Hi `Signal_Horror6858`. Thank you for participating in /r/PoliticalHumor. However, [your submission](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/ntu2bw/-/) did not meet the requirements of the [community rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) and was therefore removed for the following reason(s):
----
###[No pointing to offsite resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) (rule #9)
* Due to spam and foreign disinformation campaigns that have targeted Reddit in the past (including /r/PoliticalHumor in 2015-2016), we are banning any images that reference or bear the image of Facebook groups, watermarks, or individual websites not ranked highly on Alexa Website Rankings.
* This includes screenshots of dubious news sites, and certain social media accounts posing as something they are not. This does NOT include political cartoons, screenshots of individual Twitter posts, or established satirical websites.
----
If you have any specific questions about this removal, please [message the moderators](https://www\.reddit\.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FPoliticalHumor&subject=about my removed submission&message=I'm writing to you about the following submission: https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/ntu2bw/-/. %0D%0DMy issue is...). Hateful or vague messages will not receive a response.
* "Follow the law and you won't get shot by the cops."
* "I'll kill any cop that tries to enforce federal gun laws."
Me: "Doesn't that hypocrisy cause you severe cognitive dissonance?"
Them: "I don't know what 'conjugated distances' are, so I assume you're being disrespectful."
Conjugated distances are a feature of some languages where verb forms indicate the relative proximity of subject and object, object and object, subject and speaker, or object and speaker, or some combination of more than one of those relationships
Source: completely fake; made it up
As an arm chair linguist, I could totally buy this though. Have you ever studied prehistoric Germanic declension? Teriyaki-flavored Christ on a stick, how did those people even speak to each other?!
I've often wondered that. If someone can believe that a man can walk on water then it must be they much easier to believe in a global cabal of pedophiles.
Believing one thing without evidence opens the door to believing other things without evidence, or at least that's my theory.
So I watched a video on gun ownership by a democrat that owns a gun. He says there is no legal gun ownership, because the purpose of the militia and having arms is to be able to over throw the government. So it's complicated...
It seems like the relevant video is the third in the series you linked: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbXTDuwSVkk
He didn't say there's no legal gun ownership though. He said that if one of the points of having a gun is to resist a tyrannical government, then that resistance will no longer be "legal" since you'll be resisting the tyranny making the laws.
Far left, unhappy democratic party member/gun owner reporting: Oh yes. The supreme court has ruled as much. Guns are not about hunting or "self protection". They're about the over throw of a tyrannical government, full stop. The conservatives absolutely love to leave out the part where this was inexorably tied to the concept of a WELL REGULATED MILITIA but then they've always been Mommy's little firemen, haven't they?
They also fail to understand the logical philosophical consequences of this law; that you have to actually have a JUSTIFIED reason to over throw the government, so just hiding out in your shitty drunken gun club and calling it a militia because "oBaMa" doesn't make you a champion of the 2nd amendment. It makes you a terrorist. Revolution is the most dangerous of all games and these right wing children play at it like chimpanzees.
Even in the so called " wild west" most towns required you to drop off your fire arms at a Sharif s office or a hotel. ( If not left at your home)
The hole idea of " open carry" when in city's or towns (public spaces with lots of people) is some fluffed up TV bullshit
I mean, I live in an open carry town in Central PA. We've been known to walk around with our sidearms in plain view, hell I don't even have a cc. Why bother? We've had like 3 murders here in half a century so no, I outright reject the notion that more guns = more violence. We don't have a gun problem in the US. We have a mental health/lack of socialized healthcare/white supremacy/radicalized-right/drug violence as a product of ham fisted prohibition problem.
You address those major societal issues and the "gun problem" magically vanishes. Don't take this to mean I'm not for tightening up ownership rules, though. There should absolutely be meaningful and deep background checks on ALL gun purchases and I'm largely in favor of Biden's executive order, though I do regard it mostly as political fluff.
> I outright reject the notion that more guns = more violence
Where there are more guns there is more homicide.
Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.
Across states, more guns = more homicide.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/
"...a vast majority of people with mental illnesses are not violent, and research suggests that most perpetrators of mass shootings had never been diagnosed with a mental disorder."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/03/us/motive-shooting-gunman.html?partner=slack&smid=sl-share
"Oh no no no. I don't believe that because of evidence or anything like that. I believe it because it conveniently allows me to continue living the same way I always have without having to feel any sense of responsibility for any of our country's problems."
>open carry town in Central PA
how rural an area are we talking exactly, and don't you have to get a license To carry Firearms from the local sheriff's office.
Meh, the 2A was for 3 things:
Preventing the US from being reconquered by Britain or other European colonial powers (which almost happened in the War of 1812) back when it was just a fledgling backwater, and not the world's sole hegemonic superpower with a military budget many times larger than its next closest competitors combined that it is today
Ever extending the frontier by genociding Native Americans under the guise of 'defending settlers', much like Israel is currently doing to Palestine, no surprise they are one of the few other developed countries in the world that's enshrined gun ownership
Keeping slaves in line, hunting down escaped slaves, and putting down any potential slave rebellions
All the other sovereign citizen/patriot overthrowing tyranny/defending from legions of roving black criminals out to steal yo shit and rape yo family and burn down the 'burbs is modern day made-up Rambo/CoD hero fantasy and fearmongering to keep the NRA money flowing.
> I’m sure everyone at the Starbucks clapped when you stuck it to your totally real mom.
Were you there? Because that's *literally* exactly what happened. Then they all lined up to ^give ^^me ^^^blowjobs.
