/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14193194]

>people who /lit/ told you were cringe but are actually based
Noam is more redpilled than any of you niggers

[Anonymous No.14193328]

He can be great, but he mimics the worst parts of Bertrand Russell.

[Anonymous No.14193345]

>>14193194
/lit/ sometimes shits on Carl but he's pretty based

[Anonymous No.14193698]

>>14193328
Considering how shit Russell is that's pretty noteworthy

[Anonymous No.14193707]

>>14193194
To be fair, he's only hated by the people that couldn't finish IJ
>inb4 brainlet "I read all 1000 pages of that shitty novel and he's a hack"

[Anonymous No.14193715]

>>14193194
based

>>14193328
Like what? Autism?

[Anonymous No.14193724]

>>14193707
Wait what? Does he have comments on IJ?

[Anonymous No.14193726]

>>14193707
Better than validating wasted time by pretending the book was great afterward.

[Anonymous No.14193729]

>>14193726
Cope

[Anonymous No.14193738]

>>14193194
Chomsky is the LEAST redpilled person out there. I mean this without hyperbole. I can't think of any intellectual who is more bluepilled - at least JS Mill, Adam Smith and Bentham were slightly radical for when they were writing

[Anonymous No.14194027]

>>14193738
I would not consider Smith to be bluepilled in any way. And I say this as an anticapitalist. I can see why one whould see chomsky critical, he is to moderate for socialists and communists and has a tendency to support established liberal instetutions and personalities. Which the right isn´t fond of aswell. However his analysis on the media, power-poletics and linguistics are on point. You even stuble upon /pol/acks who reccomend you to read manufacturing consent, admittedly that has become increasingly rare but it used to be a thing some years ago.

[Anonymous No.14194029]

>>14193194
marx and foucault

[Anonymous No.14194061]

I like reading his analysis even if I don’t agree with him morally.

[Anonymous No.14194288]

>>14193194
>anarchist
dropped

[Anonymous No.14194298]

>>14193194
>antiwar
actually pretty based
>pro pol pot
actually pretty cringe

[Anonymous No.14194379]

>>14194027
the notion of "economics" is about as bluepilled as you can get. and why I think he's so fucking annoying is he's touted as this radical when all he is saying is that "we need to have the status quo, except MORE." There is no take more corrosive. The man is completely joyless and a CIA nigger.

[Anonymous No.14194410]

>>14194379
please expand on how chomsky whats "the status quo except MORE" without resorting to "muh brown people."

[Anonymous No.14194412]

>>14194410
no

[Anonymous No.14194418]

>>14193194
He name drops philosophers who are irrelevant and never says anything to connect them in a discussion usually right after saying pseudy idealist nonsense or something workerist or something factually incorrect and backwards about Marxism. The icing on the cake with this pseud hack is usually contradicting his anarchism with calling people to support liberal politicians.

[Anonymous No.14194469]

>>14193194
>The history of the world, whose shaping properly belongs altogether to the Caucasian race, seems until now to have run through two Caucasian ages, in the first of which we had to work out and work off our innate negroidity; this was followed in the second by Mongoloidity (Chineseness), which must likewise be terribly made an end of. Negroidity represents antiquity, the time of dependence on things (on cocks' eating, birds' flight, on sneezing, on thunder and lightning, on the rustling of sacred trees, and so forth); Mongoloidity the time of dependence on thoughts, the Christian time. Reserved for the future are the words, "I am the owner of the world of things, I am the owner of the world of mind."

[Anonymous No.14194629]

>>14194027
>However his analysis on the media, power-poletics and linguistics are on point.

No

[Anonymous No.14194633]

>>14194288
You forgot to write anarchist that lives in one of the most expensive zip codes in the US.

[Wolf No.14194641]

Chomsky is a complete moron and a hack, how could you make this post and genuinely think he is 'redpilled', you must be severely retarded op

[Anonymous No.14194655]

Foucault is the correct answer to your question.

[Anonymous No.14194715]

>>14194379
>The man is completely joyless and a CIA nigger.
I'll concede the former, but the latter is absolutely retarded.

[Anonymous No.14194724]

>>14193724
No, that anon is talking about DFW

[Anonymous No.14194892]

>>14193194
>just another self hating Jew getting rich on mind pozzing the goyim
>based
OP sure is a retarded nigger faggot. I've never seen Chomsky win a debate and I've been subjected to hear his moronic speech repeatedly by cock suckers like OP.

