots.

Skrivet av 5th SS Wiking, 19.01.2016 at 09:50

-snip-

Meh, such ideals is only possible in modern peaceful era. Other than that, it's useless.

Skrivet av 5th SS Wiking, 19.01.2016 at 09:50

-snip-

thought you might like this article by huffington post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/syrian-kurds-murray-bookchin_us_5655e7e2e4b079b28189e3df?

It's about the political ideas of the syrian kurds and how they evolved from the PKK and an American who began having letter talks with it's imprisoned leader.

Skrivet av Helly, 19.01.2016 at 04:52

Humantism the idea that we are all one people who share common ancestry and all current and past conflicts of race religion and culture where made up by individuals with superiority complex and or genes that cause "alpha pack" like traits that force them to take advantage of there fellow man eventually causing devides in our species as they try to convince there followers that there wars taxes and corruption are justify ablr to keeping there state stron and supperior to it neighbors. The goal of this government is to destroy falsified history and corruption in the global world while accepting any creed into its borders as long as they are willing to leave the worst parts of there cultures behind to start there new life not as a Russian or a german or Arab but as a human amongst brothers all showing the entire world how dumb and how far we have fallen.

In other words, an open border multi cultural state. Yes, it's called western civilization and its burning.

"how far we have fallen"

From what? We have always been like this. We have always been a viscous tribal species that prefers its own genetic tribal group. This is never going to change. Different racial groups are not equally capable, their culture is not equally equivalent and we self-segregate regardless of any intentions to force integration.

Why do people continue to deny our tribal nature? What you are talking about doesn't work, has never worked and will never work. This is BIOLOGY vs 'muh feelings'. Your feelings don't mean shit in the real world, they don't mean shit compared to concrete mathematical data built into our bloody genome and they don't mean shit to people crossing a border who want what you have.

You people need to grow up at some point. Reality isn't going to just keep knocking for long, it's getting ready to go full 'Shining' on your arse and break through the door with a goddman axe.

I consider myself to be by-and-large a social-democrat, but I do have some beliefs that deviate from that norm.

My stance on individual issues within a hypothetical utopia are:

1. Freedom of Speech and Expression
The absolute core foundation of all my political beliefs. Regardless of whether someone's hateful, offensive, fanatical, or whatever, opinions and their expression should never be illegal. Censoring national socialist rhetoric isn't going to make national socialism go away. After all, many countries have already tried that before. Considering how radical ideologies has been, is, and will always be around, it's much, much better for everyone to just have everything out in the open where people can debate their relative merits and disadvantages, instead of having it bottled up in somebody's head.

If someone feels like standing up in the main market square and make a speech about how all brown-haired people (for example) deserve to die, well, why the heck not? If that is that person's honest opinion, and that is what the person really believes, then of course that opinion should be out in public, available for debate.

As such, any limitations to the freedom of speech should be very carefully considered. There should be, for example, a very strict and very narrow definition of what constitutes defamation. There should also be a very strict and very narrow definition of what is considered subverting national security.

2. Economic Egalitarianism
Democracy exists only in words if the people do not have the opportunity to use the rights availed to it. That means that everybody has to be reasonably literate, reasonably wealthy, and have reasonable leisure time. All this requires a rather large social spending, which will naturally be paid for by an aggressively progressive code of taxation on all personal and corporate income. Citizens of developed nations should have a right to a lifestyle befit of a citizen of a developed nation. Similarly, I support other legislation that will provide economic and political advantages to the lower classes, such as but not limited to labor's right to organise and citizens' rights to know where politicians' campaign funding comes from.

I think that basic social services such as infrastructure, healthcare, education, etc. should be provided for by the State, with the option to use private facilities if available and affordable. In terms of general welfare, though, I don't support things like food stamps and other conditional aid. Either a negative income tax or a citizen's dividend is the most efficient form of general welfare, and this will cut the sheer bureaucratic nightmare that surrounds policies like food stamps.

