

Insta: to watch furry femboy thirst reels YouTube: to watch stuff Snap: Nudes Reddit: See reactions to governmental policies. Also, I really love the askeconomics sub.


Insta: to watch furry femboy thirst reels YouTube: to watch stuff Snap: Nudes Reddit: See reactions to governmental policies. Also, I really love the askeconomics sub.


Yea, fuck the corpos. The fandom is perfectly good the way it is. I’d prefer more interest (and suiting) for therians tbh. The realistic side of fursuits that is. SUITS THAT DON’T LOOK UNCANNY.


Thick of it (Ray Walter Music remix)


I mean it does have legitimate narrow use cases imo ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Everywhere? Nawww not rlly


Sigh… Texas…
The riper the better


What’s the guy gonna do? Sue them? He’s dead. Murdered by the capitalist authoritarians.
The only rightful place for kings is under the blade of a guillotine.


So here’s the thing. I wouldn’t view it as impolite in all cases. It just… depends on the context a lot.
I have no love for my cultural heritage at all. The reason I came to Canada was to get away from… all that, right? So if you’d ask me excitedly about my “roots”, I would give exceedingly one worded answers hoping that you’d drop the topic. I don’t want to glorify the culture I grew up in, because there’s nothing to glorify. Ah, now if you wanted to have a sociological discussion about it, I would be very interested in talking with you. So as I said, “context”, right?
Often, racist white folk also tend to ask about “culture” as a sly way to remind non white folks that they “aren’t really Canadian” or whatever. Yeah, it makes no logical sense to do that, but well… It happens. So you know… It depends.


Lemme explain the sensibility even when we use 1.a.1. I said the idea of a nation itself should cease to exist.
An analog would be religion. If someone asked me, “what’s your religion?”. I would say, “I’m non religious”. I wouldn’t reply by saying, “my religion is atheism”.
Similarly, if someone asked me what nation I belonged to, I would say something along the lines of “technically, I’m under the jurisdiction of XYZ state, but I do not identify as a member of any nation.”
I’m hoping that this becomes the majority viewpoint. That’s how my answer is sensible even with 1.a.1.
And as for “will inevitably rise within any sovereign state which will persist for a long enough time”, it’s not true necessarily. Example being myself and so many other people (anarchists, lib socialists, even right wing libertarians). Yes, it has been true throughout history (descriptive), but I’m hoping it isn’t going forward (normative).


My bad. I incorrectly assumed that the above terminologies were common knowledge. I should’ve provided direct links. Well, here they are:
Difference between nations and states
Definition of a “nation-state”
When I talk about nations and states, I talk from the perspective of these definitions. As you can see, they’re not really synonyms. It’s not squabbling about terminologies. If we have a different understanding of what different words mean, then our logical arguments are going to look very different. I’m not saying that your definition is wrong or whatever. I’m just clarifying how I define these terms in my arguments. That way, you can understand what I mean to say.
As for the “questions” you posed… I’m not sure exactly what answers you want me to provide. I already told you that I do believe that states need to exist. We’re in agreement there. I just don’t think that it’s healthy for society to divide itself among different nations. Seems quite a waste of mental space, resources, etc. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


That’s why I didn’t propose an anarchist vision. I do recognize the need for states. Just very very weak ones.
Nation states are a different case altogether though. You can have a multinational state. Sure, it is easier for a state to continue existing if the landmass it controls identifies as a single nation. That helps give it legitimacy.
I’d recommend reading more about nation states and why nations ≠ states.


How about the concept of a nation itself ceases to exist? How about free movement of people, very weak states, consumer cooperatives as the only capital controlling entities who are allowed to buy labor only from worker coops? Economic democracy, competition, choice and so on?
How about a world without kings and non consented rulers, a world where we stop wanting to conquer each other, and instead focus on conquering the limits set on us by nature? How about a world where we build a Dyson swarm, solve interplanetary, interstellar, and dare I say intergalactic travel?
Aight imma go cry myself to sleep now


From what I recall, the reason why they specifically reflect the green is to moderate the amount of sunlight they absorb.
Hence, if plant life exists, around red dwarfs, it is likely to be red in color.
And I’m not dead yet so I guess I’ll be alright
In “Way less sad” by AJR


The role of the government is not to decide what is abhorrent and what isn’t. The role of the government is to ensure protection of human rights, provide healthcare, run schools, build infrastructure and so on.
Consenting horny adults being horny with each other and doing horny stuff to each other does not violate any human rights.
The British government can go fuck itself.


I wonder what fascinated alien scientists would write about us
I’ve no idea why I thought reading the comments would be a fun experience, but holy moly… I’m so sorry you guys had to go through that, holy shit.
My worst pain that I can remember was probably when I fell on my knee from my bike after tripping over a pothole. It hurt like a bitch. But yeah… But now after reading the comments… I’m glad this was my worst experience lol


Sorry for the non answer, but here’s a little rant:
Honorifics should go away. They unnecessarily create and restate hierarchies that don’t really need to exist.
On the receiving end, it has always felt weird being called “sir”. A smile is more than enough, thank you very much.
No, you aren’t missing anything. You’re right that some sort of basic income is inevitable (universal or not). Even if you are a raging capitalist, you still need the plebs to have SOME income to be able to purchase goods and services.
However, for this to happen, it must be demonstrable that AI is actually causing high unemployment. Right now, while economic productivity is kinda increasing due to AI, unemployment isn’t. When it happens:
Massive unemployment is bad for everyone including the ruling class, as that leads to pitchforks, guillotines and chopped off heads.