[Anonymous No.14194897]

>>14194379
You say that like everyone here wouldnt have an absolute blast being a cia nigger.

[Anonymous No.14194901]

>>14194897
cia nigger is a special ethical category - it's difficult to describe, but watch how Terry Davis applies it to various things. it's a schizoid demonic entity which represents, to be crass and formulaic, the man and the boot on your back keeping you down.

[Anonymous No.14194909]

>>14194418
>he can't make the connections himself
What's it like being a brainlet? The rest of your post is just cope stemming from this

[Anonymous No.14194912]

>>14193194
If by "redpilled" you mean "communist", then sure.

[Anonymous No.14194920]

>>14193328
Damn. Actually true

[Anonymous No.14195237]

>>14194418
I was listening to him last week. He named dropped Smith and Jefferson for no reason during one of his talks

[Anonymous No.14195394]

In what way is Chomsky supposed to be an anarchist? Is this some semantic game where he 100% supports the status quo with the belief that some future conditions will be met that allow for the flourishing of his own personal concept of anarchy?

[Anonymous No.14195529]

>>14195394
Choms is great because he's realistic about 'the revolution' being something that, if it happens, would likely be something that occurs after his lifetime. He's not some teenager yelling at the air because he'd otherwise be bored, he's actually realistic about the goals he espouses.

[Anonymous No.14195581]

>>14195529
You could have just said yes

[Anonymous No.14195609]

>>14195581
Chomsky is always focused on practicality and application, rather than ideology.
That is his entire beef with Zizek, and his impasse with Foucault.

[Anonymous No.14195619]

Marx, Freud, Lacan, Maimonides, Dogen, Al-Maʿarri

[Anonymous No.14195664]

>>14195619
>Marx, Freud, Lacan, Maimonides, Dogen, Al-Maʿarri
Would you be interested in expanding on this a bit? I am only vaguel familiar with the first three (in descending order)

[Anonymous No.14195687]

>>14195609
>Chomsky is always focused on practicality and application
>Chomsky claims to subscribe to anarchy an ideology so laughably idealistic that it makes communism look pragmatic
???

[Anonymous No.14195709]

Whas Chomsky wrote Manufacturing Consent was he just bragging?

[Anonymous No.14195712]

When Chomsky wrote Manufacturing Consent was he just bragging?

[Anonymous No.14195723]

>>14195664
>Marx
The first philosopher to expound a materialist idea of history, his ideas of consciousness being formed by the need for communication is incredibly interesting, and it is fun to read him shit on other philosophers and Jews (German Ideology).
>Freud
Freud is black pilled (Civilization and its Discontents); his idea of death-drive is novel and potentially a great addition to 20th century philosophy when expounded upon, which Lacan does in his lectures of Freud.
>Maimonides
Great work on eschatology and the problem of evil. He was also a proud proponent of /negativetheology/.
>Dogen
There's one autistic chinese ant poster who wants to degrade Dogen here. He however is probably the greatest Japanese intellectual, a great Buddhist theologian, and in particular his idea of being-time anticipates existentialist philosophers by centuries.
>Al-Ma'arri
Pessimistic middle age thinker and poet who is rare in the Arabic canon as someone who openly attacked religion in his writing.

[Anonymous No.14195731]

>>14193738
This. Saw a video where someone asks him about The Bell Curve and he casually responds "oh yea that's just pure racism". He then says the proper way to respond is to ask "why they're doing it" as if the motive of someone doing scientific or statistical research is the important factor in this. Finally, in the end, he mentions there's no point in arguing at all about these subjects. The lady asking the question was Asian too for some added irony. As a statistics major and someone who always looks at data first, I've noticed lots of left-wing talking points can be easily debunked with data.

Video in question https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQm2kf5vbqs

Only a total hack would have his mind so set on a topic without even reading the book/literature on the subject.

[Anonymous No.14195734]

>>14195731
His point went entirely over your head, STEMdrone

[Anonymous No.14195739]

>>14195734
Do you want to add an explanation on top of the insult?