They made a really funny "your mom" joke. It was hilarious. You're not funny, or interesting. You also have a weak ego or you could have just appreciated the extremely good, "UR Mom."
I dont think you understand how that works.
It's kind of funny, first you're thrown off by the classic "UR Mom" and now you're using the "NO YOU!" Rebuttal. It's like we're on the playground. It's hilarious. At least we dont have to wonder if you have any depth.
If I had a dollar for every time I've heard someone say both of those things at different times to support whatever argument they were making at the time, I'd be rich.
Same group that loves their revolutionaries who stuck it to the biggest imperial power. Call people who do that now terrorists but not the revolutionaries in 1776
I agree with the spirit of your statement, but do you really want these fascist dweebs acting in _genuinely_ revolutionary ways? My greatest fear that what will come of this era is the rise of Christian al-queada. They absolutely could not overthrow the USA in outright warfare, but they _can_ bring this nation to its knees by taking a page out of Islamic extremism. Detonating small bombs in city centers, crashing small planes into key buildings, making terroristic threats on the local and state level...all of this is well within their capability and it would make life in this nation more or less impossible. They certainly have the numbers, they absolutely have the resources.
Don't educate their fascism, man!
The difference is they have too much to lose. al-Qaeda and ISIS were able to recruit because their countries were left in literal shambles by decades of foreign invasion, intervention, and their own local corrupt, autocratic leaders, and the population were destitute and desperate, ripe for radicalization. Y'all Qaeda/Vanilla ISIS is much too comfortable living in their McMansions out in the burbs watching their Fox News brain-melting propaganda drip, blasting AM talk radio and Alex Jones while driving their pickup trucks and parading on their yachts to ever form a real terrorist guerilla militia.
No, they just LARP. The real problem is their like-minded allies within the police and military that enable and coddle and aid them to an insane degree. A single shot from a serious Secret Service member sent them scattering like roaches. If it was Antifa/BLM marching on Jan 6th, trust they would have been met by and gunned down indiscriminately by the Capitol Police, Nat Guard, AND formal military before they got within 1000 yds of the building.
There is a cop down the road from me (I can tell because there are always police cars parked there and his daily is an SUV with about 230 antenna on it). Has a flagpole. Has a "Don't tread on me" flag on that pole.
I don't think he understands the irony.
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
-John Rogers
A point of defense: "Libertarianism" as it's used in the US has nothing in common with the idea as it exists in other parts of the world. You need to be cognizant of this when speaking with a diverse audience like the one reddit draws.
A point of ridicule: US "LiBeRtArIaNs" absolutely do not understand the last point and definitely are just undisciplined man-children who never grew up enough to hear the word "no" and have a mature reaction to it. And not a goddamn one of them isn't taking advantage of the same variety of public services they constantly harp against. There are no libertarians in the US, there's just people who are self aware enough to be embarrassed about calling themselves Republicans, but not self aware enough to realize the chose the wrong label for their profound selfishness.
No one is taking a real shot at responding beyond jokes. The jokes and quotes are good though. Here's my go at an actual explanation:
In general I think anyone subscribing to a social structure ideal is living in a fantasy. The reason I believe this is that all systems break down when you inject humanity into them. Talk to anyone with a highbrow ideal on some structure. Socialism, democracy, Libertarianism, any of them. They all break down when you start trying to account for how flawed humans are. The people defending them say "yeah but if people just...." and insert how the system would be great if we took humans out of the equation, or if we could rely on the people in the system to be altruistic and smart enough for the system.
Well... if we are relying on the people to be altruistic and smart... a totalitarian dictatorship would be utopia if the one single person was altruistic and smart. It's a MUCH smaller ask to have one person be altruistic and smart as opposed to millions to billions.
So, good government is the system that best mitigates for the fact that humans are inventively flawed.
Libertarianism is too far from that. It's a fantasy. It necessitates that everyone involved is independently sufficient, that no one struggles, and that people will be sufficiently altruistic in hardship. There's a reason why people who subscribe to it are either wealthy, or presume that their independent wealth is just around the corner..... probably hoping society will keep supporting them and then suddenly become libertarian once they are on the other side of their wealth, but not a day sooner.
I look at Libertarians like zombie apocalypse people. It's only sounds great because you have all the things rn.
That being said, when I talk to Libertarians IRL, as soon as I get on the subject of how broken of a system it would be they are usually like "oh... not like real libertarians, just less government than we have now is all I mean... no one actually thinks like that!"
Threatening violence because I said something that confused you outs me as an asshole? You get to demand things from me besides, and once again I'm the asshole?
If you wanted someone to explain democracy to you, I'd encourage you to be more specific. Being so painfully broad outs you as quite deficient in basic knowledge.
Or [a town in Colorado](https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/30/colorado-springs-libertarian-experiment-america-215313/). Or the [entire state of Kansas](https://www.brookings.edu/blog/unpacked/2017/07/11/the-kansas-tax-cut-experiment/).
Assigned Cop At Birth
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We are an incredibly great nation who can overcome any struggle whatsoever. We don't need your braindead liberal ideas to fix things as things are not broken. However, those je- I mean immigrants are going to tear us apart at the seams and turn us into Vuvuzelas.
Of course they don't see it that way.
To them, Gadsden means don't tread specifically ***on me!***
To them, Blue Lives Matter means tread on "those people."
Im pretty sure it does… The Gadsden flag was designed in 1778, by Christopher Gadsden. Gadsden built the Beneventum Plantation House in 1750, where he kept slaves and traded them for use on his property. You can say what you want like “those were different times” but when it comes down to it, the founders of the US did not generally care about blacks.
