Posts by Timothy Nelson5

Amy Rogers6 said:Total Trojan Horse move here—crises don't just "happen," they’re manufactured. They’re one of the most powerful geopolitical levers used to grab power and exert control. So, to answer your question: yeah, crises are coming. The driver? Defending the Petrodollar, which is getting seriously eroded along with Anglo-Saxon dominance. Honestly, the Anglo-Saxons need to trigger an economic crisis ASAP; they still hold all the cards when it comes to controlling global money flows, and since things are going south for them on the front lines (basically, they're in total shambles), they’ll pivot to their last resort—a tactic they’ve perfected many times before. If that doesn't work, get ready for a major conflict—something way more intense than the typical proxy wars we've seen over the last 25 years.

Bottom line: the geopolitical landscape makes a crisis inevitable. But whether it hits in a year or three, or which country gets hit first and how they pull the trigger, is anyone's guess right now. You’d have to be sitting at the high table to know for sure... 😁My personal speculative bet? The crisis kicks off within 12 months of Brexit being finalized...☕

Basically, once you see some random commodity price like copper tanking in some obscure market, you'll know the wheels are officially in motion...☕

🤦

The Petrodollar? Hmm... was that before or after the gold standard? 🤔 Probably after mercantilism... I guess...
😁
Anyway, it's just some historical term...

My suggestion? Maybe wake up to the 21st century and realize the USA is now the biggest producer and net exporter of oil and gas. Plus, the IT industry is basically the engine driving everything.
The whole Petrodollar concept is fifty years old, and nowadays, the only people still obsessing over it are those salon-dwelling blowhards spinning their little fantasies. It's as if certain cultural Marxist economic theorists—which is an oxymoron if you ask me—have elevated it to some kind of cult object, the ultimate scapegoat for all the world's problems. And now, they just can't cope, so they keep seeing this phantom threat in every nightmare.

fadedtinker36 said:The media is getting louder by the day about a looming global economic meltdown during the COVID-19 recession.

Everyone remembers how the 2008 crash absolutely decimated global balance sheets.

Now, they’re claiming the COVID-19 recession will hit even harder.

Even the water levels at Lake Mead suggest the same thing, pointing toward an inevitable collapse.

Do you actually buy any of this?
Is a global crisis actually coming, or is it just noise?

The COVID-19 recession will only happen if the globalists here in the USA manage to get rid of Trump.

Everything else is just noise from various pseudo-scientific leftist hacks and Nobel laureates like Krugman, who was busy predicting a recession right after Trump was elected.

It’s being claimed that the COVID-19 recession is looming and might have even worse effects.

To quote:
Germany's major economy admitted a few days ago that it's entered a technical recession, and stock indices on the largest US exchanges plummeted on Wednesday, leading global analysts to suggest a new global economic crisis might be on the horizon.

On the other hand, US stock indices hit all-time highs on Monday; they're higher now than they've ever been in history.
And all this happens while the Democratic Party tries to sabotage Trump's successful economic policies, seemingly hoping that by crashing the economy, they can take down Trump too. For instance, Democrats in Congress failed to ratify Trump's USMCA, which could have spurred even more growth on its own.

Anyone following politics even remotely knows that last week's dip was a direct result of the Democrats in Congress pulling yet another sabotage move against Trump. The market's reaction afterward—that massive rally—just shows their attempt didn't really work.

All this American economic growth is happening right in the middle of a trade war with China and negotiations where we're only just starting to see a potential end to the first phase.
Many experts are guessing that once the US and China reach a deal, stock indices could jump 10-15%, which would probably be the biggest surge in history.
But, I guess, if they somehow do manage to topple Trump, it's almost certain that all this economic momentum would grind to a halt, leaving us with a brutal recession.

Europe and Germany are a completely different story.
The sickness in the European economy feels like a malignant tumor that started spreading when the European Economic Community evolved into the political entity known as the EU; now it seems more focused on ideological nonsense rather than sound economics.
The situation in the EU isn't helped by this whole tug-of-war regarding the United Kingdom leaving. Instead of finding a sensible agreement quickly, the globalists in Brussels along with the remainers in the United Kingdom are sabotaging any resolution, pushing the entire EU into even deeper uncertainty.

lonebadger6 said:One of the fundamental rules around here at KZB is pretty simple: you don't open up a whole new thread just to protest someone else's card. And the second rule? Don't start a new topic about cards at all—there’s already a dedicated thread for that. I guess we should probably stick to the established format.
...

I guess Wayne’s question, even if it does break the rules, is actually pretty fair...

I don't think Wayne's question was meant to be some kind of card protest. It felt more like a simple request... just asking for some clarity on how the moderation criteria actually work. Maybe I'm misreading things, but that seems to be the case.
Even you’re saying it seems fair, but I guess... nobody from the moderation team has actually shown up in over a week to give any kind of response. Not even a small one. It's just silence.
By the time I actually decided to jump into this debate, there really wasn't much point in dodging the question anymore. I guess it was just time to face it.