[Anonymous No.14195753]

>>14195734
his point? he's an evil judeo-communist who is deliberately lying to you

[Anonymous No.14195754]

>>14195739
Chomsky was using racism as a thought terminating cliche. He point is that such pursits aren't helping him achieve his goals so they should be dismissed and ignored. The left is trying to run out the clock on biological reality by turning everyone brown or reaching the singularity so they can say it does not matter anymore.

[Anonymous No.14195757]

>>14195739
>Do you want to add an explanation on top of the insult?
No.

[Anonymous No.14195762]

>>14193194
>In 1995, Noam Chomsky criticized the book's conclusions about race and the notion that Blacks and people with lower IQs having more children is even a problem.
I used to have a fraction of respect for him. now it's gone

[Anonymous No.14195766]

>>14193726
how can pseuds ever recover?

[Anonymous No.14195769]

>>14195762
the book was le bell curve by the way

[Anonymous No.14195785]

>>14195739
Data is never simply produced as if in a void; it is always produced and displayed with some sort of motive behind it. Trying to argue with this book is a pointless endeavor because in arguing you are validating the findings of this book as worthy of debate.
The bell curve has been debunked and outdated by this point, so unlike the Cambodian genocide debacle Chomsky was correct in this case.

[Anonymous No.14195789]

>>14195762
>>14195769
Critiquing the bell curve is complexly fine, it’s how he approaches the critique which irked me. His mind was concluded before he finished reading page 1 (laughably assuming he read the book)

[Anonymous No.14195792]

>>14195785
>debunked
citation needed
>outdated
because it's 2019?

[Anonymous No.14195803]

>>14195792
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=225294

[Anonymous No.14195806]

>>14193194

>his peacenik anarcho-syndicalist public persona is inconsistent with his personal fortune, military consulting work, and support for the Gulf War and murderous economic sanctions.

S

[Anonymous No.14195808]

>>14195785
Yet he never attempts to debunk those biased conclusions by explaining how the statistical methodology was wrong or whatever, instead he believes he holds the right to say we should completely shut down the discussion based on that book (without even reading it!)

[Anonymous No.14195824]

>>14195803
>As a result, their analysis gives an exaggerated impression of the importance of IQ relative to parents' SES, and relative to family background more generally. Estimates based on a variety of methods, including analyses of siblings, suggest that parental family background is at least as important, and may be more important than IQ in determining socioeconomic success in adulthood.

You do realize all that paper states is there might be a statistical error in their methodology and that adult income is 50% genes and 50% SES still proving Murray’s conclusion?

[Anonymous No.14195827]

>>14195808
Chomsky is just too pragmatic to concern himself with such trivialities

[Anonymous No.14195828]

>>14195803
it claims that the bell curve does not sufficiently weight socio-economic status. this is just the same cope which american communists have used since the 1960s to avoid talking about race and IQ. pic very fucking related

[Anonymous No.14195837]

>>14195824
No, did you read the Bell Curve? They argue that IQ is more important than parental status, which this paper refutes.
Without even going into their assumptions about IQ, the paper argues about the key points Murray seeks to bring up.

[Anonymous No.14195846]

>>14195731
>>14195734
>>14195739
>Not getting that he's low key hinting that he's aware that racial stats do imply a significant genetic factor is involved, but doesn't want to say this on record or draw attention to it in a way that would lead to uneducated people using this info for stupid shit

The guy is smart is fuck in so many ways and you people don't seem to comprehend that.

[Anonymous No.14195848]

>>14195846
He's one of the Chosen People, his is beyond most of our comprehensions.

[Anonymous No.14195856]

>>14195846
he's abusing his annointed status as a high jew of academia to lie to people, directly justifying the flooding of their neighborhoods with niggers and the destruction of trillions of dollars in the fake and gay pursuit of raising their ability. and you think this is clever?

[Anonymous No.14195858]

>>14193194
Noam is a retarded shill, just read Edward Bernays instead

[Anonymous No.14195860]

>>14195856
>being an id-pol addicted brainlet
>still browse /lit/
where do you get off, lad?

[Anonymous No.14195864]

>>14195860
the truth will set you free

[Anonymous No.14195887]

>>14195860
So what's the angle here?
It doesn't matter?
It shouldn't matter?
It does matter but once x happens it won't matter anymore?
Or
These silly squabbles about real issues that effect people everyday are just pesky details getting in the way of my glorious revolution?