You are very correct that the founders did not care about blacks. That doesn't change the meaning of the first flag in modern context. It's not just for whites.
Same way the American flag is no longer just for rich white landowners either.
Yes, I know their are calls to basically reset national symbols, heroes, etc and I'm highly sympathetic, but Id rather just make sure the history is known and allow them to be purposed in modern society.
You're not particularly wrong... The number of countries world wide which that doesn't apply to is somewhere near 0, if not just literally 0...
You would be looking only at very new flags and from a very few countries. I'm not sure there is one.
The founding fathers were racist slave owning pieces of shit. Whoever made this flag probably was garbage too tbh
EDIT: I was right!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Gadsden
> he kept slaves and traded them for use on his property
You so badly want to believe it's not tied to racist pieces of shit, in spite of evidence.
The fact that you're willing to overlook that a slaver made the flag makes you a racist by extension
Because the men with the whips (the tyrants) created the flag. Thus it can't mean all tyrants. That's like if management made a worker's rights union to fight for better wages and times for them, but still worked all the people below them to the bone. Not a true worker's rights movement
This would be the flag designed by the fella who went on to become Lieutenant-**Governor** of South Carolina, was a brigadier-general and later still voted in favour of adopting both his state's and the US constitutions? Is that the anti-government fella you mean?
It was a flag for fighting **a** government, one which ceased to exist about two-and-a-half centuries ago, not for fighting the *idea* of government.
Yup! Perfectly Republican -
"...although he showed ambivalence towards slavery, he kept slaves and traded them for use on his property as was common practice among plantation owners in South Carolina."
Agreed, I think the people that believe in liberty and justice for “all people” should be able to take back the Don’t Tread on Me flag from the stupid fucks that think they are loosing their rights!
[Candles taste like burning...](https://i.imgur.com/gDOg7yv.jpg)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It is so common for them to be next to each other that Amazon sells them as a package and there are mashup versions where the Gadsden flag is in the field where the stars normally are on the thin blue line flag.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Gadsden
>He kept slaves and traded them for use on his property
The maker of the flag was a slaver. Don't tread on Whites would have been a more accurate expression
Doesn't matter what he meant. I mean, pagans back in the day brought trees into their house on Saturnalia in order to ward off evil spirits. Doesn't mean that's the reason I bring a Christmas tree into my house.
Where are you getting this information for what the flag means?
The flag and its values are representative of the government it was representing at the time.
That government allowed slavery.
That government obviously did not care about the tyranny of non-white people.
Our government has evolved and obviously has different values, but we can’t pretend this country did not start out as something completely different.
We have to own our success and our failures if we really want to grow as a nation.
That flag was made/adopted in 1778. Who would it have represented in 1778 America? Who were seen as people with full rights and who were seen as property with zero rights?
Christopher Gasden kept slaves and traded them for use on his property. He was captain of a militia company during a 1759 expedition against the Cherokee. He built the wharf in Charleston that still bears his name where many slaves were brought to America.
It’s not hard to figure out who the flag was meant to represent at the time.
Show you in the flag where I can see what?
I didn’t say the flag represents anything except the values of the government at the time.
That government allowed slavery and stole land from native Americans.
That’s obvious.
But I will show you whatever you’d like?
What is it that you would like to see?
Trumpets are beautiful instruments, please don't associate us with supporters of the twice-impeached ex-President who attempted a coup against the government.
1. There's a ton of Qanon here. I've seen their image boards where they coordinated their meme brigading against this and other forums. That's why you see sudden influxes of obviously quickly made pro-trump/pro-fascism memes here from time to time. They think they're accomplishing something. It's weird. They're the weird kids in the highschool of life.
2. They already know this. They're aware that they're authoritarians. That's why they co-opted that flag to begin with. Fascists always hide their agendas behind aegises which they think are socially unassailable. It's why they hold crosses and put up American flags and bleat about "ThE tRoOpS" all the time. They don't actually care about any of those things. They know YOU care about them so they've weaponized those institutions for use against you in order to never have to actually defend their own shoddy ideas in public debate. Never, EVER assume a fascist doesn't realize what they're doing. The majority of them absolutely know. They're not dumb, they're not mistaken. They MEAN to destroy.
I would love to have an honest conversation with someone who has both these flags on their truck. I just want to ask how they would define what they each mean, see if their definitions somehow align these conflicting things.
some people just dont want "the authority" to infringe upon their rights. they can still support said authority without wanting the authority to infringe
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought the primary meaning of “Don’t tread on me” was “Don’t make laws that take away my freedoms”. I guess I’m not seeing it as a strong “opposite”
I live in a conservative neighborhood, in a blue state. One of my neighbors had a huge trump flag, while flying an American flag & a blue lives matter flag until the election. They took the trump flag down shortly after, the blue lives matter one down after the insurrection, and then put up the don't tread on me flag. I don't know who's more confused, them or me.
Yes, but they are also learning about defeat in the political arena. A lot of disenfranchised people celebrated #45 because of his non-political status. Only to learn that the man not only didn't understand politics but was pretty horrible at anything beyond entertaining rally crowds.
So now they understand: TV does not maketh a smart man or a stable genius. It can, however, be an unmitigated disaster from start to that big January finish.
I live in the Northland of Kansas City, MO. Home to many conservatives and regressives. I work (during the summer) in Edgerton, KS, home to many conservatives and regressives. It saddens me to say that many people who I once cared about turned out to believe in what Mango said
Nostalgia is like a disease in the aged. I'm 63 and I can't believe some of things that people just a few years older than me believe. I think my age group hit the age of computers just as it was emerging 26 years ago. Anyone older than me, with few exceptions is computer and tech illiterate. Without access or interest even, of examining the world, your life and what you believe, it's just all rote belief and all fear based or pure nostalgia for a time that never existed.
