Tags
I have long regarded talk show hosts to be people of superior intelligence, and the great Phil Donahue was no exception. Perhaps no better example of this is when he verbally spared with Ayn Rand. Although Miss Rand was Jewish, and these tend to have branching neurons that give rise to certain genetic diseases like Tay Sachs, Donahue’s brain was twice as large as Miss Rands.
So it was a battle of brain size vs brain branching. This was in 1979, seven years before the even bigger brained Oprah would explode out of nowhere and replace Donahue as the #1 talk show host in America while replacing Miss Rand as the most influential woman on the planet.
Among Rand’s insights were:
- Altruism is evil.
- There is no God because there is no proof, and we are not required, even as a hypothesis, to entertain any idea for which there is no evidence.
- All monopolies are caused by government favours. Without government help it’s impossible to create a monopoly.
Gates vs Musk: Who would Ayn Rand have admired more?
One of the prevailing themes of Ayn Rand’s books is that some men are just supermen who put the rest of us to shame by dominating our capitalist society. Although Bill Gates and Elon Musk are both very brilliant men, Gates is much more brilliant. If you go by their reported SAT scores, Musk is around 140. Gates’s IQ is either 170 or 154, depending on whether you believe he scored in the high or low 1500s on the old SAT (reports vary). Since both men became the richest person in the World in highly g loaded fields, it’s interesting to ask if there’s any reason to expect one genius to be so much smarter than the other.
- For starters, although Musk has far more money than Gates today because he came of age when there was more money, Gates held Forbes annual title of World’s richest human a record 16 times while Musk has so far held the title only twice (in 2022 and 2025) and now that he has pissed off Donald Trump, this year may be his last.
- Gates is nerd (skinny sci-fi fan with glasses) while Musk is a socially maladjusted self-described autist. Gates is a geek while Musk is a freak.
- Musk’s companies were subsidized as are all monopolies according to Ayn Rand. If Gates is the exception to Rand’s rule, he’s almost superior enough to be a different species, and may indeed have a 170 IQ.
Despite Gates being much smarter, Rand hated altruists so she might have despised the Gates foundation and applauded Musk’s demolition of USAID.
Pumpkin Person 
“There is no God because there is no proof, and we are not required, even as a hypothesis, to entertain any idea for which there is no evidence.”
I don’t think this is a big brain take. The argument for for God is conceptual, not empirical. So “evidence”, as is popularly construed, is irrelevant to the God argument (of course, arguments are a form of evidence but people think “empirical evidence” when they hear the word “evidence”).
What’s the conceptual argument?
Plantinga’s ontological argument is one:
It is possible that a maximally great being exists. If it is possible that a maximally great bring exists, then it exists in some possible world. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world. This maximally great being is what we call “God”. So God exists.
(I’m agnostic leaning atheist on this matter, but I’m open to a good argument that a being, if you want to call it that, exists that could have created the universe and could just be a passive observer or something, not getting into human affairs or whatnot.)
I think Kant debunked that by noting that existence is a prerequisite not a product of greatness
Maximal greatness includes necessary existence, meaning existing in all possible worlds. So a being that exists only contingently is less great than a being that exists necessarily, therefore existence isn’t an external prerequisite to greatness. The argument rests on P1—that there is a possibility of such a being, so unless you can show that such a being is impossible then the argument remains valid. Therefore if it’s possible, it must exist in some possible world and by its nature all worlds including our own. What you’re saying about existence applies to contingent beings, not a necessary one like God.
By this logic we’d have to believe in any allegedly perfect entity. Trump must be the perfect president because it’s more perfect to be in office right now.
if God exists in a possible world how do you prove he exists in this one?
if God does not exist everywhere then God exists nowhere.
does God exist in my toilet water?
the maximally great definition of God is flawed then.
God would need to be something else. (Does not exist in the toilet water)
God is an agent but not one made of matter and energy.
“By this logic we’d have to believe in any allegedly perfect entity. Trump must be the perfect president because it’s more perfect to be in office right now.”
Presidents are contingent beings.
“if God exists in a possible world how do you prove he exists in this one?”
Its possible that a MGB exists (P1). If something is possible, then it exists in at least one possible world, so a MGB exists in at least one possible world (P2). Maximal greatness includes necessary existence, so if a MGB exists in any possible world, then it must exist in every possible world; if something is possibly necessary, then it is necessary (P3). The actual world, our world, is one of those possible worlds (P4). So if a MGB exists in every possible world, including the actual world, then it must exist in our world (conclusion).
The ONLY way to defeat Plantinga’s argument is to reject (1) and argue against it, since the rest of the premises and conclusion follow necessarily from it.
I think a form of deism where a creator God that’s passive and merely observed it’s creations without putting its hand into things could be possible. And I think that using logic we can reach that conclusion, if it is indeed true.
Presidents are contingent beings.
Explain.
Another rebuttal I’ve heard to this argument is the perfect drink must be in my hand since that’s the perfect location for a drink. Plantinga is debunked through reductio ad absurdum.
deism won’t work because a maximally great god can do anything and since it doesn’t do anything we can see either we are not understanding it’s motives or it doesn’t exist to change causality.
its possible God in a possible world could send me millions of dollars therefore necessary he does so to be maximally great. Because he doesn’t means God is not what we humans think God is. (God needs reasons not to change causality as an agent with motives)
if God is maximally great God necessary has to do maximally great things necessarily i.e. sending me millions.
i think God allows contingency as a semi maximum deity i.e. has motives to do only specific actions in/on reality.