Moderators are only obligated to respond to civilized inquiries. I guess Wayne used to be like that, but this whole topic morphed into something else entirely rather quickly.

If we didn't have all this constant spamming—and those same few misunderstood souls always popping up to make noise—I guess the actual answers would probably be a bit more frequent. So, if you, or anyone else for that matter, actually wants a real answer to something, maybe next time you could just suggest to the folks on your side, roughly speaking, to stop trolling and spamming. Or, I suppose, you don't have to. It's up to you.

Wayne's question was, as you put it, civilized, but I guess he didn't end up getting an answer.
It wasn't even the people who joined in by asking actual logical questions that cluttered things up. No, it was placidorca16 with the constant spamming and Peter Reyes33 with those crude insults. And honestly, regarding Peter Reyes33—even though his behavior flies right in the face of the site rules, neither you nor your colleague have actually stepped in to issue any sanctions. I guess that's just how it goes.

Maybe Timothy Nelson5 could have just started his own thread over at KZB, or perhaps he should have just headed over to the "card protest" topic instead. I guess.
Honestly, if Timothy Nelson5 had just started his own thread, I bet he would have actually gotten a real answer to a question phrased like that—assuming some spammers didn't swoop in immediately to ruin everything. And I suppose John Wayne would probably get a fair response too, since he asks things the right way. I don't quite get why he suddenly feels the need to act like some high-priced lawyer defending rule-breakers, especially when he knows perfectly well that's against the rules.

We aren't just some clueless bystanders, and you shouldn't assume for a second that we have no idea what's actually going on.

I guess Oštrić at least had the decency to be honest in his reply when he suggested that Nina wouldn't even be allowed to post comments. He couldn't quite manage—even with a bit of mental effort, I suppose—to explain which specific criteria in my post he considers "hate speech." Meanwhile, in Nina's much more blunt article regarding "Gretenism," he doesn't seem to see any grounds for filing a criminal complaint. It's all a bit inconsistent, isn't it?

I feel like I’m constantly getting hit with a card for trolling a bit too hard, and then my posts just end up being deleted anyway. It happens all the time, I guess.
I wonder why it gets deleted. I guess it just happens sometimes. Maybe there's a reason, though I can't quite put my finger on it. It's strange, really.?
I suppose it’s just because explaining all those radical criteria for sanctions is such a massive headache. It's complicated, I guess. Maybe it's just too much to unpack without getting lost in the weeds.
Even the moderation team seems embarrassed by their own handiwork, I suppose. It’s almost as if they realize they couldn't honestly claim this is a platform where anyone can just step up and share their thoughts or opinions in a civil way. Maybe they know it. I guess.

We aren't fools.
I suppose we only endure being tolerated by the rest of you—those few of us still attempting to contribute something actually meaningful to the conversation—because if every thread were just a collection of people nodding in agreement, the whole thing would probably die out pretty fast.
And on top of all that, I suppose you're just hoping we'll start policing our own speech.
It happens, I suppose, but maybe not exactly the way you’re picturing it. A lot of these topics have just... died out completely. And honestly, I think that’s precisely why.
Everyone jumping into this thread seems completely checked out. From what I can see, people are straight-up saying they aren't even bothering to engage in discussions anymore. I suppose it’s not really surprising, honestly, given how it's become pretty obvious that insulting and belittling anyone with a different perspective is just tolerated now. Even right here in this thread.

But please, feel free to keep destroying this site with this kind of moderation. Go ahead—keep up those Stalinist-style trials where dissenters get banned without any real explanation (because claiming "trolling" is the sole, omnipresent reason doesn't really count as an explanation, I guess). Keep feeding yourselves this illusion that you're actually "winning" debates just because you've banned everyone who disagrees and scrubbed away all the "unwanted" posts. It'll be real interesting watching when placidorca16, Peter Reyes33, and the rest of their crowd start tearing each other apart.

The Overton window can only shift so far.
If you push it too hard, people just stop looking at it altogether and find some other, more interesting window to look through.

Ethan Fisher66 said:I’d also point out that there’s a massive chance that by saying anything at all, you won't achieve anything useful. In fact, that friend could easily end up resenting you or your husband. As the old saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions...
Personally, I’d probably just suggest she stop wasting her breath. I’d try to hint indirectly that if she doesn't get the hint, it isn't her place to dictate how anyone else lives their life.
She’s likely smart enough to figure out what everyone's motives are on her own.

Exactly this.
It seems all too likely that a woman suffering through such a health crisis would just end up blaming the people who delivered the bad news.

The mere fact that she’s putting off having her ovaries removed in some slim hope of having a child suggests she’s headed for an even deeper heartbreak once she realizes her partner doesn't want kids at all (or, which I guess is even more depressing for her, doesn't want them with *her*).