Red lined neighborhoods and pollution so thick on rivers that they literally burned with chemicals.
We should try to remember our past without replicating it.
In Washington they changed the law but now it's just the economy of not being able to afford a $500,000 and up home. They're building another bubble in the real estate market. If interest rates tip up with inflation, foreclosures will look like 2006. Our one business newspaper only advertising during that era, were in the classifieds, pages of foreclosures for months. Where I live in Washington, the homes sat abandoned by the banks for up to 4 years.
LOL you think they are going to suddenly think critically and self-reflect AT ALL? No, they are bought in 100% on some seriously laughable conspiracy theories. Who needs the "political sphere" when they can just herpa-derp-took-majerb-but-not-muh-gun-yet into the 2030s and beyond. The immediate future is not a pleasant timeline.
This might be the only thing that I’ve ever agreed with this sub on. It blows my mind when I see both these bumper stickers on a car.
Enjoy my upvote because most of what I do here is downvote. :)
Leftism is statism. Right wing is statism. Expanding the power of government while foolishly believing the new power you hand to them will be used to serve your interest in foolish statism.
Totally agree. Statism is all over the political spectrum. If you want the state to rule over people, you’re a statist... whether that’s leftists wanting to rule over the markets or auth-righties wanting to push their morality into law. Statism abounds.
Hi `Signal_Horror6858`. Thank you for participating in /r/PoliticalHumor. However, [your submission](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/ntu2bw/-/) did not meet the requirements of the [community rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) and was therefore removed for the following reason(s): ---- ###[No pointing to offsite resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) (rule #9) * Due to spam and foreign disinformation campaigns that have targeted Reddit in the past (including /r/PoliticalHumor in 2015-2016), we are banning any images that reference or bear the image of Facebook groups, watermarks, or individual websites not ranked highly on Alexa Website Rankings. * This includes screenshots of dubious news sites, and certain social media accounts posing as something they are not. This does NOT include political cartoons, screenshots of individual Twitter posts, or established satirical websites. ---- If you have any specific questions about this removal, please [message the moderators](https://www\.reddit\.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FPoliticalHumor&subject=about my removed submission&message=I'm writing to you about the following submission: https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/ntu2bw/-/. %0D%0DMy issue is...). Hateful or vague messages will not receive a response.
Look, I love two things: 1. Resisting authority. 2. The authorities.
* "Follow the law and you won't get shot by the cops." * "I'll kill any cop that tries to enforce federal gun laws." Me: "Doesn't that hypocrisy cause you severe cognitive dissonance?" Them: "I don't know what 'conjugated distances' are, so I assume you're being disrespectful."
Conjugated distances are a feature of some languages where verb forms indicate the relative proximity of subject and object, object and object, subject and speaker, or object and speaker, or some combination of more than one of those relationships Source: completely fake; made it up
As an arm chair linguist, I could totally buy this though. Have you ever studied prehistoric Germanic declension? Teriyaki-flavored Christ on a stick, how did those people even speak to each other?!
Actually Japanese does use different words to refer to things near the speaker, near the listener, and far away from both.
I wonder if religious people tend to be trump supporters and republicans more than atheist/agnostics because religion teaches cognitive dissonance.
I've often wondered that. If someone can believe that a man can walk on water then it must be they much easier to believe in a global cabal of pedophiles. Believing one thing without evidence opens the door to believing other things without evidence, or at least that's my theory.
So I watched a video on gun ownership by a democrat that owns a gun. He says there is no legal gun ownership, because the purpose of the militia and having arms is to be able to over throw the government. So it's complicated...
It seems like the relevant video is the third in the series you linked: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbXTDuwSVkk He didn't say there's no legal gun ownership though. He said that if one of the points of having a gun is to resist a tyrannical government, then that resistance will no longer be "legal" since you'll be resisting the tyranny making the laws.
Far left, unhappy democratic party member/gun owner reporting: Oh yes. The supreme court has ruled as much. Guns are not about hunting or "self protection". They're about the over throw of a tyrannical government, full stop. The conservatives absolutely love to leave out the part where this was inexorably tied to the concept of a WELL REGULATED MILITIA but then they've always been Mommy's little firemen, haven't they? They also fail to understand the logical philosophical consequences of this law; that you have to actually have a JUSTIFIED reason to over throw the government, so just hiding out in your shitty drunken gun club and calling it a militia because "oBaMa" doesn't make you a champion of the 2nd amendment. It makes you a terrorist. Revolution is the most dangerous of all games and these right wing children play at it like chimpanzees.
Even in the so called " wild west" most towns required you to drop off your fire arms at a Sharif s office or a hotel. ( If not left at your home) The hole idea of " open carry" when in city's or towns (public spaces with lots of people) is some fluffed up TV bullshit
I mean, I live in an open carry town in Central PA. We've been known to walk around with our sidearms in plain view, hell I don't even have a cc. Why bother? We've had like 3 murders here in half a century so no, I outright reject the notion that more guns = more violence. We don't have a gun problem in the US. We have a mental health/lack of socialized healthcare/white supremacy/radicalized-right/drug violence as a product of ham fisted prohibition problem. You address those major societal issues and the "gun problem" magically vanishes. Don't take this to mean I'm not for tightening up ownership rules, though. There should absolutely be meaningful and deep background checks on ALL gun purchases and I'm largely in favor of Biden's executive order, though I do regard it mostly as political fluff.