The existence of presidents depends on specific historical and political conditions. On the other hand, a MGB exists necessarily in all possible worlds, independent of any contingent conditions.
Plantinga’s argument is a variant of Anselm’s argument, and what you’re saying about a perfect drink is like the objection that Anselm received about a perfect island. But, again, the counter is god is a necessary being while an island is contingent.
Seems like a post-hoc goal post moving to save the argument. Contingency wasn’t part of the original syllogism, the argument was existence is a corollary of greatness
“Seems like a post-hoc goal post moving to save the argument. Contingency wasn’t part of the original syllogism, the argument was existence is a corollary of greatness”
No, existence as a corollary of greatness means necessary existence, not contingent existence. Necessity is foundational to the structure of the argument. Contingent things exist in SOME possible worlds while necessary things exist in ALL possible worlds.
“deism won’t work because a maximally great god can do anything”
A form of deism could be that God COULD be great enough to do anything yet chooses to just observe his creations without intervening in any types of affairs.
Contingent things exist in SOME possible worlds while necessary things exist in ALL possible worlds.
But what makes a maximally great being any more necessary than a maximally great anything else?
I mean, comparing a MGB to maximally great anything else (MGAE) doesn’t make sense. MGAEs could either exist or not exist and their existence depends on specific conditions. Things that necessarily exist don’t depend on other things for their existence; things that contingently exist depend on other things for their existence.
Things that necessarily exist don’t depend on other things for their existence; things that contingently exist depend on other things for their existence.
But why do only BEINGS who are maximally great necessarily exist and not non-beings who are maximally great?
Because only a being with personal attributes can embody the suite of great-making properties which includes necessary existence.
Then why can’t a maximally great President exist?
How do you think Plantinga defines “maximally great”?
perfection
A maximally great being must have omniscience, omnipotence, moral perception, and necessary existence (existing in all possible worlds). A president, even if maximally great, is contingent (depends on historical and political conditions) and lacks necessary existence. If a president could be maximally great, it would have necessary existence. A president doesn’t have necessary existence. So a president cannot be maximally great.
If a maximally great being is not contingent, why is a maximally great president. A president is just a type of being
Already said why—they’re contingent.
That explains nothing. Why are great presidents contingent when great beings are not. Presidents are beings
Because God is the uncaused cause—the necessary being which must exist in all possible worlds whereas contingent beings exist in some possible worlds.
The universe is contingent right? It has a begin, right (the big bang)?
If the universe is contingent, then it has to be explained by a necessary being (since contingent beings exist in some possible worlds while necessary beings exist in all possible worlds). The universe has a beginning (the big bang, which makes the universe contingent). Therefore, if the universe is contingent then what explains the universe is a necessary being, which is God. So God exists.
The universe is contingent right? It has a begin, right (the big bang)?
Right
If the universe is contingent, then it has to be explained by a necessary being (since contingent beings exist in some possible worlds while necessary beings exist in all possible worlds).
Then it can also be explained by a necessary anything, not being only, and can also be explained by ANY necessary being you want, from a President to the Easter bunny, simply by positing the existence of a necessary/great/perfect (fill in the blank)
The universe has a beginning (the big bang, which makes the universe contingent). Therefore, if the universe is contingent then what explains the universe is a necessary being, which is God. So God exists.
And so does by that logic the necessary/perfect/great version of anything we can imagine.
(1) A contingent universe requires a necessary entity with causal power to explain its existence. (2) Arbitrary entities are contingent or lack this causal efficacy. (3) If a necessary entity could be any posited “perfect” thing, then it would have causal power and necessary existence. (4) But arbitrary entities lack these properties. (5) So the necessary entity cannot be an arbitrary “perfect” thing. (6) A personal necessary being (God) has the required causal power and attributes. (7) So the universe is explained by a necessary being, God, not arbitrary entities.
(2) Arbitrary entities are contingent or lack this causal efficacy.
A great being is itself an arbitrary entity. Why not a great accident? A perfect accident? Humans arbitrarily chose a “being” as the cause of the universe because we ourselves are beings so that’s what we can relate to.
Accidents are contingent and lack causal efficacy to explain the existence of the universe since accidents are effects, not ultimate causes. A necessary being is the only way to halt an infinite regress (who created God, and that and that), since God is the necessary being which is itself uncaused and the cause of all contingent things.
Why is a necessary being any less caused than a necessary accident? We’re beings and we were caused.
Is a necessary accident a random event in all worlds? How is it coherent and causally efficacious? Do you agree that necessity implies being uncaused, which rules out accidents?
A necessary entity (being or accident) is uncaused, existing in all possible worlds. A necessary accident is incoherent (accidents are contingent and lack causal efficacy). If a necessary accident could explain the universe, it would be necessary and causally efficacious. A necessary accident is not necessary or causally efficacious. So a necessary accident cannot explain the universe. A necessary being, a deistic God, explains the universe. So a deistic God, not a necessary accident, explains the universe
Do you agree that necessity implies being uncaused,
Of course not. Your mom and dad were necessary to create you and they were both caused.
A necessary accident is incoherent (accidents are contingent and lack causal efficacy).
