NewKidOnTheBlock

@zazen I get your point about different power centers checking each other, and I agree with that in principle. Same with the idea of a multipolar world, being that balance is better than domination. But from where I stand, there’s no question which bloc I’d rather live under. I’ll take the system that gives me choices: what to buy, what to believe, how to live. Freedom isn’t perfect, but I’d rather deal with its flaws than live under a system that doesn’t allow it at all. The problem with your version of multipolarity is that it seems to rely on states like China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea as the ones checking the West. But those are authoritarian regimes that crush dissent and strip people of basic freedoms. If we’re talking about real alternatives, I’d rather see countries like India play that role, since at least there’s pluralism and democracy in the mix. And yes, money and resources have always shaped geopolitics. That’s not unique to the West, and it’s not new. Russia and China are more imperialistic than the west is nowadays, and pretending otherwise is just bias. The difference is that in the West, corruption and abuse can still be challenged, for example by citizens, media, courts, civil society at large. Not perfectly, but the mechanisms exist. In authoritarian systems, they don’t. So sure, multipolarity sounds good. But the real question is: which poles do you actually want shaping the world? For me, I’ll take the imperfect freedoms of the West over the "stability" of authoritarianism any day. There was once a multipolar world made up purely of feudalistic and later absolutist monarchies. That world existed for a long time, sure. But using it as a counterexample to my point that corruption is prevalent in all human-made systems is pretty ironic, since it’s not mutually exclusive with anything I’ve said. Feudalism was a system built on fixed hierarchies and rigid beliefs. Capitalism, at its infancy, stood in direct opposition to feudalism and offered a far freer alternative, with no theoretical limits to upward mobility for the individual. There were literal violent clashes between classes before capitalism eventually prevailed. Yet you seem biased against systems that allow more freedom, claiming they simply make corruption more available. Meanwhile, feudalism was extremely strict, while capitalism opened the door to greater liberty. So which way is it? Is authoritarianism or libertarianism more fertile ground for corruption, and which one represents progress in your view? Because from where I’m standing, you’ve clearly contradicted yourself on this LOL

Bros pilgrimage to Mecca accidentally destabilized Mamluk economy lol

So the 2 most important things you have as a human go to shit. Great. Not suprised at all of course, but reminding myself of what's gonna happen always makes me cheery LOL

I can definitely relate to that to some degree. But upon any further inspection, all meaning behind these activities starts to melt away. That's how you know it's all BS LOL

That's besides the point. Obviously I can intuit that, it's just that I can't personally imagine where the motivation can come from, even while married you still think about how to be attractive to your wife. But he prefers to become a human tank instead, probably to cope with some internal psychological issue of his, broootaaal Indeed, there definitely is something to that

So he is blackpilled about dating and still does the stuff he's doing with his body? Still being obsessed with becomming some sort of midget Hulk? Pretty strange if you ask me LOL

The most prolonged game development in existence LOL

@zazen The core flaw is a human propensity for corruption which literaly all systems share, no matter how authoritarian or libertarian they are, how is it the fault of capitalism that some people are corrupted? Or that nearly everyone is corrupted to some degree? You think religious theocracies like Afghanistan, or religious authoritarian muslim states in general aren't corrupt? Oh, would you take a look at all those cultural religious guardrails, surely that'll ensure people in power having a conscience and not do whatever they want? LOL

Hockey is incredibly dynamic sport, no point in denying that. Football is definitely a snoozefest compared to hockey, the stadium is always so big and it takes so long to get the ball from one side of the stadium to the other, never mind land a goal. However, hockey is sometimes so dynamic that neither side is able to land many goals, leading to a similiar paradoxical stalemate. Needless to say, all sports are boring to me. Just a bunch of chimp competitions lol

I can see him putting up a front and seemingly seeking to achieve some sort of christian socialist ethnostate, however I don't really think him, any of his people really give a shit about any of that, I think he likes capitalism and especially the way it is now, it benefits him and his friends. His real goal is to just hold power, the rest are just some weird narcisistic fantasies. Just like that Nick Fuentes guy, who is hilariously weird if you look some stuff about him, they're all just a bunch of freaks lol

Maybe it should happen to America so yall learn the lessons Europe had to learn LOL

Seems like he's not an unrealistic type of guy after all - he'll probably just try to increase taxes for the rich by a few percentages and attempt to use the money to finance schools and pro social stuff. Seems like he's also not overly ideological either. I don't think he's really as much about that commie stuff as people are hyping him up to be about, he just wants to implement some basic social programs. That's fine. As long as he keeps being grounded in reality. Rich people will hardly give away their money voluntarilly so some tax increase for the richest of them probably is in order

Now there will be no excuses left lol you are going to see. That it doesn't work. Not even the progressive wokie form of socialism

I don't understand, it takes like a few minutes of thought - or no thoughts at all - to know who to vote for. Especially in our simpleton democratic system run on popularity, you always have only a few options available. Are you unfamiliar with the voting process? What is it that you actually need help with? Is this what school system is producing? LoL To be frank, I often envy people who can just sort of retardmaxx throught life and live a dope life regardless, a lot of them live a much better lives than those obsessed with politics - regardless of which sides of the political spectrums they reside on.

A meme train continue it's journey😂

Mine is Hugh Mungus

His real name is Leo Gura, obviously

The reason is rather obvious. Messi simply doesn't know how to promote himself very well or he just doesn't care. That's why all these streamers like Ishowspeed are constantly attached to Ronaldo's schlong, cause they're in love with that sweet suggary clout

"This was something I let DeepSeek develop" *Closes the thread immediately and logs off from the forum*

In this day and age, there is so much sugar in everything you literaly need to do your best to dodge it. I will certainly abide by the conventional common sense wisdom in this case 70% of Americans can be clasified as overweight

A proper American answer. LOL

I dispute the idea that life is healthy

@Ishanga I can agree with the lack of consciousness part, and that people should be better. Noone wants suffering and noone wants people starving. I am definitely proponent of making capitalism better by making people's characters better. However, you are never getting rid of capitalism and inequality. People with talent and no talent, people with ambition and no ambition. Lucky and unlucky. However, you can make billionaires and millionaires more charitable (some of them are), make them less power hungry. Donating to charity is fine, volunteering is great. 3d world countries focusing on improving their own countries would be a long term solution to a lot of their problems, of course easier said than done. Everything is easier said than done