If I were to offer advice to the OP, if she’s determined to take action, maybe she should suggest that the husband’s friend find a private moment to be upfront with his partner about where he stands, rather than leaving her in this agonizing state of uncertainty. He could frame it around his own sense of integrity or being a "stand-up guy," instead of leaning on those counterproductive lectures about "women's rights." Most people—men and women alike—aren't going to respect him for staying silent and being evasive, and eventually, word tends to get around anyway.

I suppose, if there’s any silver lining here, it’s that the woman is regularly seeing doctors and monitoring her health. Even if she goes through with the surgery and falls into a deep depression afterward... well, who knows? At least she’s being proactive. If she stopped going to her checkups entirely, things could go south very quickly.

bluemason3 said:Just because someone struggles mentally doesn't mean they're stupid. You're putting words in my mouth.

I know plenty of people with Asperger, and others on the spectrum too... way more than I can count, actually. I spent more than half my life around them, so I really don't need anyone explaining their pros and cons to me.

They can be hyper-successful at whatever they focus on, sure, but things like metacognition, breadth of thought, grasping complex situations, social dynamics, etc.—that stuff is usually a mess. They're great for highly specialized roles, maybe, but lousy leaders. If I were hiring, I’d bring an Asperger on board as a programmer, but never as the head of a department. They all tend to be intensely obsessive, almost fanatical, about their specific fixations.

Cognitive ability isn't just about knocking out certain tasks. Metacognition is a cognitive ability, too.

And for what it's worth, I have a diagnosis of depression myself. 😉

On top of that, I think I read somewhere—maybe it was her or her family or whoever—saying she was essentially developmentally delayed because of all the issues she faced, and that she even looks younger than she is, or something along those lines. I don't recall the exact wording.

👍

Even the most advanced sixteen-year-old is still dim-witted in some ways. Like I said, the neurological development of the key parts of the brain regarding these matters doesn't wrap up until around age 25.

I'd have to correct you there, just a little bit.
"Stupid" is such a broad term. In this context, it would be more accurate to say "immature."
When you call someone a "kid," that's exactly what you mean—they're immature.

lonetrucker4 said:@John, I just wanted to share how I see things, since it might actually be relevant. I’m not a moderator over on the Politics sub, and I wasn't the one who handed out that card protest, so I'm not looking to get into a heated debate here.

I guess I won't be getting into any arguments. But look, you've gone straight into a polemic, and honestly, it feels like you're just aiming to insult me at this point.

I didn't even realize people actually discussed this stuff here, but since we're already on the subject, I guess I should ask if I could just share what that actual post looked like—the one they banned me for:

MrsGahan said:Maybe we should take a moment to actually analyze Greta Thunberg's entire speech, rather than just pulling random clips out of context..[/COLOR]

Maybe we should take a moment to actually analyze Greta Thunberg herself—and, more importantly, the people who seem to be recklessly manipulating her. It’s hard not to notice how they leverage her frustrations, her fears, and even her neurodivergence just to push their own agendas. It feels a bit calculated, if you ask me.
So, wait... are they actually bullying her? I mean, is she really being targeted like this? It seems that way, I guess. Maybe it's just how things work now.

I guess I should probably say something here... just sitting here thinking about how everything seems to be shifting, though maybe it's just me. It's hard to tell sometimes, isn't it? Everything feels a bit heavy lately. Anyway, I suppose I'll just leave this here.
(quoting Greta Thunberg's speech)
It’s all wrong. I honestly shouldn't even be here; I should probably be back in school on the other side of the ocean, but instead, you all just keep turning to us young people, looking to us to provide some kind of hope. How do you even have the nerve? You’ve basically stolen my childhood and my dreams, replacing them with nothing but empty words.

Timothy Nelson5
Who exactly stole anything from her? I mean, really... what did she actually lose?
I mean, look at Greta Thunberg. She was born into this world of absolute abundance—a world built by the sheer grit and tireless work of the generations that came before her. It’s all there, isn't it? The infrastructure, the stability... it was all carved out by people who actually put in the effort. So, I guess you have to wonder... who does this kid think she is, coming in here and lecturing everyone else about how to live? It feels a bit much, doesn't it?

Besides, those aren't even her words.
I mean, I guess it’s highly unlikely she actually penned those words herself; it feels more like they were written by her handlers. It just seems that way to me.

I don't know, maybe I'm just getting old, but I feel like I've been staring at this screen for hours and nothing actually changes. Everything feels a bit... static? I guess I'm just tired. It’s hard to tell if it's the caffeine or just the general state of things lately. Anyway, I'll probably be back here later. Or maybe not. Who knows.
So, it isn't exactly that Greta is claiming she had some tragic childhood or anything like that. It’s more that she’s arguing that once she grew up and actually looked at the reality of things—all those empty ecological promises from around the globe, the Kyoto protocols, and all those other agreements meant for... well, you know—she realized she’d been cheated. I guess her point is that she feels robbed of both her future and her childhood because of it. Maybe.