An accident is no more contingent than a being is. And neither lack causal efficacy. Car accidents for example CAUSE death.
Right, that means your parents ground your existence. A necessary entity exist in all possible worlds and is uncaused. Causation implies contingency, so do you think that God – if God exists – is caused or uncaused? Also “necessary” is being used here in a different way than you’re using it. Can you define what a “necessary accident” would be and? Aren’t parents contingent beings, whereas a modally necessary being isn’t?
How are you defining “accident” here? Accidents depend on prior conditions. The causal efficacy would be secondary, not sufficient, to ground existence.
Can you define what a “necessary accident” would be and? Aren’t parents contingent beings, whereas a modally necessary being isn’t?
Not sure what you mean by “modally” and necessary for what? An accident is simply an unintended event. If a necessary being is uncaused, why can’t we say the same for a necessary accident? Because accidents depend on prior conditions? So do beings.
“Modal necessity” describes something that must exist or be true in all possible worlds, meaning non-existence or falsity is impossible. A modally necessary being requires no cause for its existence—no external cause is the reason for its existence (like contingent things).
We can’t say that a “necessary accident” (whatever that means) is uncaused, because accidents are contingent events. Whereas a modally necessary being doesn’t depend on prior conditions and exists in all possible worlds.
We can’t say that a “necessary accident” (whatever that means) is uncaused, because accidents are contingent events. Whereas a modally necessary being doesn’t depend on prior conditions and exists in all possible worlds.
Beings are also caused but you just added the adjectives modally necessary to assert otherwise. So why can’t a modally necessary accident similarly exist in all possible Worlds?
An unintended event can be necessary and exist in all possible worlds? What’s your understanding of the maximally great being (MGB) and contingent things?
If being can, why can’t an unintended event?
Do you mean the same unintended event happening in all possible worlds?
I’m just asking why your logic applies to beings but not unintended events. So do you mean the same being in all possible Worlds? If yes then that answer to your question is yes. If no then the answer to your question is no.
“Muh philosophical arguments for God”
Statements are only useful insofar as they make meaningful, testable predictions about observable reality.
Is there a maximally great being, a perfect being, an omniscient being?
Is our world, in some restricted sense, the best of all possible worlds?
Who cares?
Whether or not these arguments are true has no bearing on how I should live my life. Now, if you can persuade me that there is a land of eternal fun and I can get myself a ticket to it by doing specific things, then I will listen to your premises and conclusions. Proselytizers who think that deploying these arguments qualifies them as theologians-militant always conflate the God of whatever religion they subscribe to with the God of their formal logic.
Muh scientism.
I’m not saying that the argument justifies any kind of specific god from a specific religion. Just that God COULD exist, and we have to use conceptual argument and not think of “proving” it using empirical evidence l—because empirical evidence isn’t the only kind of evidence.
“empirical evidence isn’t the only kind of evidence.”
There are other kinds of evidence? Can you show – oh wait.
What’s the argument that scientism is true? How is scientism not self-defeating?
Premise 1: Scientism is justified.
Premise 2: If scientism is justified, then science is the only way we can acquire knowledge.
Premise 3: We can acquire knowledge through logic and reasoning, along with science.
Conclusion: Therefore scientism is unjustified since we can acquire knowledge through logic and reasoning.
RR. This has nothing to do with ‘science’ per se. It has to do with fantastic goals and how to reach them. If you can’t provide compelling evidence that there is a place across town that hands out free donuts by the dozen, I can’t be certain of its existence. The differences are that the existence of such a place is inexpressibly more plausible than the existence of Heaven, and driving a couple miles to get a box of free donuts isn’t such a huge time sink that I would want to double-check that there are indeed free donuts there.
Both of you are wrong. In the future, the tools will be there to ‘observe’ it.
Just like 2000 years ago some people used intuition or common sense to know the world was round and it took another long time to ‘prove’ it.
The science is the ‘proving’ bit.
The speculation is the logical aspect.
To be fair Ganzir, RR is somewhat right, though I think it should be phrased differently.
The concept of “empirical evidence” itself relies on a specific conceptual grounding that must be taken for granted. In that case, if you do take it, as most of us are forced to take the reality of our senses + things like “physical” causation as true, since there is really no other choice, Hume’s problem of induction is true, and we are always “inducing” that one state causes the next in some sort of logically dependent manner.
Of course, localized physical causation is the only way we could feel we had any power in the world and it make any sense. And it also explains how the universe has a medium (obviously if there were no space there’d be nothing for our perceptions to be placed in).
But we can’t simply deduce anything logical about one state transition to the next without assuming that it should be that way, unless we had some sort of proof besides empirical evidence, which is not proof for itself, since it is not purely mathematical or logical by nature and so assumes prior structure.
The idea of “evidence” is basically empirical though: “something that furnishes proof“, and that is based on our induced axioms about physical and temporal locality and logically dependent cause-and-effect. The only way I could see it being used in pure mathematics is when there are conjectures that we feel are correct but aren’t able to prove. Things like patterns, structural similarities to proven formulas, or heuristic plausibility (probabilistic evidence). Examples include the Riemann Hypothesis, the related Twin Prime Conjecture, Goldbach’s Conjecture, P vs. NP, and the Collatz Conjecture. (Yes I did look up the last things!)
The only thing worse than a religious blog.
Is a libertarian blog.
I think both musk and gates are smart.