This will of course be paid for with higher taxation. A 75~90% top bracket rate seems reasonable, because honestly, are rich people's lives actually any better if they make a twenty million dollars a year as opposed to ten? I don't think so.

I also (contrary to most social-democrats) do not support a minimum wage. It literally doesn't make poor people's lives any better. If anything, it makes them worse. Provide a citizen's dividend, or have the State offer more jobs (there are always rocks to be hauled), and wages will naturally rise as a result of market forces.

3. Semi-Open Citizenship
Unlike some of my more right-wing peers here, I strongly believe that what constitutes a nation and its people is culture, not ethnicity. I don't mean culture in the sense of religion and such, but more in the sense of attitudes, values, and customs. In Eastern Asia, where I come from, we respect highly our elders and superiors, whereas Western Europe has a much more egalitarian attitude to things. Individualism is valued highly in the United States, but less so in Europe and even less so in Southern Asia. Northern Europe has fairly liberal attitudes to sex, but the Americas and Asia does not. These sorts of many, many little things, in my opinion, is what defines a nation.

As such, I promote a more open citizenship. If a person can speak the language of the land to reasonable standards (with pretty generous definitions of 'reasonable standard,' absorbed or at the very least understands and is willing to follow the values and attitudes of the nation, and is willing to work, then that person should be granted citizenship or, at the very least, permanent residency, unless there are really strong reasons not to (such as, for example, prior terrorist activity).

4. Devolution
Some things can just be done better by locals. I am strongly in favour of Swiss-style devolution, where the national government controls such nationwide affairs as immigration, diplomacy, defence, large-scale infrastructure, and constitutional law (plus a few more things), while almost everything else is left to the regions (provinces, states, etc). I'm not as extreme as Blu, though. I think there nonetheless should be a national government with considerable power.

But if there's no particularly good reason why the national government needs to do it, it's probably better to just decentralise it.

5. Social/Personal Liberalism
In terms of social and personal rights, I am of the opinion that anything goes.

Gun rights, for example. Any adult of sound mind with a non-criminal background, in my opinion, should be allowed to possess and carry firearms. There's no reason for the police to crack down on this. Normal people understand that a firearm is a dangerous object, and they most certainly won't be playing around with it. If they do play around with firearms (for example, pointing loaded guns at strangers), then they clearly aren't of sound mind and won't be permitted to carry around one anyways.

In terms of social issues, I'm a full liberal there also. People who seek to preserve family values can do so: they can live their lives however they want. What happens in the bedroom between consenting adults is nobody's business but their own. The state should also de-sanctify marriage. After all, is there any particular reason except religious/moral that a legal household (for tax purposes and such) needs to consist of one man, one woman, and their children?

6. Democracy and Political Rights
The State should represent the people, pure and simple. The legislative branch of government, whether they be national or regional, should be elected through an election in which all citizens which that legislative body represents has one vote. Proportional representation. Similarly, acts of political display, such as parades, protests, etc, should be allowed provided that they do not break some other law (rioting and looting will be violently cracked down on). The head of government must also be chosen through democratic processes, whether it be direct or indirect. The State should also remain transparent. It should not hide its activities from its own citizens, and anything that needs hiding (tapping on private citizens' phone lines without a warrant, for example) shouldn't be done. In wartime, it may be prudent to keep military activities secret, but that's about it. All other information should be available for citizens.

Separation of powers is also an important one. The legislative, executive, and judicial branches should keep each other in check, to ensure that one ambitious person or rogue committee can't push through anything. It should be absolutely impossible to effectively consolidate decision-making power in the government. Furthermore, the balance between national and regional governments should be maintained, to ensure that both national tyranny and regional separatism can be countered by intervention from the other.