T:
I have a daughter who's right about Greta Thunberg's age.
My daughter is actually heading to one of the most demanding high schools in the country this year—based on her entrance exam scores, anyway. But even she wouldn't be foolish enough to think that listening to world leaders lecture us about things they clearly don't understand is a good idea. I guess some people just enjoy hearing themselves talk.


Someone on Reddit quoting Greta Thunberg:
For over thirty years, the science has been crystal clear. I honestly don't know how anyone can still look the other way and come in here claiming they're doing enough when there aren't any real solutions in sight. You say you hear us, and you say you grasp how urgent this all is, but... I don't know. No matter how much anger or sadness I feel, I just can't bring myself to believe it. Because if you truly understand what's happening and you still choose to do nothing, then you'd have to be malicious. And I just refuse to believe that's the case.

T:
For over thirty years now, it seems like scientists just can't reach a consensus on any single significant aspect of this whole topic. That claim about 97% of scientists being in agreement? I guess that’s just one of those blatant lies pushed by a radical activist, John Cook—who, if I recall correctly, is a comic book illustrator by trade. In reality, it feels like less than 0.2% of scientific papers actually identify CO2 as the primary, driving factor behind climate shifts. Most of these researchers aren't even denying that changes are happening or that there's an issue to address, but the vast majority seem to be against fueling this massive wave of hysteria. Maybe that's just how it is.

MrsGahan
Has anyone here—specifically those folks who keep recycling that one single sentence of hers like a broken record—actually sat down and watched the full four minutes and fifteen seconds of her speech?

T:
I've been watching, and I see this one deeply unfortunate girl... she really needs some help, you know? For her own good, I suppose.
I’d suggest everyone watch the clip, but maybe mute the audio and just focus on the expressions on her face.

Regardless of where people stand on this whole issue, manipulating a girl who is autistic—who has Asperger—to the point where she is paralyzed by anxiety and essentially unable to attend school (so it’s not really a case of 'skipping class as a protest')—well, that’s just wrong.

And what kind of message does that actually send to our kids?
Just stay home from school?
Skip out whenever you aren't satisfied?

That’s just not the way to do things!

John Wayne meant well when he asked the question (thanks, John), but since the quote from my reply only included my own words and omitted the parts of her post I was actually responding to... well, maybe he didn't expect the entire conversation to be wiped clean.

Consequently, my post ends up looking like some sort of rant against Greta Thunberg rather than a genuine discussion with another user.

Of course, it seems like the moderators are too embarrassed to leave posts like that up; it's probably hard to explain why they get banned when they haven't actually broken any site rules, or why something like this is even being labeled as hate speech here.
After all, wasn't Nina Raspudić the one who wrote and published that article titled "Gretenism..." where he was even harsher regarding all this chaos surrounding Greta and her orchestrated performances?

I haven't noticed anyone filing a criminal complaint for hate speech against Nina R.
If someone has, please let me know.

Similarly, I doubt neither moderator Oštrić nor anyone else would dare repeat the insults leveled at me—essentially accusing me of being a bad, malicious, and regressive parent simply because I care about my children's well-being, unlike Greta Thunberg's parents who involved their minor child in a reckless political campaign—in public or at a PTA meeting. Or perhaps they would, though they'd likely face a quick lawsuit for doing so.

cosmicviper18 said:What part of "I can't discuss my legal issues publicly" is unclear? I’m busy burning through cash just to have my attorney charge me an arm and a leg for a single question. If someone here wants to step up, fine, but if not, fine—so why all the immediate arrogance?!

Don't take this personally (or go ahead and take it personally if you think I'm lying...) but your attitude right now is actually the textbook definition of being arrogant.

And honestly, it's also a perfect example of having zero social intelligence—a trait that seems to be spreading through an American society where everyone constantly insists they have a right to everything.

So, basically, you need help and guidance, yet you expect people to approach you on your terms—specifically only those who are supposed to be top-tier experts—even though you refuse to even outline the basic facts of your situation.
Isn't that... well, arrogant?

You don't even really know how to ask for advice properly.
Look, if you really aren't going to share your problem publicly...
The smartest move would be to browse the threads first and find the people who give solid, expert answers. You know, the ones whose opinions actually carry weight.
This isn't some specialized legal forum; most lawyers don't even moderate here anymore. Even Mike, whom I've seen around, isn't active as a supermod anymore, and I don't see anyone correcting all the legal nonsense being posted. And when it comes to property disputes, sometimes a surveyor actually knows more than your average lawyer or attorney.
Once you find one (or a few) of those people, send them a private message asking for help. Start it off with something like: " I noticed you're very knowledgeable about the specific issues I'm facing, so I was hoping you might be able to assist me...." That way, you're giving them a little bit of credit while also making it clear why you're reaching out, which might encourage them to put in a bit more effort than they would in a public thread...