And neither invented the product theyre most closlely assoicated wiht.
AFAIK, Gates even publicly said his co-founder was more intelligent than him. Another loss for Ayn Rand and Puppy.
I think Ayn was a woman that lived with a very classic jewish trait. Psychopathy. Read about her personal life puppy.
Of course they’re both smart but gates is way smarter because he did the impossible: created a monopoly without government help
?? Creating a monopoly is impossible??? Who said that? Oprah?
You sound dumber than Rand. Rand was saying it because she assumes competition always emerges because she had the economic analytical ability of a 7 year old. Like you.
A toll bridge is a monopoly. Most towns before public education had 1 private school, which were monopolies. A church is a monopoly (am I allowed to call them businesses?). The EMT when youre dying from an accident or overdose has a monopoly about whether to save you or not and can charge whatever he wants in that period.
Monopolies are natural and pretty common and maybe even the usual in developing countries with less capital.
Look, I’ll make it easier to understand.
If you bothered to leave your hut and walk down the street and look around youd see ads with logos……Monopolies are everywhere dumbass even in developed countries…theyre called BRANDS. Haahahaha.
Gillette razor blades.
Apple Iphone.
Birkin upper class woman bags.
All this stuff could be produced as a commodity but the brand makes them de facto monopolies on the human mind using Bernays techniques.
Don’t even talk about patents…but Ayn Rand would say patents are great because the protect genius!
Phil: But patents are literally government mandated monopolies
Rand: [Head explodes, blood all over the screen]
A toll bridge is a monopoly.
And if it started making bank, someone would build a competing toll bridge, unless that wasn’t allowed, in which case the first monopoly was government assisted which was Rand’s point. All monopolies require government (unless your IQ is 170?)
Most towns before public education had 1 private school, which were monopolies.
You’re ignoring the context which indicates autism. Rand’s talking about mass market monopolies. If that one private school made bank, someone would build another one next door.
The EMT when youre dying from an accident or overdose has a monopoly about whether to save you or not and can charge whatever he wants in that period.
No they can’t in a free society because if they charge too much, a rival EMT will pop up.
Gillette razor blades.
Nope, they only have 50% of the razor market.
Apple Iphone.
LOL! They don’t even have a monopoly on smart phones, let alone phones.
Birkin upper class woman bags.
No they have tons of competition from Chanel, Saint Laurent, Givenchy, Gucci, Dior, etc.
“And if it started making bank, someone would build a competing toll bridge, unless that wasn’t allowed, in which case the first monopoly was government assisted which was Rand’s point. All monopolies require government (unless your IQ is 170?)”
Sorry, Pumpkin, you’re just wrong about this. Cost of entry and innovation will always be a huge barrier for competition.
For example, if you wanted to create an ISP to compete with, say, Charter Communications, you would have to dig and lay down fiber all across the nation, acquire a fleet of trucks to service these lines and homes they lead to, have teams of software engineers, network admins, data center technicians, accountants, managers, janitors, etc. That’s not fucking cheap.
It’s never as simple as just creating a new product with a cheaper price.
Furthermore, if you actually started getting big a bigger company could literally just buy you out and absorb your company, consolidating their power.
Now obviously, companies can take advantage of patent laws, IP laws, and government subsidies to speed a long this process but that’s not the only reason monopolies exist. Just look at how Apple and Tesla utilized vertical integration to take over their markets.
If your argument were valid Charter Communications would have a monopoly but in fact, Charter Communications holds only 8.58% of the ISP market in the US.
Lol, Charter was just an example. But go ahead, if that’s easy then just build one and offer cheaper internet services then everyone else.
Ill wait.
Not saying it’s easy; in fact it’s so hard to get internet services to the entire country, that before you can service the whole nation, some competitor will get to some neighborhoods first, so no one company has a monopoly.
I don’t want to get too lost in the metaphor here, but you have a fundamental misunderstanding on how monopolies work when it comes to ISPs.
Build cost, and first-mover advantage create local monopolies and the only thing that breaks them up IS the existence of local governments. In fact, my home town is suffering from this issue right now. You cant actually have a national monopoly when it comes to ISPs.
Again, competition is not something that can just spring up over night, and it completely ignores the fact that shady business practices exist.
How do you think governments even form to begin with?
Build cost, and first-mover advantage create local monopolies and the only thing that breaks them up IS the existence of local governments.
1) she’s not talking about local monopolies but big monopolies
2) even the local monopolies were caused by government because how else do you get permission to plant wires under sidewalks and other public spaces?
You cant actually have a national monopoly when it comes to ISPs.
Because the federal government has not given permission to one
[ad hominem redacted by pp, 2025-06-08]
In no instance in all human history were two toll bridges erected side by side.
The Iphone is more or less a monopoly in America, especially in certain cities.
Gilette razors has zero competition in europe. Not sure about america.
The EMT….puppy whats your IQ score? The real one? You know in a life and death situation nobody has time to set up and license themselves as a rival business in the same time a person has a heart attack? You think theres going to be a bidding war as the person is dying? Where? How? How would an auction even be organised? Describe it.
LOL
[ad hominem redacted by pp, 2025-06-08]
In no instance in all human history were two toll bridges erected side by side.
LOL! Because toll bridges don’t make enough money to justify the expense, especially since two toll bridges would divide said money.
The Iphone is more or less a monopoly in America, especially in certain cities.