Skrivet av Tik-Tok, 22.01.2016 at 08:50

Skrivet av Helly, 19.01.2016 at 04:52

Humantism the idea that we are all one people who share common ancestry and all current and past conflicts of race religion and culture where made up by individuals with superiority complex and or genes that cause "alpha pack" like traits that force them to take advantage of there fellow man eventually causing devides in our species as they try to convince there followers that there wars taxes and corruption are justify ablr to keeping there state stron and supperior to it neighbors. The goal of this government is to destroy falsified history and corruption in the global world while accepting any creed into its borders as long as they are willing to leave the worst parts of there cultures behind to start there new life not as a Russian or a german or Arab but as a human amongst brothers all showing the entire world how dumb and how far we have fallen.

In other words, an open border multi cultural state. Yes, it's called western civilization and its burning.

"how far we have fallen"

From what? We have always been like this. We have always been a viscous tribal species that prefers its own genetic tribal group. This is never going to change. Different racial groups are not equally capable, their culture is not equally equivalent and we self-segregate regardless of any intentions to force integration.

Why do people continue to deny our tribal nature? What you are talking about doesn't work, has never worked and will never work. This is BIOLOGY vs 'muh feelings'. Your feelings don't mean shit in the real world, they don't mean shit compared to concrete mathematical data built into our bloody genome and they don't mean shit to people crossing a border who want what you have.

You people need to grow up at some point. Reality isn't going to just keep knocking for long, it's getting ready to go full 'Shining' on your arse and break through the door with a goddman axe.

Tik tok being human is a special sentiment we are capable of higher thought and able to control our own destiny, we are animals a filthy species of war mongering animals, but at the same time we are special we can control our impulses we can control the devil in all of us. To give in to such evil will unravel society itself, the only option we have is to become more technically advanced, so advanced to the point where scarcity isn't a thing. Once this is a reality and there is no reason to undermine our fellow man in a compition of power, or to spend 65% of a budget on the military. Lastly iv studied your opinion on political matters very heavily, and to be honest our ideologies are not so far apart, I simply see the good in all races and I don't label man by his origins but by his actions, a german can be just as useless as an african, and an Arab can be as innovative as Indian, my goal is not to see yours or my race undermined or assimilated into anothers culture my goal is to see the act of there being a separation based on origin destroyed and instead a kind of segregation based on actions put in its place. If you contribute you are a free man in my world, if your feeding in the system you must be rehabilitated or removed. I'm an American iv seen what happens when one race is held above another when it was the blacks it caused sever issues for generations so much to the point where being white is now a crime. It is time to kill the problem at the roots. Which that problem is the very barbarity you stated above.



Edit: let me elaborate on my ideology a little since we seem to think I'm a libtard fuck boi. I'm against homosexuality, mental illness should be strictly regulated by the state. Gun laws should be abolished, if you commit any crime in your first 5 years living in a country it should be immediate deportation. There should be no such thing as naturalization citizenship. No immegrant should migrate without a job. Welfare should exsist but all countries should strictly supervise each recipient, with things such as monthly drug testing and child upbringing standards.all money used with welfare should be documented it's not ment to go to the Solon with or an athletic event. The military should be isolationist, only protecting it's own borders reducing the amount of economy going into it. Lobbying shoukd be illegal, nationalized private banking should be illegal. Country conquering and rebuilding is illegal, and should be punishable to the elected officials who conducted the atrocity. Religion shoukd be kept out of schools entirely, but there should be enough religious institutions to allow people to be informed about religion . Religion should be a private matter between you and god, it should be left out of society. The media should be an unbiased third party who investigates wrong doing. There shoukd be way stricter environmental laws and the goal should be to abandon fossil fuel entirely by 2030. The nation should encourage many political parties to reduce corruption, the two party system is corrupt. IQ testing shoukd be yearly for all childeren those with exceptional inelegance should be given all neccassary resources required for successful life. Those with lower IQ should be put in an educational system not based on standardized testing but instead one that teaches critical thinking and leadership. For those unwilling to adopt this system stated above should be deported removed or killed.