[Anonymous No.14195915]

>>14195887
>So what's the angle here?
Living in the real world, free from racial-conspiracy theories that make no sense, nor have any credibility outside of paranoia peddlers like brietbart and /pol/.
It requires critical thinking skills and mental discipline that reading widely implies.
Conspiracy theories anywhere on the political spectrum are delusional thinking and products of the narrow minded who refuse to defend their beliefs intellectually but rather rely on dog whistles and manufactured outrage to rally their believers.

[Anonymous No.14195929]

>>14195915
>Conspiracy theories anywhere on the political spectrum are delusional thinking

Like, how could anyone who's read Chomsky actually think this? Conspiracies clearly occur all the time and governments actively try to get people to brush them aside using implicit media control. This is absolutely basic, well known, uncontroversial shit.

[Anonymous No.14195949]

>>14195929
The term conspiracy theory fist appeared in the New York Times after the release of the Warren commissions repot on the Kennedy assassin. The phrase was used in 3 articles that week.

[Anonymous No.14195951]

>>14195915
Nonresponsive

[Anonymous No.14195952]

>>14195929
Governments purposely support conspiracy theories precisely for control. If you need a concrete example, look at the 'mastermind' theory in Turkey, which is actively supported by Erdogan.
You are construing conspiracy theorists as somehow 'fighting the power', thereby legitimizing each and every crackpot. I am instead focusing on how they operate on their insularity.
Conspiracy theories, whether bottom-up or top-down, fall apart by analyzing a wide array of sources. If a theory cannot account for a vast array of data, it falls apart, which is why successful ideologies effectively account for all experiential data and thus can become sublime. Rather than seek to account concretely for dissenting data, theorists chalk it up to their boogeyman, trying to protect their insularity while their theory becomes more and more convoluted. It's not built on the basis of logic.
I find your attempt to normalize this type of delusional thinking aggravating.

[Anonymous No.14195956]

>>14195915
you do not possess critical thinking skills. you are a dogmatic critical theorist who has honed a cult-like defense mechanism to disregard any and all data which doesn't fit your blank slate model. this single image >>14195828 is a refutation of your entire worldview and you don't even know how to address it because your "intellectual" "thought" leaders also pretend that such data does not exist

[Anonymous No.14195959]

>>14195956
absolutely pathetic frog poster
leave this board until you have actually read a book

[Anonymous No.14195960]

>>14195949
>Governments purposely support conspiracy theories precisely for control.

Yes, and I don't dispute that. They specifically are likely to support the crazy 'backyard' conspiracies that involve people pouring over publicly released media for 'clues' that point towards crazy shit happening that is actually benign because they know it's bullshit. The actual significant conspiracies, however, are not meticulously hidden, to be uncovered by foiled hat snoops, but rather are left in the open, but suppressed in terms of active media coverage.

[Anonymous No.14195970]

>>14193345
This

[Anonymous No.14195988]

>>14195959
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html
>In this way, a consensus was established that among human populations there are no differences large enough to support the concept of “biological race.” Instead, it was argued, race is a “social construct,” a way of categorizing people that changes over time and across countries.
>But over the years this consensus has morphed, seemingly without questioning, into an orthodoxy. The orthodoxy maintains that the average genetic differences among people grouped according to today’s racial terms are so trivial when it comes to any meaningful biological traits that those differences can be ignored.
>I have deep sympathy for the concern that genetic discoveries could be misused to justify racism. But as a geneticist I also know that it is simply no longer possible to ignore average genetic differences among “races.”
Even leftist thought leaders are giving the heads up that outright denial is running out time.

[Anonymous No.14195998]

>>14194027
>>14193738
Manufacturing consent is good... and he is right that Israel is a apartheid state... that's it

[Anonymous No.14196094]

You people are fucking morons. If you actually believed and internalized any of the "IQ" and "race" bullshit you spout as anything beyond a tool to win slapfights, you'd go stone crazy.

This, what you have, right now, is all you'll ever have. You will never get better, you will never improve, you will never "git gud". The rusted shore of this anoxic offal pond is the absolute circumference of your abilities. As good as your parents did, your boomer dad and your braindead mom, you will almost certainly do worse. Your Pale Fire is a forum post or a short story for one of these ridiculous little "zines" that keep trying to magic up an "alt right counterculture", in direct defiance of the fact that all the brainmass has been spoken for, that makes its name on the backs of washouts and defectives from the overculture. You cannot be that theorist, you cannot write that novel, you will never be a poet. You are a physical artifact and you simply, finally, lack the parts. You're a doorknob that wants to be a window. Your only legitimate consolation is the garbage eating self-satisfaction of the dog or the Redditor. You can't even save your children from this, except by not fucking having them.