Monopoly is a relative term. If you want to straw-man Rand’s argument you could set the bar low & call 50% of a market a monopoly & make her sound ridiculous, but you learn far more when you steel-man your opponents’s argument and thus define a monopoly as over 90% of market, like what Bill Gates had with operating systems in the 1990s.
The Iphone has nowhere near that kind of dominance among smart phones and smart phones are only one type of phone.
The EMT….puppy whats your IQ score? The real one? You know in a life and death situation nobody has time to set up and license themselves as a rival business in the same time a person has a heart attack? You think theres going to be a bidding war as the person is dying? Where? How? How would an auction even be organised? Describe it.
This is so dumb lol. Obviously you can’t compete for the people who are already dying but if you notice an EMT making bank, you could set up another one next door to cut into their future business, but what you’d likely find is some government regulation preventing you from doing so, making Rand’s point about monopolies being caused by government.
“Because the federal government has not given permission to one”
Naturally, it’s impossible for national ISP monopolies to exist without government intervention. That doesn’t prove the claim national monopolies can only exist with government help. The existence of economies of scale, network effects, and first-mover advantage prove that.
I didn’t watch the video. Does she actually say she’s only referring to national monopolies? That would be weird if so. That’s typically not what people mean when they refer to monopolies.
Maybe just watch from the 6:00 to 13:00 minute mark. She doesn’t explicitly say national monopolies but she’s talking about monopolists who can act like dictators so people who have cornered the market in some really important industry like oil. She’s not talking about some lady who has the only chickens in a small town and thus has a monopoly on selling eggs there.
They don’t’ need permission if there isn’t a government.
If there’s no government than there’s no one to protect your ownership of the ISP other than roaming gangs who then become the defacto government,
Naturally, it’s impossible for national ISP monopolies to exist without government intervention. That doesn’t prove the claim national monopolies can only exist with government help. The existence of economies of scale, network effects, and first-mover advantage prove that.
Not sure if any of these are powerful enough to completely corner the market in a major industry, with the possible exception of Bill Gates who was after Rand’s time
How could we possibly say Gates started a monopoly without government when the government not only already existed but was quite large at the time?
It’s also possible that due to certain necessities of the government (laws, structure, etc.) that correlate with needing the same OS contributed to the monopoly.
In any case there is a huge infrastructure that is nationally/internationally standardized such as electricity, radio, that is probably even required for an OS to exist.
The whole thing is kind of backwards because there will never be “no government” if we have an understanding of what that word means because that probably indicates enough of a society that a government de facto exists.
What I mean is he had no special privilege from government, like say a special permit to manage some public utility.
Hardly. You can monopolize a good or service without state backing if you are the only one who can make it. Walter White had a monopoly on his blue meth, or, at least, he could have had a monopoly on it if he never taught anyone else how to cook it. Why? Because nobody else knew how to cook it! In that case, government interference helped his monopoly, but not in the way you would normally think. If meth were legal in the Breaking Bad universe, some chemical company probably would have applied their R&D department towards copying Heisenberg’s formula.
Before Walter joined the meth scene, Gus Fring had something of a monopoly on high-quality meth simply because no other players in that market had the kind of infrastructure he did, nor were any of them even trying to set up something comparable. Most meth is adulterated trash cooked in the back of an RV by a junkie who does not know the difference between an acid and a base. Iain Banks might have called Fring’s superlab an Outside Context Problem.
My whole life whenever ive debated econ with a libertarian I always get the sinking feeling the libertarian actually lives in a pretend-world of dragons and wizards. Or some sort of video game.
If I say the video game is based on the real world, they say the real world isn’t elegant enough, and the fake video game world is the real deal!
If I start talking about branding, marketing and advertising to puppy hell start to get super sniffy. Neoliberals don’t like admitting the purpose of those things is mind control.
DUH CONSUMERS R RATIONAL YA!
ROBOTS DONT DANCE
Notice the way I never denied Gates is a genius in IQ.
I just don’t use libertarian ‘arguments’ to show it.
I knew he was very intelligent from his SAT. Not his bank account.
There are people much richer than gates ever was, that are way dumber than him.
IQ has a strange relationships to wealth.
I would be deeply inerested to see the relationship between psychopathy and wealth, more than IQ.
There are people much richer than gates ever was, that are way dumber than him
Not when you adjust for effective inflation
IQ has a strange relationships to wealth
No it just has an imperfect relationship with wealth. It’s analogous to the correlation between height and boxing ability. On average all the best boxers have been a few SDs above average in height, but occasionally one of them will be only average height (Mike Tyson). That’s what moderate correlations look like.
I can name 5 or 6 right off the top of my head. Many are alive right now.
In science we look at all the data, we don’t just cherry pick that which confirms are biases:
No it just has an imperfect relationship with wealth. It’s analogous to the correlation between height and boxing ability. On average all the best boxers have been a few SDs above average in height, but occasionally one of them will be only average height (Mike Tyson). That’s what moderate correlations look like.
[redacted by pp, 2025-06-08]. Bi-variable as always.
What it would look like is a different chart depending on different countries, political systems and obviously the comparitive advantage of a country.
Even if you were to do one for just Wall St….where everything is on a screen and theres no excuse for not knowing the data…it would go up to a certain point of strong correlation and beyond that point almost no correlation like Buffet has said a million times.