Wow more politics

Skrivet av Helly, 23.01.2016 at 14:07

Edit: let me elaborate on my ideology a little since we seem to think I'm a libtard fuck boi. I'm against homosexuality, mental illness should be strictly regulated by the state

but instead one that teaches critical thinking

The cognitive dissonance is strong in you young one. Just like with Tik tok First of all its not very "free" society if you accept all races, religions and whatnot and dont accept all sexualities. This means that a. you are dismissing all statistics, in which is evident that people with different cultures and religious beliefs, such as muslims, are more prone to commit crimes and do not integrate in their new societies, whereas i have yet to see homosexuals killing anyone with axes yet. And b. you are dismissing science, since homosexuality is officially not a mental illness, hasnt been for decades now. You cant use science whenever it suits your purpose buddy. And thats not very critical think-ish.

Other than that and my opposition to free guns (again based on a. statistics- check violent crimes in US where guns laws are loose and put them up against Europe's which has strict laws. We only hear school shootings is a thing because we watch interntional news, otherwise we prob wouldnt have heard this word and b. common sense - easy access to guns in a society where sociopaths, psychopaths, criminals and people with all kind of mental problems are running loose is a recipy for disaster)

and my opposition to any kind of drug control ( they just protect the cartels and sustain gang violence) whereas all the countries that experimented with legalisation, like Portugal and Netherlands, saw a decrease in every relevant factors, like drug use, drug related fatalities, drug related crime, drop on aids and so on.

Other than these, i fully support the rest

Skrivet av Khal.eesi, 25.01.2016 at 03:51

Skrivet av Helly, 23.01.2016 at 14:07

Edit: let me elaborate on my ideology a little since we seem to think I'm a libtard fuck boi. I'm against homosexuality, mental illness should be strictly regulated by the state

but instead one that teaches critical thinking

The cognitive dissonance is strong in you young one. Just like with Tik tok First of all its not very "free" society if you accept all races, religions and whatnot and dont accept all sexualities. This means that a. you are dismissing all statistics, in which is evident that people with different cultures and religious beliefs, such as muslims, are more prone to commit crimes and do not integrate in their new societies, whereas i have yet to see homosexuals killing anyone with axes yet. And b. you are dismissing science, since homosexuality is officially not a mental illness, hasnt been for decades now. You cant use science whenever it suits your purpose buddy. And thats not very critical think-ish.

Other than that and my opposition to free guns (again based on a. statistics- check violent crimes in US where guns laws are loose and put them up against Europe's which has strict laws. We only hear school shootings is a thing because we watch interntional news, otherwise we prob wouldnt have heard this word and b. common sense - easy access to guns in a society where sociopaths, psychopaths, criminals and people with all kind of mental problems are running loose is a recipy for disaster)

and my opposition to any kind of drug control ( they just protect the cartels and sustain gang violence) whereas all the countries that experimented with legalisation, like Portugal and Netherlands, saw a decrease in every relevant factors, like drug use, drug related fatalities, drug related crime, drop on aids and so on.

Other than these, i fully support the rest

Never said homosexuality was a mental illness or did I say it was scientifically proven false. It is genetics ofc. My issue is with gay men acting like women and playing victims. I am strongly in favor of a male driven society and those charecteristics in a man disturb me. But like I said that's a personal view not a scientific one.

Skrivet av Helly, 25.01.2016 at 05:09

Never said homosexuality was a mental illness or did I say it was scientifically proven false. It is genetics ofc. My issue is with gay men acting like women and playing victims. I am strongly in favor of a male driven society and those charecteristics in a man disturb me. But like I said that's a personal view not a scientific one.

Well you kind of did. Or atleast thats what anyone would conclude after reading the choice of words you used in that order.