That's what this shit actually means. That's what would be running through your head day and night if you really thought about anything you post.

[Anonymous No.14196106]

>>14195988
This article made me seriously lol when it came out. They're trying so fucking hard to cling on to that last bit of plausible deniability

[Anonymous No.14196107]

>>14196094
No one kill themselves because of what I just posted. It's not quite that grim yet.

[Anonymous No.14196112]

>>14196106
but if race is real the jews are our rightful masters

[Anonymous No.14196124]

>>14196112
I don't see how that follows but I wouldn't care if it were true anyway

[Anonymous No.14196129]

>>14196094
I know your are just shitposting but lol at babies first thoughts of determinism

[Anonymous No.14196130]

>>14196124
they're smarter

[Anonymous No.14196133]

>>14196129
Nice laughcope. The post was sincere.
>determinism
That's not what determinism is.

[Anonymous No.14196142]

>>14196112
>implying implications

[Anonymous No.14196145]

>>14196142
jews are our rightful masters unless you want to be all black south african oogabooga kill YT third-worldist

[Anonymous No.14196167]

>>14196145

[Anonymous No.14196171]

>>14196130
They're about as smart as Episcopalians, im not about to call either of them a master race.

[Anonymous No.14196187]

>>14195998
>and he is right that Israel is a apartheid state.
Why is /pol/ opposed to Israel, then?

[Anonymous No.14196192]

>>14196094
Your argument is that believing the thing would be damaging to your feelings? Lmao you consider this an actually valuable thing to say, what about you know whether it's true or not?

[Anonymous No.14196193]

>>14196187
because jews don't deserve a country

[Anonymous No.14196198]

>>14196167
but that's the whole point, the point of race realism is that privilege is earned and just

[Anonymous No.14196209]

>>14196192
if you're a bug with no aspirations it probably can't hit you quite as hard

[Anonymous No.14196213]

>>14196209
I'm genuinely confused, do you even have a category in your head for 'whether things are true', or do you believe things purely because they feel good or you're supposed to believe them?

[Anonymous No.14196215]

Max weber

[Anonymous No.14196221]

>>14196213
people can't operate under conditions of total empirically derived truth because it makes them fall apart

that's why when you force them to, they call you a 'fedora'

[Anonymous No.14196237]

>>14193726
I've wasted more time on worse things. Infinite Jest was okay

[Anonymous No.14196241]

>>14196221
But we're not talking about what helps you operate right now, we're talking about whether IQ is a useful measure, and it demonstrably is, at the very least for populations. There is literally no contradiction between IQ being true, and the most helpful psychological state being some meme about self-empowerment. It just means that humans function better with slightly delusive heuristics

[Anonymous No.14196247]

>>14196221
Is this like the cliche where when leftists are confronted with race an IQ their immediate reaction is that we have to genocide all the ”inferior” races?

[Anonymous No.14196254]

>>14193738
>>14194379
>>14194418
>>14194892
>>14195731
>>14195846
>>14195856
>>14195887
>>14195915
>>14195956
Another thread ruined before it got off the ground, congratulations /lit/. Anyone who deigns to even read this thread is poisoning themselves.

[Anonymous No.14196263]

>>14196254
>people disagreed with me what a catastrophe the thread is ruined
holy fucking reddit

[Anonymous No.14196270]

>>14196241
this whole thing is, semantically, a madlib of the "is god real" argument
i don't really care much about ""resolving"" this because it's a total meme but i do think it's interesting how the IQ denialists aren't able to hit like the nu-cathies do

i think it's down to religion involving cruelty and punishment, whereas liberal progressive orthodoxy doesn't really let you feast on your fellow man in principle because it's intrinsically opposed to doing so

[Anonymous No.14196288]

>>14196270
>, whereas liberal progressive orthodoxy doesn't really let you feast on your fellow
They really do though, they have determined that 'fascists and bigots' are free game, and should be shit all over if not outright exterminated. They're quite open about believing this

[Anonymous No.14196295]

>>14196270
>doesn't let you feast on your fellow man
unless, of course, he's a bigot, a racist, a sexist, a fascist, a climate denier, a homophobe, a transphobe, an islamophobe, or g-d forbid, an anti-semite...