What it would look like is a different chart depending on different countries, political systems and obviously the comparitive advantage of a country.
We’re talking about the U.S.
Even if you were to do one for just Wall St….where everything is on a screen and theres no excuse for not knowing the data…it would go up to a certain point of strong correlation and beyond that point almost no correlation like Buffet has said a million times.
You’re so boring. Why are you talking about Wall street? They’re not the only people that have incomes. It’s like talking about the correlation between height and boxing success and you say “well we need one chart for Italian boxers in New York” and another chart for ” Hispanic boxers in LA”. SHUT UP and learn how to simplify information instead of obsessing over needless complexity.
You werent talking about the US, you were talking about in general.
If you were just talking about the US, the conversation would be irrelvant and boring and not worth even mentioning.
So i picked Wall street because every neoliberal economist for 50 years in their papers picks Wall St because its a market which has things almost no other markets have:
So when I prove that wall st’s IQ/wealth correlate is not perfect even in the most perfect market situation on planet earth, you can then use a type of cognitive ability, which you don’t have sadly, called inference and assume less perfect exchanges for labour have an even worse IQ/wealth correlate.
Man, I should take photos of all this before you delete your comments.
Because officially you keep denying youre a libertarian even though all your views on economic activity are exactly like Rain Man.
The IQ-income correlation is largely mediated by the IQ-occupation correlation so it’s dumb to look only at people in a specific high IQ occupation because you get a range restriction effect that depresses the correlation
I genuinely think you need social intelligence to understand economics.
Even financial economics.
Certain people with neurodivergences are going to struggle.
Which is why you’re struggling.
pumpkin never pointed out that rand hated the Soviet Union (I will not tell you why, it’s grewsome)
peoples lives were ruined because you had to be forced to be “altruistic” to the state. You had to because it’s your obligation to the collective. Like the government was your family, a very abusive family that brainwashed you.
in that video donahue was taking advantage of her old age. That girl called he a cultists. And ann is kind of crazy mad about that, thought she was a plant (a infiltrator to discredit her like happen at all soviet Russian meetings) Donahue played into that trying to make her look bad.
The thing about God is that she was against brainwashing so she didn’t believe and did not want people to force her to believe. Pill doesn’t understand that libertarians hate being forced to do anything. Making him a stanch libertarian also (against racial integration and other shit he thinks effects him).
the reason Gates made the money he did was because he licenced his software and outsourced development of it. Look up the movie Pirates of silicon valley. The first licence he paid the original developer $50,000 for DOS (disk operating system) made billions of it. He wrote an open letter saying to the computer club software should not be free. Look up the computer they used back then in the club. He then borrowed Steve jobs GUI system jobs was borrowing from xerox and called it windows. Microsoft first office was incorporated in Albuquerque in a hotel room when they sold ibm the DOS they did not have anything until they bought it for the 50 grand.
so lots of reasons gates has money with business decisions and people needed computers. In the past people needed train locomotives. Carnegie melon bought all the suppliers and tracks and made a trust fund.
Pill will tell you if you are a poor farmer who only made 1 million dollars working 50 years you are an evil monopoly but he’s stupid and lives in Ireland with no opportunities to make money controlled by the aristocracy. Americans who moved west were hard working people and pill is just lazy. An rand would be against pill because he would want my grandmother to be poor and altruisticly give the government all the money. Pill believes in stealing just like the people in Soviet Russia where famine was propagandized as good. Many farmers starved to death because they were called the bourgeoisie and there food was taken away and died on mass without seeds to grow new food. Pill is all for that kind of altruism.
I believe class warfare is evil for this reason and is bad to teach kids to identify as such (killing people because they are a different class)
the book about the wizard of Oz tells us the farmers were smart in America and should not be looked down on.
[ad hominem redacted by pp, 2025-06-08]
But on your point about me being a libertarian because im against civil rights….youre right. Not because I want ‘freedom’. But because im against violent, low IQ, schizos living alongside.
Note the way Anime is for civil rights, even though it goes against his childish libertarian dragons and wizards stuff lol.
[ad hominem redacted by pp, 2025-06-08]
everyone should be allowed to vote
pill is against voting rights
because he doesn’t believe everything is equal under the law.
unfair treatment is unconstitutional
thus pill is pro-corruption
Corruption is evil and so is pill
pill would block my right to vote
that is why I believe no one should be prevented from voting
either you believe in the bill of rights or you don’t, you believe everyone has the right to participate or you don’t. No groups right should be taken away because that’s a dictatorship. Pill doesn’t understand Americas foundation principles.
The Bill of Rights was written for land-owning White males, a much more selected population.
I think the next step is to give 17, 16, 15 year olds, and so on the right. Then cetaceans.
the process is adaptable
and why the people are in charge of forming the government
–
children should not serve in the military
and I believe child labor laws should protect children
so I guess if you don’t believe in those things you would need to change the laws and we already have ways to do that.
certainly I won’t vote to make my relatives child soldiers
It’s difficult to empirically validate this because there aren’t actually any examples of national monopolies that existed without any “help” from the government simply because for most of civilized human history, there has been a state.
That said, the emergence of states and national militaries, could be an example of natural large monopolies existing. There is no doubt they can exist naturally in my mind, but the lack of examples emboldens Libertarian stupidity.