That's what we call social intelligence.

cosmicviper18 said:Fine, an attorney works too.

Sure thing, Your Honor...
the lawyer will shoot you a DM just to make sure everything is exactly how you want it.

Morgan Cook10 said:Look, you guys are missing one huge piece of the puzzle here.
Not all migrants are created equal.

There is a massive difference between someone moving here from Norway or Germany versus someone coming from the Middle East.
The statistics tend to lump everyone into one big, messy pile...but from what I’ve been reading, the far-right isn't even that much more popular among those groups compared to the mainstream.
It probably makes sense—those 800,000 immigrants coming from within Europe likely share a lot of the same values as the people already living here.

The United Kingdom still has a fighting chance.

And that’s where you have to be careful—you really need to parse the data. An immigrant from Poland is almost certainly a Pole, but out of 40,000 immigrants from Germany, how many are actually ethnic Germans versus just 'German citizens of foreign descent'?

but honestly, from what I read about the migrant population, the SD is only slightly less popular than the Swedes.
Probably because those 800,000 European immigrants likely think much the same way as the locals.

But they aren't ethnically Swedish, and they aren't going to fight for the survival of the Kingdom of Sweden as a sovereign nation. When things truly hit the fan and the unrest spreads from the no-go zones, a Pole will just head back to Poland, and an American will just go back to America.

The Kingdom of Sweden still has a chance.

No.
The Kingdom of Sweden doesn't have a chance anymore.
They had a shot if the SD had pulled 30% of the vote in these elections.
If that happened, we might have seen a sensible, decisive pivot in policy.

People just don't seem to grasp how quickly erratic politics, combined with sky-high taxes and social unrest, can dismantle a stable nation.

First, capital starts fleeing. Investors don't want to put money into unstable regions, and those massive tax burdens won't help either.
Then, you get the exodus of sensible Americans. That process is already underway; Americans are leaving. Especially the entrepreneurial types, the younger or middle-aged folks with families.
The American healthcare system is already struggling; wait times and similar issues are only getting worse. You might see a psychiatrist immediately, but for surgery? You could be waiting years. Local municipalities are drowning in debt, and the number of American seniors relying on social safety nets is climbing.
Local governments are sinking under the cost of managing migrants, all while the housing shortage gets more severe.

None of this looks incredibly dramatic right now, I guess, but when you look at all these trends converging—where does that leave us in ten years?

frozenpuma69 said:Instead of trying to play prophet, you might find it more dignified to just sprinkle some ash on yourself, especially since you were just claiming the other day that Social Democratic voters are too scared to even admit who they voted for.

Who exactly is rising up against tyranny here? 😁
The exact same thing is playing out in the Netherlands, France, and Germany.
Sure, extremists might be gaining ground in decent countries, but they usually hit a wall they can't cross.
As long as the bulk of the conservatives and centrists keep acting like François Fillon or Angela Merkel rather than Sebastian Kurz, parties like the Social Democratic Party aren't going to see any real power.
And I guess we shouldn't even count places like Italy or Greece, where finding a functioning political party is a struggle in itself.

Actually, it’s worse than that.
It wasn't just that they wouldn't admit their choice in a poll— they didn't even have the guts to actually vote!
Just a bunch of spineless cowards, I guess.

And don't try to twist my words.
I was just relaying what the poll showed.
The reason I wasn't making any predictions is because the Swedes have already proven themselves to be pretty pathetic weaklings.

Extremists might be on the rise in stable countries, but there's always a clear line they can't cross.
As long as the mainstream conservatives and Democrats act like François Fillon or Angela Merkel,

Which extremists are we talking about?
The ones who actually love their country and want to preserve their culture?
Because if you think Merkel and Fillon are examples of people doing that... well, 🤣that's something.

I'm obviously not counting places like Italy or Greece, where you can barely find a functional political party.

Yeah, right. Imagine that.
Politicians and parties who actually care about the people electing them and the interests of those citizens more than some globalist agenda or the influx of migrants tied to it.

frozenpuma69 said:So, I wonder what all those people are saying now—you know, the ones who were so convinced there was some kind of "Moderate Republican" factor influencing the Democratic Party voters? 🙏
It turns out everything they thought was totally backwards, because the polls pretty much completely missed the mark on Democrats, even when you account for the Social Democrats and Moderates. ☕

True enough.
I guess the people in Sweden basically voted for their own downfall this time around. If the Social Democrats had managed to pull in somewhere between 25 and 30%, they would have become that indispensable force needed to actually shift policy.
You see citizens in various authoritarian regimes fighting back against tyranny, risking everything just to get a taste of freedom. Meanwhile, these complacent Swedes just sit there, watching calmly as their liberties are stripped away right under their noses.
Things might change once the economy starts heading south, but by then, I suppose it’ll be too little, too late.
Sweden is a lost cause.
Fine.
It’ll serve as a cautionary tale for everyone else.

nimbleridge5 said:It’s just one of those moments, isn't it? When you see a team from one of the least developed 🙂
nations somehow manage to pull off a win against a powerhouse from the most advanced countries in the European Union.