Skrivet av Helly, 25.01.2016 at 05:09

I'm against homosexuality, mental illness should be strictly regulated by the state

It is ok to think so, you wouldnt be the first, especially here. Tik tok, Tito, Commando, Hdrakon among many others certainly believe so and have made very well thought, really compelling and intelligent arguments in the past. (buahahahhahahaahahaha!!) But the real issue here, is not medical, but aesthetics and pure difference of opinion, views and likes/dislikes, aint it? I have my own, i dont like fat and ugly/hairy/beaten people and i have evidence too that they hurt both themselves and the planet, whereas you have none, but nevermind that, so what? should we regulate them too and imprison them just because i dont like to look at them or they dont fit my criteria or my views that all people should have a good healthy body and should atleast try to be goodlooking/take care of themselves? The answer is no, i think. The government is responsible for regulating alot of things, your feelings aint one of them.

Also social gender attitude and norms are artificial social constructs. They dont really exist, we made them up and they have always been subject to change along with everything else in a society, so i dont really get the "they act like girls". Achilleas was a crossdresser in ancient Greece, Egyptians wore more makeup than Cher, Vikings braided and scented their hair, Brit lords wore more bling than Rihanna and all her cousins combined, Scots wore shorter mini-skirts than Paris Hilton and French wore freaking pantyhose.

As for playing victims, i dont think its really a game for them, because they have been victims for a long time and alot of them still are, to this day.

As a last note, dont worry you made your position clear, you are not a libtard fuckboi, so Tik tok and his fan club wont think less of you, but i worry about my self. I feel like i shared too much on this forum and fascist youth will never accept me now. Tik tok is this true, have i really burned all bridges?

Skrivet av Khal.eesi, 25.01.2016 at 15:19

Skrivet av Helly, 25.01.2016 at 05:09

Never said homosexuality was a mental illness or did I say it was scientifically proven false. It is genetics ofc. My issue is with gay men acting like women and playing victims. I am strongly in favor of a male driven society and those charecteristics in a man disturb me. But like I said that's a personal view not a scientific one.

Well you kind of did. Or atleast thats what anyone would conclude after reading the choice of words you used in that order.

Skrivet av Helly, 25.01.2016 at 05:09

I'm against homosexuality, mental illness should be strictly regulated by the state

It is ok to think so, you wouldnt be the first, especially here. Tik tok, Tito, Commando, Hdrakon among many others certainly believe so and have made very well thought, really compelling and intelligent arguments in the past. (buahahahhahahaahahaha!!) But the real issue here, is not medical, but aesthetics and pure difference of opinion, views and likes/dislikes, aint it? I have my own, i dont like fat and ugly/hairy/beaten people and i have evidence too that they hurt both themselves and the planet, whereas you have none, but nevermind that, so what? should we regulate them too and imprison them just because i dont like to look at them or they dont fit my criteria or my views that all people should have a good healthy body and should atleast try to be goodlooking/take care of themselves? The answer is no, i think. The government is responsible for regulating alot of things, your feelings aint one of them.

Also social gender attitude and norms are artificial social constructs. They dont really exist, we made them up and they have always been subject to change along with everything else in a society, so i dont really get the "they act like girls". Achilleas was a crossdresser in ancient Greece, Egyptians wore more makeup than Cher, Vikings braided and scented their hair, Brit lords wore more bling than Rihanna and all her cousins combined, Scots wore shorter mini-skirts than Paris Hilton and French wore freaking pantyhose.

As for playing victims, i dont think its really a game for them, because they have been victims for a long time and alot of them still are, to this day.

As a last note, dont worry you made your position clear, you are not a libtard fuckboi, so Tik tok and his fan club wont think less of you, but i worry about my self. I feel like i shared too much on this forum and fascist youth will never accept me now. Tik tok is this true, have i really burned all bridges?

Well like I said my views on homosexuality are superficial and opiniontive, and stated it the way I am now to make sure everyone knows this that I have no proof they are mentally ill (some of them attention seeking whore like Bruce Jenner) other then that way to rehabilitate the current american culture on the other hand is to foster a society that takes responsibility for there actions, and does not blame others or play the victim and this is a trait found far to often in liberal democratic homosexuals, if even this one thing changed in that part of there culture I'd hate them far less then I do currently.