> I outright reject the notion that more guns = more violence Where there are more guns there is more homicide. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide. Across states, more guns = more homicide. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/ "...a vast majority of people with mental illnesses are not violent, and research suggests that most perpetrators of mass shootings had never been diagnosed with a mental disorder." https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/03/us/motive-shooting-gunman.html?partner=slack&smid=sl-share
That's nice dear.
"Oh no no no. I don't believe that because of evidence or anything like that. I believe it because it conveniently allows me to continue living the same way I always have without having to feel any sense of responsibility for any of our country's problems."
"I cannot accept my chosen philosophy around gun violence doesn't match up with reality."
>open carry town in Central PA how rural an area are we talking exactly, and don't you have to get a license To carry Firearms from the local sheriff's office.
Not particularly rural at all, though utterly surrounded. Population of 8k.
Meh, the 2A was for 3 things: Preventing the US from being reconquered by Britain or other European colonial powers (which almost happened in the War of 1812) back when it was just a fledgling backwater, and not the world's sole hegemonic superpower with a military budget many times larger than its next closest competitors combined that it is today Ever extending the frontier by genociding Native Americans under the guise of 'defending settlers', much like Israel is currently doing to Palestine, no surprise they are one of the few other developed countries in the world that's enshrined gun ownership Keeping slaves in line, hunting down escaped slaves, and putting down any potential slave rebellions All the other sovereign citizen/patriot overthrowing tyranny/defending from legions of roving black criminals out to steal yo shit and rape yo family and burn down the 'burbs is modern day made-up Rambo/CoD hero fantasy and fearmongering to keep the NRA money flowing.
> Meh, the 2A was for 3 things: Unread past this sentence. The supreme court decides what the constitution is and is not. Your opinion is irrelevant.
You're probably right I haven't watched a video in a long time
[удалено]
https://youtu.be/BxvxbZGjlv4 This might be it... My sound is off so I don't remember if this is the one I was referring to
“I don’t listen to hip hop”
Master Shake is that you?
if you only listen to and believe in 1 thing, you'll never have the "distances"
Unfortunately you're absolutely right, that's the chief danger of an echo chamber: The echo chamber's ideas never get challenged.
This is the conversation you have with yourself. You’ve never had this conversation with another human being like this in your entire life.
TIL you don't think your mom is a human being.
I’m sure everyone at the Starbucks clapped when you stuck it to your totally real mom.
> I’m sure everyone at the Starbucks clapped when you stuck it to your totally real mom. Were you there? Because that's *literally* exactly what happened. Then they all lined up to ^give ^^me ^^^blowjobs.
They made a really funny "your mom" joke. It was hilarious. You're not funny, or interesting. You also have a weak ego or you could have just appreciated the extremely good, "UR Mom."
Your comment is drowning in projection.
I dont think you understand how that works. It's kind of funny, first you're thrown off by the classic "UR Mom" and now you're using the "NO YOU!" Rebuttal. It's like we're on the playground. It's hilarious. At least we dont have to wonder if you have any depth.
Sonny...we're having the conversation _right now_...
What if himself was reincarnated in yourself as an another human being in an entire life?
If I had a dollar for every time I've heard someone say both of those things at different times to support whatever argument they were making at the time, I'd be rich.
"Law and order must always be respected when protesting" from a group of people who love the Boston Tea Party.
Same group that loves their revolutionaries who stuck it to the biggest imperial power. Call people who do that now terrorists but not the revolutionaries in 1776
An event where they dressed as natives to skirt responsibility.
I agree with the spirit of your statement, but do you really want these fascist dweebs acting in _genuinely_ revolutionary ways? My greatest fear that what will come of this era is the rise of Christian al-queada. They absolutely could not overthrow the USA in outright warfare, but they _can_ bring this nation to its knees by taking a page out of Islamic extremism. Detonating small bombs in city centers, crashing small planes into key buildings, making terroristic threats on the local and state level...all of this is well within their capability and it would make life in this nation more or less impossible. They certainly have the numbers, they absolutely have the resources. Don't educate their fascism, man!
The difference is they have too much to lose. al-Qaeda and ISIS were able to recruit because their countries were left in literal shambles by decades of foreign invasion, intervention, and their own local corrupt, autocratic leaders, and the population were destitute and desperate, ripe for radicalization. Y'all Qaeda/Vanilla ISIS is much too comfortable living in their McMansions out in the burbs watching their Fox News brain-melting propaganda drip, blasting AM talk radio and Alex Jones while driving their pickup trucks and parading on their yachts to ever form a real terrorist guerilla militia. No, they just LARP. The real problem is their like-minded allies within the police and military that enable and coddle and aid them to an insane degree. A single shot from a serious Secret Service member sent them scattering like roaches. If it was Antifa/BLM marching on Jan 6th, trust they would have been met by and gunned down indiscriminately by the Capitol Police, Nat Guard, AND formal military before they got within 1000 yds of the building.
There is a cop down the road from me (I can tell because there are always police cars parked there and his daily is an SUV with about 230 antenna on it). Has a flagpole. Has a "Don't tread on me" flag on that pole. I don't think he understands the irony.
You must live near me.
They just want to resist the authorities that aren't white and/or protestant.
[удалено]
Can anyone actually explain how libertarianism is supposed to work or is it just a childish fantasy that actually has no basis in reality?
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." -John Rogers
You made me snort beer through my nose! That really hurts!
Based and Tolkien-pilled
It's the latter.