I mean, are we really talking about a country where citizens can just walk through any neighborhood at midnight without worrying they'll be intercepted, harassed, physically assaulted, or even robbed or raped by groups of migrants? In the Kingdom of Sweden, I hear even the paramedics, firefighters on calls, or police patrols aren't safe anymore.

Carol Newman2 said:The parliamentary elections in Sweden are set for September 9th.

Here’s how the latest poll is looking:

The Red bloc is sitting at 40 percent
The Blue bloc follows with 38 percent
And the right-wing Sweden Democrats have 18 percent

Other polls, like YouGov, have put the SD as high as 24.8%.
Beyond that, I suppose it’s worth noting that out of all the EU members, Sweden pretty much holds the title for having the least amount of freedom of speech and media liberty. It makes me wonder... maybe... how many people in these surveys are actually being honest about who they intend to vote for when the mainstream media keeps labeling them as extremists, even though they're really just center-right.

dustyjackal10 said:After two weeks in Seattle, I’ve moved on to Austin for a week. Work stuff.
By worldview, I’m a conservative, Catholic, right-winger.
I’ve been watching the situation in Sweden for a while now, and naturally, seeing it from an American perspective is pretty jarring.

But after this brief stint here, I wanted to jot down a few observations.

I look at the whole LGBTQ ideology with total disdain, and honestly, the following is just fascinating: Swedish patriotism isn't unknown, you can even see it in the colors of some road signs—where they'd be red and white elsewhere, here they're blue and yellow. On the flip side, the most dominant flag in Sweden is the rainbow one. It’s absolutely mind-boggling; in front of every business, corporation, public institution, or transit vehicle, you mostly see three, sometimes more, rainbow flags flying. Hardly any Swedish flags to be seen. Just now in Austin, a guy in his private apartment hung up a Swedish flag when he realized my colleague and I were visiting. I have to admit, that relaxed me a bit. We're staying in an immigrant neighborhood, so it's good to see some Swedes around here too.

As for the immigrants;

Like that article in the morning paper said, things are worst in Miami, so I was actually surprised by what I saw in Seattle.

Last Sunday, I went to church for Mass, thinking based on what I read online that there would be a Mass in American. Sadly, there wasn't. Instead, I had a once-in-a-lifetime experience attending a Mass in Arabic with a full church of people from the Middle East. Since I've been watching a lot of videos of former Muslims on YouTube lately, I have to say I was pleasantly surprised by the situation in Seattle. Traffic in Seattle is a nightmare right now (lots of construction and a new bridge being built, so the tunnels are jammed), so I spent a lot of time staring at other cars and drivers. Plenty of them are Black or from the Middle East, and they aren't living off welfare—they certainly couldn't afford those cars on social assistance. A pleasant surprise.
Swedes, as Swedes, are very professional and polite, though I get the impression the politeness is somewhat superficial.
One unpleasant surprise? In these two weeks, I haven't seen a single attractive Swedish woman. That really caught me off guard.

General impression:
Sweden is one massive construction site, with heavy industry and jobs everywhere. With that much work available, they don't seem to have a choice but to import even more migrants.

So, you basically just headed off to work in Sweden without checking out how bad things actually are over there first?
Take a look at this:

The guy in the video is actually an immigrant himself, from the North America...

On the topic of immigrants;

Based on what I read in the news, things are worst in Miami, so I was somewhat surprised by these recent events in Seattle.

Here’s a video from the same guy regarding those recent car burnings:


There’s an interesting point made—statistics show this has been going on for years. The only difference now is that it’s being caught on camera, and the footage shows the arsonists doing it almost routinely, without even any excitement.
Does that say anything to anyone?

Another important observation—these hooligans aren't usually targeting the cars of wealthy Swedes; they're hitting the cars of other immigrants—people who are actually working and trying to integrate into society.

One unpleasant surprise for me during these two weeks is that I haven't seen a single attractive Swedish woman yet, which really caught me off guard.

For years now, Swedish women have seemingly accepted a certain 'adaptation' to the new reality—they don't dress provocatively or revealingly anymore; many dye their blonde hair black and tend to avoid going out unless absolutely necessary, especially in neighborhoods and areas that have been 'enriched' by multi-cultural values (if you catch my drift).

General impression;
Sweden is one massive construction site; heavy industry and plenty of jobs. With so much work available, they seem to have no choice but to import even more migrants.

Sweden is a country practically on the brink of bankruptcy due to the extreme costs brought on by its idiotic policies.