I get it. Being a Darwinist gives you an inclination to believe Darwinist narratives about economics and human behavior. I thought the same thing…when I was like 20. But when you start to educate yourself about the complexities of macroeconomics this idea that everything would work out perfectly fine if rich people were just allowed to do whatever they want starts to sound like an autistic fairytale.
I have said in the past if everyone had a large IQ and good intentions then maybe it could work, but we don’t, and won’t ever, live in that society.
I’m not endorsing libertarianism, only the idea that no one with an IQ below 150 can have a super monopoly without government help
I just listed 3 examples above of really basic things:
I could literally list another 200 just based on fluid verbal IQ ability.
And none of them are ‘legally enforced or mandated’ like patents or ‘Intellectual property’ which Ayn Rand was for.
Gillette never had more than 70% of the global razor market. The other examples are not specific companies
Well you keep deleting my responses so I guess thats the end of the debate
There’s nothing to debate. You’re simply not intelligent enough to understand Rand’s ideas. Get a job working with your hands.
It’s difficult to empirically validate this because there aren’t actually any examples of national monopolies that existed without any “help” from the government simply because for most of civilized human history, there has been a state.
But there have been millions of businesses that did not get special help from the state.
That said, the emergence of states and national militaries, could be an example of natural large monopolies existing.
Well the fact that your only example is government kind of makes Rand’s point that you need government to have a monopoly
There is no doubt they can exist naturally in my mind, but the lack of examples emboldens Libertarian stupidity.
The idea is libertarian in the sense that it’s a criticism of government but also socialist in that it’s a criticism of the rich, in that she’s saying many of the richest people needed government help & thus did not pull themselves up by their boot straps.
“But there have been millions of businesses that did not get special help from the state.”
Right, but that still doesn’t prove that the government is the reason monopolies can exist. It’s also just as likely that governments tear monopolies down. They do it all the time.
“Well the fact that your only example is government kind of makes Rand’s point that you need government to have a monopoly”
Well a government is more than just a military. Even if these private militaries that ISP would supposedly need to protect their business would almost always lead to the formation of a pseudo government wouldn’t that then prove that that the libertarian paradise of anarcho capitalism is just a pipe dream?
After chatting with Chat GPT, I discovered that there have been only four companies that achieved 95%+ global market share WITHOUT GOVERNMENT SUPPORT: Microsoft (from 1995 to 2005), Adobe (in the 2000s) GoPro (2012 to 2015) & Google (mid 2010s to today). But all of these cases are long after Rand’s Donahue appearance so perhaps her statement made sense in her time, but no longer makes sense today because technology allows some companies to really dominate in ways they couldn’t in the past.
Friendly reminder that Trump REFUSED to deploy the national guard when his supporters attacked the capitol after he LOST a fair election.
I hope the protestors dox every single ICE agent.
I hope they dox the ICE agents too and see what happens on the street.
We have more and more illegals every year and NOTHING gets better. All prices GO UP.
What the fuck do you think they’re contributing you braindead self-hating half-White?
If the idea is to have enough illegals that they forcefully accelerate and take our politicians and bankers and billionaires out, you wouldn’t be a socdem or whatever.
Aren’t you like fucking 20?
How could you possibly have any idea whether life has gotten better or not. You’re literally just now starting adulthood. You’re just regurgitating shit that you hear online because you’re a brainwashed retard.
What exactly do you think getting rid of illegals is going to fix?
Let’s be clear. You don’t actually give a shit about helping people or making peoples lives easier. You just get angry when you see people who look different than you out in public.
im between you and RRs age.
So once again you have no argument but to deflect and accuse me of racism?
you ever think people form stereotypes AFTER getting experience?
i know with your special mixed race parentage you probably are both genetically and culturally unlikely to ever form those stereotypes as a result of genotype or physiogomy, but it’s very possible or else i would even care to debate it. As I said I used to be as nonracist as your average libtard and racism doesn’t come that naturally to me in the first place. I have many mixed race family members so it is not about a predisposition to racist thought, and certainly isn’t something i learned by watching media.
I was really late to the JQ as well and still debate the exact nature of the problem.
Just give the argument if others sake.
Talk about deflection. Why don’t you answer my fucking question?
Do you even have a coherent argument for why these deportations are necessary?
Jesus, what a faggot you are. Make sure your GF doesn’t cuck you in between your rape roleplay with her.
Anyway, it will set a precedent that we are not for sale. That we want to preserve a specific culture. That our culture is better than others. That laws actually matter and there is a meaning to following them. We could preserve our culture and high-trust society WAY more easily, and not go on this steady trajectory of reliance on centralization and surveillance and a technocracy. We won’t have to become like a more advanced version of Brazil. We don’t have to lock up items in stores. Small businesses might thrive, etc.
Obviously all of these depend on other factors, but the point is YOUR IDEOLOGY IS LITERALLY LEADING TO A SHITHOLE COUNTRY and you have no defense besides “if we just had a few more illegals and Whites let themselves get fucked even harder are country would reach peak Liberal Democracy!”
Are you such a fucking TikTok rotted mind that you can’t draw simple conclusions and have to have everything spelled out for you? Luckily you’re not the only one reading this because it’s wasted on you.
” Make sure your GF doesn’t cuck you”
The projection is insane. You can always tell people’s darkest insecurities by their favorite insults.
“Anyway, it will set a precedent that we are not for sale.”