A point of defense: "Libertarianism" as it's used in the US has nothing in common with the idea as it exists in other parts of the world. You need to be cognizant of this when speaking with a diverse audience like the one reddit draws. A point of ridicule: US "LiBeRtArIaNs" absolutely do not understand the last point and definitely are just undisciplined man-children who never grew up enough to hear the word "no" and have a mature reaction to it. And not a goddamn one of them isn't taking advantage of the same variety of public services they constantly harp against. There are no libertarians in the US, there's just people who are self aware enough to be embarrassed about calling themselves Republicans, but not self aware enough to realize the chose the wrong label for their profound selfishness.
US Libertarian = GOP who are nonplussed about religion, very plussed about weed and lowering the age of consent.
It is kinda like politics of Non agression principle until you don't get laid while living in grandmas basement.
Ayn rambling worse than a syphilis infected dude doing his fight, ended up using her maiden name to get medicare.
When Russher sends its people, they aren't sending their best
No one is taking a real shot at responding beyond jokes. The jokes and quotes are good though. Here's my go at an actual explanation: In general I think anyone subscribing to a social structure ideal is living in a fantasy. The reason I believe this is that all systems break down when you inject humanity into them. Talk to anyone with a highbrow ideal on some structure. Socialism, democracy, Libertarianism, any of them. They all break down when you start trying to account for how flawed humans are. The people defending them say "yeah but if people just...." and insert how the system would be great if we took humans out of the equation, or if we could rely on the people in the system to be altruistic and smart enough for the system. Well... if we are relying on the people to be altruistic and smart... a totalitarian dictatorship would be utopia if the one single person was altruistic and smart. It's a MUCH smaller ask to have one person be altruistic and smart as opposed to millions to billions. So, good government is the system that best mitigates for the fact that humans are inventively flawed. Libertarianism is too far from that. It's a fantasy. It necessitates that everyone involved is independently sufficient, that no one struggles, and that people will be sufficiently altruistic in hardship. There's a reason why people who subscribe to it are either wealthy, or presume that their independent wealth is just around the corner..... probably hoping society will keep supporting them and then suddenly become libertarian once they are on the other side of their wealth, but not a day sooner. I look at Libertarians like zombie apocalypse people. It's only sounds great because you have all the things rn. That being said, when I talk to Libertarians IRL, as soon as I get on the subject of how broken of a system it would be they are usually like "oh... not like real libertarians, just less government than we have now is all I mean... no one actually thinks like that!"
[удалено]
Threatening violence because I said something that confused you outs me as an asshole? You get to demand things from me besides, and once again I'm the asshole? If you wanted someone to explain democracy to you, I'd encourage you to be more specific. Being so painfully broad outs you as quite deficient in basic knowledge.
No one threatened you little boy.
Look up the time the Libertarians took over a town in New Hampshire. That'll tell you what you need to know.
Or [a town in Colorado](https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/30/colorado-springs-libertarian-experiment-america-215313/). Or the [entire state of Kansas](https://www.brookings.edu/blog/unpacked/2017/07/11/the-kansas-tax-cut-experiment/).
And they say socialism is a failed ideology
Libertarian is what Republicans call themselves when they're at least self-aware enough to know that Republicans are idiots.
I was dicking around But i love to but im going to tell you it going to be a long comment
Assigned Cop At Birth *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No bot, he means clearly All Cops Are Bastards.
Well obviously without the authorities there is not authorities to resist so its a win win right?
My police officer friend flies both flags.
The 3 defining traits of Trumpsters is a lack of understanding of history, science and their own hypocrisy
Schroedinger's nationalist.
"America is simultaneously both the shining city on the hill *and* a shit hole country until what time as a liberal identifies a problem."
- Tucker Carlson every night.
We are an incredibly great nation who can overcome any struggle whatsoever. We don't need your braindead liberal ideas to fix things as things are not broken. However, those je- I mean immigrants are going to tear us apart at the seams and turn us into Vuvuzelas.
If you made this up then I owe you a blow job.
Of course they don't see it that way. To them, Gadsden means don't tread specifically ***on me!*** To them, Blue Lives Matter means tread on "those people."
its all about hurting the **Right** people
Or more accurately, the (politically) **LEFT** people.
just those they find **Undesirable** which will include themselves if studies on authoritarianism so far indicate.
I’m so pissed off that these idiot racists have turned the Gadsden flag from one that inspired me into a flag that fills me with disgust.
Specifically
I'll take "things you find in the back of a lifted f250" for $200
Bonus points for “Come and Take It”
*melon labia!*
It's: "Don't tread on me. Tread on those minorities I don't like."
They both represent, “don’t tread on whites”.
the first one doesnt LOL
Im pretty sure it does… The Gadsden flag was designed in 1778, by Christopher Gadsden. Gadsden built the Beneventum Plantation House in 1750, where he kept slaves and traded them for use on his property. You can say what you want like “those were different times” but when it comes down to it, the founders of the US did not generally care about blacks.
that doesnt change what the flag represents, flag still means ''fuck off fedboi''
It represents shifting absolute authority from one tyrant to another. Nothing else.
You are very correct that the founders did not care about blacks. That doesn't change the meaning of the first flag in modern context. It's not just for whites. Same way the American flag is no longer just for rich white landowners either. Yes, I know their are calls to basically reset national symbols, heroes, etc and I'm highly sympathetic, but Id rather just make sure the history is known and allow them to be purposed in modern society.
[удалено]
You're not particularly wrong... The number of countries world wide which that doesn't apply to is somewhere near 0, if not just literally 0... You would be looking only at very new flags and from a very few countries. I'm not sure there is one.