Sweden’s parliamentary elections are just three weeks away.
The Swedish people finally have a chance to turn the tide on this suicidal policy nonsense by voting for the Sweden Democrats. I mean, they aren't even radical right-wingers per se; they're more of a center-right outfit that happens to be the only group actually calling for some common sense regarding immigration. It's almost funny how much they're treated like extremists just for wanting sanity.
If the voters in Sweden can't manage to pull together a majority to support even a mild pushback against this insane immigration surge, then... well, maybe they actually deserve the inevitable collapse headed their way. I guess it's just one of those things.

Rachel Allen55 said:In Scandinavia, if you actually want to feel like a man, you’ve basically got two paths. Option A: Become a cop. You can play the tough guy, act however you want when nobody's looking, and then pull that classic "barking orders" routine like some drunk hooligan once you make an arrest. It's pretty much the norm for most of them, honestly. The law basically gives them a free pass, too. The Probability of actually winning a case against the police in court? Pretty much zero. Option B: Join a biker gang—you know, sign up for one of those Harley-Davidson clubs filled with "rockers" and actual criminals. Your other options are just to pack your bags and move away, or simply stop giving a damn. 😁 It’s low. Like, barely even two percent, but literally.

Lately in Sweden, it seems like cops are quitting their jobs left and right. It’s probably because the "normal" ones—if they even exist—are tired of getting punched in the face every time they arrest the wrong person or try to step in in certain neighborhoods. Instead, they're expected to just crack down on peaceful citizens.
It feels like we're heading toward a future where the police force just adopts the mindset of being another street gang. 🤔

B) join a biker gang, you know, sign up for one of those Harley-Davidson clubs filled with so-called rockers and criminals. The only other alternative is to just pack your bags and leave or simply not 😁. Though, honestly, there isn't even a two percent chance of that happening.

Basically, you join a wild mob where the members will hunt you down if you report them for anything. Especially if some party girl decides she didn't enjoy the sex.

So, all that's left is to wait for the expansion of "no-go zones" ruled by gangs of motorized Vikings.

A truly wonderful future for Swedish women, I guess.

They'll get to choose between three types of zones: no-go zones run by immigrant groups, no-go zones controlled by biker gangs, and then the zones governed by anarchist police who don't follow any laws at all...
🤔 🤣

Go Sweden!
🍿

coastalbison6 said:Honestly, when I first clicked the link, I closed it immediately. Once you read "purges in Europe," it's obvious the piece was written by some partisan hack who hasn't left their hometown in years.
I skimmed it a bit, and it’s clear this person doesn't have a clue how Austria works, let alone how the Republican Party operates there.
The neoliberals (FPÖ, NEOS, and Sebastian Kurz) are far too weak to actually push through any neoliberal reforms.
At most, they might try to overhaul public health insurance, and that's about it.
His own people basically let him win the elections, but they won't let him touch their territory. Out of six sub-organizations, he only controls about one and a half (the youth wing and maybe the farmers), and out of nine provincial leaders—who hold a lot of power in Austria—only one (NÖ) is on his side. Thinking they can forcibly weaken all the chambers and unions, just like NEOS, FPÖ, and big industry dream of, is pure science fiction.
All those chambers and unions are actually responsible for the balance that keeps everything running smoothly in Austria.
If they held a referendum on whether membership in these chambers should be mandatory, none of them would fall below 75% support. They simply have too much money to throw into a "war." Only the Chamber of Commerce has a billion-dollar reserve, with 240 million in cash. The workers' chamber has 240 million ready to go, and after many years, the unions are loaded again.

It’s not that I get triggered by every single controversial word, I just skim the article to catch the actual gist.
In this case, they aren't using the term "purge" to mean cleaning out "communist leftovers" from the government, but rather dismantling an existing system where the traditional labor left and the Christian Democrats have a long history of teaming up to maintain a "stable government."

I’ve been looking through this, and it’s clear the guy has no clue how things actually work in the Republic of Austria, let alone how the Republican Party operates.
The neoliberals (Freedom Party, NEOS, and Sebastian Kurz) are way too weak to pull off any kind of neoliberal overhaul.
At most, they might manage to tinker with public health insurance, and that’s about it.
His own people basically let him win the election, but they won't let him touch their specific territories. Out of six sub-organizations, he only really controls one and a half (the youth wing and maybe the rural voters), and out of nine provincial leaders—who hold massive power in Austria—only one (Nö) is truly under his thumb. Thinking they can violently weaken all the chambers and unions, like NEOS, the Freedom Party, and big industry dream of doing, is pure fantasy.
And those very chambers and unions are what keep the equilibrium functioning so well in Austria.

I don't know enough about the Austrian political scene to get into the weeds. But everywhere you look lately, there's this phenomenon of "ideological bubbles." People call them the "left-liberal bubble," and honestly, it makes sense because many on the left rarely interact with anyone who thinks differently. They don't even see it, especially since the media tends to be quite biased and leans left.
It’s entirely possible to live in Austria, or anywhere else for that matter, moving through social circles where everyone echoes the same sentiment, never hearing a dissenting opinion. Meanwhile, someone else will hang out with a completely different crowd and walk away with a totally different view of reality.