[Anonymous No.14196306]

>>14196288
>>14196295
well yeah, in practice, their church has totally fallen apart

unfortunately the brainlet managed opposition's only idea is to try to offer sociopaths and true believers a better deal, which is why you get /pol/ downies screaming about tranners and spouting memes instead of anything that can solve problems

[Anonymous No.14196312]

>>14194298
its the other way around buddy

[Anonymous No.14196342]

>>14196306
actually i'm being too hard on said downies, social proof is real shit and if you're in it you'll say a whole bunch of stuff

[Anonymous No.14196359]

>>14193328
Too empirically oriented but has some interesting insights. I doubt there will be much Chomsky on shelves years down the road just like Russell other than a piece or two at best. That's the problem with not theorizing, not that interesting to read without a historical motive to read works concentrated on a moment in time. His lack of a dialectical approach reduces what he's produced to just observations.

[Anonymous No.14196561]

>>14193194
Noam is basically the most red pilled person on Earth

[Anonymous No.14196599]

>>14195846
Never claimed he was stupid, but just saying that towing the party line is bluepilled as fuck.

[Anonymous No.14196612]

>>14195828
>this picture
What actually goes on in the mind of an antiracist when they see stuff like this. I bet it's even worse if you compare blacks to east asians

[Anonymous No.14196738]

>>14195956
Okay, now I have proven you are a gay hooker, who is very poor, how does it feel?

[Anonymous No.14196758]

>>14193328
Bertrand Russell was a terrible historian, all of his books about history and politics were pretty much tepid divulgative nonsense. I don't agree with Chomsky on many points, but I really have to concede that at the very least he is competent and educated enough to speak in public about these topics

[Anonymous No.14196776]

>two old german fucks btfo the culture industry

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.14196811]

>>14193738
C R I N G E
R
I
N
G
E

>>14196254
I believe it. What a bunch of ignorant slobs

[Anonymous No.14196892]

>>14196738
seething

[Anonymous No.14196900]

>>14196892
did this guy seriously post this or is it a shop?

[Anonymous No.14196926]

>>14196900
it's real. not sure if it is before or after he got banned from quora for posting too many red-pills. here's one related to the topic

[Anonymous No.14196967]

>>14194379
Boobs or gtfo

[Anonymous No.14197007]

>>14193194
https://www.globalresearch.ca/left-anticommunism-the-unkindest-cut/5502859

Noam Chomsky is not the anti-establishment government dissenting intellectual figure he is made out to be. He literally told people to vote for Hilary Clinton under a "lesser evil" pretense. He is not genuinely interested in stopping the campaign of terror, oppression and murder perpetrated by the US.

[Anonymous No.14198197]

>>14195785
it has never been debunked

[Anonymous No.14198315]

>>14196198
the point of race realism is that different races have different levels of intelligence and behavior, and these are primarily genetically determined.

[Anonymous No.14199063]

>>14197007
>He literally told people to vote for Hilary Clinton under a "lesser evil" pretense.

Yes, and he's completely correct to do so. Nobody even has an argument against this that isn't ridiculous. Obviously it would have been good to do whatever to prevent Trump getting in, and it's this practical sense that Chomsky has that makes him worthwhile and even outright superior to pie in the sky theorists who pretend to have a gameplan but don't.

I'm utterly convinced this thread proves that there is a task force committed to actively making Chomsky look ridiculous by getting people to argue about inane shit while ignoring his actual published works, which are meticulously argued and which I have never seen an actual take down of.

[Anonymous No.14199086]

>>14199063
>Obviously it would have been good to do whatever to prevent Trump getting in

would a CIA coup or military junta be "good" if it prevented trump's presidency?
dumb fucking lib post

[Anonymous No.14199098]

>>14199086
What's better voting for someone who is gonna do only 1 coup or not voting and letting someone in who is gonna do 3?

[Anonymous No.14200377]

>>14199063
>>14199098

You are pro establishment and have no genuine interest in changing things so there is nothing more to say.

[Anonymous No.14200560]

>>14193194
>people who /lit/ told you were cringe but are actually based
Kissinger