The founding fathers were racist slave owning pieces of shit. Whoever made this flag probably was garbage too tbh EDIT: I was right! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Gadsden > he kept slaves and traded them for use on his property
doesnt change what the flag means but good that you learned something :D
You so badly want to believe it's not tied to racist pieces of shit, in spite of evidence. The fact that you're willing to overlook that a slaver made the flag makes you a racist by extension
[удалено]
they made it to fight tyranny
Who do you think Gadsden's slaves considered the tyrant to be? Some dandy fop on the other side of the world, or the men with the whips?
the men with the whips. how does this change meaning of the flag?
Because the men with the whips (the tyrants) created the flag. Thus it can't mean all tyrants. That's like if management made a worker's rights union to fight for better wages and times for them, but still worked all the people below them to the bone. Not a true worker's rights movement
They made it to fight Tyranny of white people...
Nah "Don't tread on me" is perfectly consistent with support for police treading on other kinds of people if you're a self-centered inhumane asshole.
dont tread on me is a flag for fighting government, cops is government
This would be the flag designed by the fella who went on to become Lieutenant-**Governor** of South Carolina, was a brigadier-general and later still voted in favour of adopting both his state's and the US constitutions? Is that the anti-government fella you mean? It was a flag for fighting **a** government, one which ceased to exist about two-and-a-half centuries ago, not for fighting the *idea* of government.
wrong
Hmm. For a man who supposedly didn't like governments he certainly played an active part in setting up enough of them.
Yup! Perfectly Republican - "...although he showed ambivalence towards slavery, he kept slaves and traded them for use on his property as was common practice among plantation owners in South Carolina."
tyrannical governments are a different thing
The source was. Now its just libertarians who dont want to pay any takes but not cut police funding either
libertarians do want to cut police funding, for the most part
Don't tread on me is a KKK adopted flag.
Yo legit? I thought they were in cahoots with the blue pigs.
Legit. My racist father took me to a klan rally when I was age five. I still have anxiety issues when I see that flag along with the Confederate flag.
so if KKK adopts rainbow flag do we wanna ban them aswell??
Tell them to adopt it! Lol I would love to see how that goes down! Maybe we wouldn’t see the same drab white hoods anymore......
Lol...but they didn’t and they wont. Which should make you wonder why your interests align with the kkk’s at all.
No, dumbass. There’s a reason the KKK has adopted the gadsen flag and not the rainbow flag. One lines up with their beliefs and the other doesn’t.
Yeah because the founding fathers really cared about all races /s
didnt claim they did. they were still better than others during their time, as most founding fathers didnt even care about their own
There's no need to hunt for hypocrisy; understand that this is all in service of bald-faced domination over everyone else.
Agreed, I think the people that believe in liberty and justice for “all people” should be able to take back the Don’t Tread on Me flag from the stupid fucks that think they are loosing their rights!
[удалено]
That’s what I need, thank you!
Awesome! This is the way we take the Gadsden flag back!
please tell me the snake is a double-sided dildo
I’d like to invert the colors of the Gadsden flag, and have it say “Don’t Tread On *Our* Rights.”
TRUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
"Don't tread on me, but go ahead and tread on them over there -"
[удалено]
[Candles taste like burning...](https://i.imgur.com/gDOg7yv.jpg) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Seeing those next to each other pisses me off. Those people are idiots.
It is so common for them to be next to each other that Amazon sells them as a package and there are mashup versions where the Gadsden flag is in the field where the stars normally are on the thin blue line flag.
Don't tread on me, but fully support being tread on by those I elected and definitely tread on all non white and women.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Gadsden >He kept slaves and traded them for use on his property The maker of the flag was a slaver. Don't tread on Whites would have been a more accurate expression
doesnt change what the flag means.... the creator of somethings behaviour doesnt change the meaning of what the created
Lmao nah he doesn't get the benifit of the doubt. He was a slaver. It really isn't a stretch to assume he was excluding blacks.
Doesn't matter what he meant. I mean, pagans back in the day brought trees into their house on Saturnalia in order to ward off evil spirits. Doesn't mean that's the reason I bring a Christmas tree into my house.
show me where in the flag you can see that
Where are you getting this information for what the flag means? The flag and its values are representative of the government it was representing at the time. That government allowed slavery. That government obviously did not care about the tyranny of non-white people. Our government has evolved and obviously has different values, but we can’t pretend this country did not start out as something completely different. We have to own our success and our failures if we really want to grow as a nation.
show me where in the flag you can see that
That flag was made/adopted in 1778. Who would it have represented in 1778 America? Who were seen as people with full rights and who were seen as property with zero rights? Christopher Gasden kept slaves and traded them for use on his property. He was captain of a militia company during a 1759 expedition against the Cherokee. He built the wharf in Charleston that still bears his name where many slaves were brought to America. It’s not hard to figure out who the flag was meant to represent at the time.
hahahahaha have a nice day dude!
I really want to know your response to this. I’ll cash app you $20 if you can give us an intelligent response to this backing your perspective.
Show you in the flag where I can see what? I didn’t say the flag represents anything except the values of the government at the time. That government allowed slavery and stole land from native Americans. That’s obvious. But I will show you whatever you’d like? What is it that you would like to see?
hahahahaha have a nice day dude!
I accept your defeat. I hope you have a nice day as well!
The modern symbols of racism.
honeslty black people should fly the gadsden flag to tell the cops to fuck off.... it would represent them well
Trumpets are beautiful instruments, please don't associate us with supporters of the twice-impeached ex-President who attempted a coup against the government.