One major takeaway from these elections is that the reputation of the Freedom Party as just some group of fringe extremists flirting with Nazism is finally being broken down.

If they ever held a "yes or no" referendum on mandatory chamber membership, no single chamber would fall below a 75% approval rating. They simply have too much money to throw into a "war." The Chamber of Commerce alone has a billion dollars in reserves, with 240 million sitting in cash. The labor chamber has 240 million ready for short-term use, and after all these years, the unions are once again flush with cash.

I really don't know about this one.
But lately, it seems like whenever everyone claims "that can't possibly happen"—well, that's exactly when it happens.

Carol Newman2 said:Look, sorry, but this whole analysis doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

I mean, sorry, but what exactly is wrong with that analysis?
https://directnews.com/us-politics/eu/p...europe-103057/

It’s actually kind of interesting... amidst this sea of mindless comments about the rise of right-wing extremism in Austria, someone finally puts out an actual, reasoned analysis—and they even approach it from an entrepreneur's economic perspective rather than just getting bogged down in ideological warfare.
And then, immediately, people start trashing the article and attacking where it was published, and so on.
It's a textbook case of an ad hominem attack, I guess.

Funny how there hasn't been any real discussion here regarding the election results in Austria, even though those outcomes are arguably way more relevant to us in the US than, say, what's happening in California.

Richard Wilson4 said:Even The Simpsons, which is basically the peak of liberal satire, has started taking shots at American universities and all that political incorrectness nonsense they try to avoid.

It’s honestly not even funny anymore.

As a response to all this gender identity madness, people are now apparently joking about identifying as attack helicopters:





There's even a new label for transgender restrooms:

https://www.google.com/search?q=all+g...4fR_72d4SJHxM:

silentviper19 said:Well, look at it this way:

Free speech is such a fragile thing because it’s always at risk of flipping on its head. See, the person claiming the right to speak freely is often the same person trying to use that very freedom to shut everyone else up. So, the whole idea that "the truth will always win" doesn't really hold water. Logic and respect aren't guaranteed by free speech itself; they come from social consensus, which is a different beast entirely.

A classic example would be certain monotheistic religions. They demand the freedom to speak their mind and expect "due respect," yet they base their entire existence on denying that any other religion even exists.
It was the same deal 2,000 years ago in ancient Rome. You had early Christians rejecting all the Roman gods and the authority of the Empire, while simultaneously demanding freedom from that very same government and society, essentially playing the martyr card if they weren't allowed to hate and dismiss everything else.

As much as PC culture can be awful—and believe me, I get it—it's still better than the alternative. Because the other option is a path that leads straight to the total abolition of free speech. If you and others who just find PC annoying are actually freedom-loving people, you won't win this fight. In fact, you might accidentally be helping the fascists, because they also fight against PC culture and claim to stand for free speech (whenever it suits them). Basically, you end up on the same side as them just because you're both pushing back against the PC crowd.

So, I honestly think the old saying will ring true again: "The roads will be full of political correctors, but soon there won't be many left." Instead, it'll be the fascists who run out of steam after they try to force their version of "truth" on everyone using their "freedom" to hate and deny anything different.

Fascists and religious extremists don't really have a rational basis for why they're right. For them, it's either God or just pure narcissism telling them they're correct for no logical reason.
That's why they always need to be under fire. PC rules have to apply to them too, because otherwise, they'll just keep trying to play the victim. They use emotion instead of reason to seize control of society, and once they do that, we can kiss free speech goodbye forever. We'd just be stuck waiting for the next revolution or something similar.

And then, they establish their own "truth" and keep it alive through force and preaching, claiming that any kind of free speech is an attack on the "absolute truth" that supposedly exists on its own.

But then again, maybe political correctness is actually just a way to dismantle freedom of expression at its core.
It’s kind of binary, isn't it? You either have freedom or you don't.

Fascists and religious zealots... they don't really have a rational basis for why their views are right. It's usually just God or some deep-seated narcissism driving them to claim they're always correct.

The second someone tries to gag a political group by stripping away their free speech, it feels like they're just admitting they can't win an actual debate using logic.
And if they can't win through open discussion, they'd probably be forced to actually question their own beliefs.
I guess it's just easier for a lot of people to silence others than to deal with the discomfort of rethinking themselves.

So they need to stay under constant fire, which is why they push for political correctness—it lets them play the martyr. They lean on emotion rather than reason, trying to seize control of society through sheer sentiment. Once they get there, we might as well say goodbye to liberty forever, because it always leads back to revolutions and that sort of thing.

Then they establish their own version of "truth" and enforce it through pure force, preaching that any kind of free speech is an attack on a truth that supposedly exists all on its own.

This seems to be the playbook for every extremist out there.
And honestly, that's exactly what's playing out in Western democracies today. Only, this brand of politics isn't being pushed by "conservatives or religious groups," but by those on the complete opposite end of the spectrum.