/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

Well... Marx did say Capitalism was a step on the road to socialism.

gross

Without capitalism workers would never achieve class consciousness

1 MP objected to the vote to add that to law, I haven't yet seen any report on why he objected.
So I'm just going to assume it's to buy time to thermite his own collection of crotch shots.

Also in the interest of fairness, will this include snapping pictures of men's bulges?
I'm remind of that expiriment where someone stuffed their pants and used a hidden camera to see tube riders reactions.

He rejected because he always rejects every proposal as a form of protest regardless of what it's about

He sounds like a bit of a jerk.

YEE HARWWWW SPESS MAHREENS!!!

Unironically abolish the air force

People get too involved with sports

It's just a game, and not even one you're personally playing like 2d spessmans

Does anyone else find it ironic that one of the lefty chants is One People One Nation?

that's not how irony works

DemonFiren wrote:that's not how irony works

I know your country pretends a certain time period doesn't exist, so I'll give you a hint

Malkevin wrote:

DemonFiren wrote:that's not how irony works

I know your country pretends a certain time period doesn't exist, so I'll give you a hint

Spoiler:

that is both factually false and unrelated to you not getting irony

Demonfiren is the biggest

Super Aggro Crag wrote:Demonfiren is the biggest

actually

>leftists are against the ethnostate and pro-diversity
>they chant One people One nation

how is this not ironic?

Cuz they mean it a different way dumbfuck

So they're suddenly turned from globalists to nationalists?

I can't tell, is that supposed to mean one world government or no borders or both?

Because I can list all the reasons why either is a bad idea

You need only take one good look at our political systems currently in place to see why a one world government is a bad idea: We have no fucking idea how to make them work.

The biggest issue that has plagued government theory since Humans were trading rocks for berries is that it gets very, very difficult to make a system for larger and larger populations. Advances in telecommunications alleviate this but you can't nullify it. Assuming such a system would even care to satisfy its constituents, its quite possible you'll get a fascist state in charge and unlike now, there's a possibility of escaping and moving to a nationstate where you wouldn't be oppressed - in a one world government, everywhere is the same fascist state.

Assuming such a government is democratic, what government would be “supreme”? The US Constitution or, say, the Republic of Earth's Constitution? If the Earth Republic Constitution is supreme, does it have a bicameral legislature, one that represents all nations as equal and as a result, Liechtenstein gets, for example, two representatives along with Russia and the US? Does it have a separate House of Representatives in which nations are represented by population? Does this mean that India and China get a quarter of all the seats? Or do we also factor in tax contribution, in which case, the US and Western Europe would gobble up the seats?

And furthermore, let's talk about the difference in economy and infrastructure. Will the US have to foot the bill to make Africa habitable? What about currency? Does everyone keep their own or is it moved to a universal "credit"? If there's only one currency, what happens when Russia is in a recession and needs to lower interest rates while France is booming and wants to cut them? What happens if Brazil is fed up with the RE and wants out? Does the world go to war to keep Brazil in? What about capital punishment, gay rights, women’s rights? Does the RE have a military and can it send that military to put down a revolt in Mumbai?

A one world government, especially right now, is such a bad idea that you would have to be severely uninformed to campaign for one.

And yet people do it, fully under the assumption it will be good

Because it would be them and their friends in control of it right now, and fuck the future

Thats a highwayman you're thinking of, not highgroundman

I've seen this before but i still don't know the context and I don't care enough to find out myself. Spoonfeed me

personaly i dont think poltiics are needed

Also weren't democrats fucked with and cock blocked when a supreme justice needed to be replaced near the end of the Obama presidency?

There's rules to ignore attempted cockblocking for that

They didn't have a big enough majority to ignore it, therefore the block stayed until elections, and then Trump got in

Interpretation of what the government can and cannot do rests solely on Supreme Court as making amendments to the US Constitution is extremely difficult if not impossible. The Constitution is a 200+ year-old document full of ambiguities like the Necessary and Proper Clause (roughly the ambiguous equivalent of our Rule 0) so that the country can keep pace with new matters of governance. Partisanally the Supreme Court is split roughly down the middle, with Kennedy the "moderate" being the swing vote liberals count on.

That said, the reaction is overblown. Kennedy will be missed but still had some rather conservative opinions. I've been more impressed with Chief Justice Roberts who will become the swing vote after Kennedy's retirement. In two cases that especially stand out, Roberts saved Obamacare by interpreting the individual mandate as a tax, and then applied the 4th Amendment to cellphone geolocation data so that the police would at the very least need a warrant to grab it. Kennedy dissented with the conservatives in both of these cases. Liberals hate Roberts for his stance that equality of gay marriage is not a constitutional issue, which is why they're screaming.

I think it's funny that every time a BBC newscaster talks about migration being down they always say it in a sombre voice, like it's bad we don't have as much cheap labour pushing wages down

Malkevin wrote:I think it's funny that every time a BBC newscaster talks about migration being down they always say it in a sombre voice, like it's bad we don't have as much cheap labour pushing wages down

They're sad because ethnic substitution and the biological extinction of the white man are having setbacks

Not just Morocco but Libya too refused to host refugee processing centers. Now it's down to Chad and Niger, which are on the main Sahel migrant route and they're both basically puppet states of France, so if they refuse as well it would mean that France is opposed to this solution, and if this happens you can bet that Italy is gonna get really angry. Our relations are already strained since Italian PM Conte cockblocked the recent summit and Macron went on a rambling rant accusing him of being a political newb who doesn't know how things work

>relying on chad

The Virgin Niger vs The Chad Chad

but what if
what if
virgin chad

The Niger Chad vs the Chad Niger

>virgins
>in Chad

wizchad

CosmicScientist wrote:Oh and the last bit of news is that a CO2 shortage has been reported for three days in a row with the main question being WILL THIS AFFECT BEER PRICES?! as though each news presenter has only just found out.

> drinking beer that has CO2 added artificially

enjoy your swill

what the fuck is CO2

What the fuck is carbon dioxide?

>amoeba
I read that as american at first
probably because you're a britbong

Here's how remain can still win

To be fair, the idiots are probably going for a 'soft brexit'
Which basically means brexit in name only and beg the EU to allow them to keep participating despite the country voting against it

Soft brexit is a joke

None of the benefits of a hard brexit, all of the downsides

Commonwealth is already in a defensive union under NATO

But that said it's probably best for Britain if they went to economic union with the commonwealth as well

Japan will get mad if you fuck with fish and they will sneak attack you

Japanese dont know that

CosmicScientist wrote:I can't imagine the government going for anything but a soft brexit as all reported economic results will be what Napoleon and Hitler achieved for a limited time; isolation from the supply of the continent.

I can imagine RED, WHITE AND BREXIT resulting in NO DEAL IS BETTER THAN A BAD DEAL.

The worst they'll get from a very pissed off EU is tariffs slapped on their goods at the maximum WTO allowance (like 2.3%). Not that it'll matter, if the Brits leave the EU it'll crash and burn as they're one of the three major funders, and France and Germany definitely can't support the burden. Plus, the US has been looming in the distance all this time and would be more than willing to trade with the Brits regardless of what happens.

I knew that a shadowmemes post in the politics thread would be just the laugh I needed

I saw an interview with Farage the other day, he said what we shouldn't done was sod the eu politicians and went straight to negotiating with eu businesses, let them put pressure on their politicians.

Great idea, what a shame he threw in the towel after winning and proceeded to be useless