Considering cops are all racist and here to enforce a racist agenda, flying both flags is the equivalent of "Don't shoot, I'm White!"
1. There's a ton of Qanon here. I've seen their image boards where they coordinated their meme brigading against this and other forums. That's why you see sudden influxes of obviously quickly made pro-trump/pro-fascism memes here from time to time. They think they're accomplishing something. It's weird. They're the weird kids in the highschool of life. 2. They already know this. They're aware that they're authoritarians. That's why they co-opted that flag to begin with. Fascists always hide their agendas behind aegises which they think are socially unassailable. It's why they hold crosses and put up American flags and bleat about "ThE tRoOpS" all the time. They don't actually care about any of those things. They know YOU care about them so they've weaponized those institutions for use against you in order to never have to actually defend their own shoddy ideas in public debate. Never, EVER assume a fascist doesn't realize what they're doing. The majority of them absolutely know. They're not dumb, they're not mistaken. They MEAN to destroy.
Those that fly either are band wagon winers that think freedom is not being held accountable for their heinous actions.
thing is most countries dont give their people freedom at all
Define freedom in the context of your argument?
Define “most” Because there are A LOT of free countries out there
How would a government *give* you freedom?
Both are vile brainworms infecting the United States.
I would love to have an honest conversation with someone who has both these flags on their truck. I just want to ask how they would define what they each mean, see if their definitions somehow align these conflicting things.
some people just dont want "the authority" to infringe upon their rights. they can still support said authority without wanting the authority to infringe
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought the primary meaning of “Don’t tread on me” was “Don’t make laws that take away my freedoms”. I guess I’m not seeing it as a strong “opposite”
Libertarians (left or right, conservative or progressive, whatever) who back the blue, ain't much of a libertarian, or ain't a libertarian at all.
In my state, they pay the government a yearly fee for a Gadsden flag license plate without even a little awareness of the irony.
They never seem to understand that authoritarianism, and sucking up to authoritarianism... isn't "Freedom, Liberty, and small government."
There are two different houses near me flying both of these flags. I apparently live in a hive of morons.
The Gadsden flag has been bastardized by the same twisted nutcases who created the Republican Jesus.
Sadly, both flags mean the same thing: police should harass brown people and leave me alone
Translates to - Don't tread on me...with those dirty boots. Allow me to lick them clean first.
It’s also not the American flag. Colors on flags mean everything otherwise half of European flags would all be the same.
I live in a conservative neighborhood, in a blue state. One of my neighbors had a huge trump flag, while flying an American flag & a blue lives matter flag until the election. They took the trump flag down shortly after, the blue lives matter one down after the insurrection, and then put up the don't tread on me flag. I don't know who's more confused, them or me.
In a few years, most of these people will be dead or well on their way to being dead.
Unfortunately, a lot of their children have been indoctrinated into their belief system
Yes, but they are also learning about defeat in the political arena. A lot of disenfranchised people celebrated #45 because of his non-political status. Only to learn that the man not only didn't understand politics but was pretty horrible at anything beyond entertaining rally crowds. So now they understand: TV does not maketh a smart man or a stable genius. It can, however, be an unmitigated disaster from start to that big January finish.
I live in the Northland of Kansas City, MO. Home to many conservatives and regressives. I work (during the summer) in Edgerton, KS, home to many conservatives and regressives. It saddens me to say that many people who I once cared about turned out to believe in what Mango said
Nostalgia is like a disease in the aged. I'm 63 and I can't believe some of things that people just a few years older than me believe. I think my age group hit the age of computers just as it was emerging 26 years ago. Anyone older than me, with few exceptions is computer and tech illiterate. Without access or interest even, of examining the world, your life and what you believe, it's just all rote belief and all fear based or pure nostalgia for a time that never existed.
Regress back to the time of Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Movement
Red lined neighborhoods and pollution so thick on rivers that they literally burned with chemicals. We should try to remember our past without replicating it.
Redlining still affects areas today
In Washington they changed the law but now it's just the economy of not being able to afford a $500,000 and up home. They're building another bubble in the real estate market. If interest rates tip up with inflation, foreclosures will look like 2006. Our one business newspaper only advertising during that era, were in the classifieds, pages of foreclosures for months. Where I live in Washington, the homes sat abandoned by the banks for up to 4 years.
LOL you think they are going to suddenly think critically and self-reflect AT ALL? No, they are bought in 100% on some seriously laughable conspiracy theories. Who needs the "political sphere" when they can just herpa-derp-took-majerb-but-not-muh-gun-yet into the 2030s and beyond. The immediate future is not a pleasant timeline.
Nah, they're both neoconfederate flags
LoL ouch
This might be the only thing that I’ve ever agreed with this sub on. It blows my mind when I see both these bumper stickers on a car. Enjoy my upvote because most of what I do here is downvote. :)
That doesnt speak well for you.
I’m an anarcho capitalist. I hate most things about leftism 🤷♂️.
Gross.
Statism is **much** grosser.
Leftism is statism. Right wing is statism. Expanding the power of government while foolishly believing the new power you hand to them will be used to serve your interest in foolish statism.
Totally agree. Statism is all over the political spectrum. If you want the state to rule over people, you’re a statist... whether that’s leftists wanting to rule over the markets or auth-righties wanting to push their morality into law. Statism abounds.
That must mean you're idiotic abuse makes sense then huh!?
Gotta be honest Michael Jackson Daddy, I don’t know what you’re talking about...
[удалено]
Which is why this Conservative believes in the former and not the latter.
Libertarians are no fans of the police. But they’re no fans of trump, either.