How are we for sale? What the hell are you talking about? What does this have to do with immigration?
“That laws actually matter and there is a meaning to following them.”
I agree. We should speed up the immigration process by hiring more asylum judges.
“We could preserve our culture and high-trust society WAY more easily, and not go on this steady trajectory of reliance on centralization and surveillance and a technocracy.”
What the fuck are you talking about. What does any of this have to do with immigration. I’ll wait.
“We won’t have to become like a more advanced version of Brazil.”
Why is that bad. I’ll wait.
“We don’t have to lock up items in stores. “
WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH IMMIGRATION.
“Small businesses might thrive”
WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH IMMIGRATION.
“YOUR IDEOLOGY IS LITERALLY LEADING TO A SHITHOLE COUNTRY”
PROVE IT!
We’re not the ones defunding education, gutting the federal government, destroying the middle class, giving tax cuts to the rich, destroying the planet, committing human rights atrocities, etc.
RELIGIOUS WHITE PEOPLE HAVE RUINED AMERICA.
“have to have everything spelled out for you”
SHUT THE FUCK UP. You literally have no ability to think for yourself. You have no original thoughts, you cannot give a coherent rationale behind your beliefs, and you’re an immoral piece of garbage.
Trump just said LA is being invaded by Mexico and needs to be ‘liberated’. Hahaha.
IDF ordered to stop Gaza-bound aid ship carrying Greta Thunberg | Israel-Gaza war | The Guardian
Wow. Finally someone with autism does some good in the world. Well done Greta.
Although I would bet my house shes a libertarian on econ lol
PP, I totally concur in estimating Megan Kelly IQ at 125 and her looks at 135 BQ. If correlation IQ and BQ would be 0, it would be a 1 in 2000 combined level. As it is around 20%, so it’s 1 in 1400.
the exact combination would be extremely rare around 1 in 75 000. But obviously you only a range of 6 points, then it makes it more frequent around 1 in 500.
so I estimated Megan Kelly IQ and BQ for news equivalent to a 145 professional quotient based on 2 components. But then you have her warm voice, her attitude and demeanor, her cultural background and lots of qualities that make her a one in a million asset for anchoring news for a public with an average 107 IQ.
pill is an angry inbred man
libertarian
neoliberal
autistic
He’d call anyone these names not because it’s truly what that person is but because he believes he is superior to everyone else.
superiority complex is formed as a defense mechanism where you don’t actually care what others are or are good at, you are better in every way possible just because, that way you don’t be able to admit any faults in yourself and push them all onto other people.
pill: person x is inferior so I have the right to say anything about them even if not true.
this protects his ego to believe he can put down anyone he wants to
automatically no one is better than pill in pills mind, he can do to them whatever he wants he believes. (Fucking Evil)
the whole point of being a libertarian is to prevent scum like pill from being dictator over you.
The government can always be corrupted by people like pill and why the Americans decided to structure it to not let people like pill get into power.
pill in fact is pro aristocracy
believes superior people have the right to rape and pillage the peasantry and why he wishes to be “superior”.
money can corrupt the system but it gets worse when people like pill are there to bolster it.
pill will never admit I am smart enough to understand because he’s corrupt
Hidden agenda + self interests + immoral person = corruption
Pill denying this is insane.
But it’s his agenda against me.
You know why I have to take medications.
Because one doctor exists in my area and my insurance will not pay for the trip to a medical facility with QEEG
Pill will call that corruption but in reality it’s about the distribution mug talks about. You know how hard it is to train low IQ people to operate the equipment? Really really hard because it’s not like driving or fixing a car. High level mathematics are involved you need a licence and you need to understand neuroscience.
It would be as cheap as video games but it’s medical so you cannot sell it as a product where people can get hurt so the people making laws don’t understand the science and stuff and people with low IQ could abuse the technology. Only doctors are allowed to help people and you cannot get a degree without having a high IQ making the supply of doctors limited.
This no insurance will pay for QEEG as it’s hard for doctors to manufacture them in research labs and is not it’s own industry yet.
Soon it will be as available as touch screen phones but only when a new industry forms as a critical mass market emerges.
To pill you need violence to “liberate”the technology. But that’s as dumb as using violence to liberate smartphones to the masses.
Holy fuck. I was watching Piers Morgans stupid show and I saw a couple retards call these other two guys they were debating “gaytheists.”……
Believing in Santa Claus for adults will never be cool, masculine intelligent, or whatever. So, stop fucking trying.
I’m so sick of this shit. Andrew Wilson can’t even open a fucking jar of olives and he actually thinks he’s a masculine person. The way these new age cuckservatives debate is so cringey and gay. These new guys like Dean, Parker, and whoever need to stop trying to use the moral Highground as a fucking argument. Or if you do that, don’t sound like a bitch in the process.
If Destiny wasn’t a literal cuck who did more than just “debate leftists” he’d be my go-to guy.
I can’t start live-streaming debates, ill die of a fucking heart attack.
the problem is everyone with your view is either literally or societally a cuck, so you’ll never have bull representation with your incoherent beliefs.
but i agree that God is definitely not like Santa Claus, as evident by literally every wrong and imperfect thing in the world.
No, the problem is that we’ve had dysgenic selection for fucking morons who think testosterone is when loud and stupid.
There was a fucking time when liberalism and masculinity were not mutually exclusive.
This may be difficult for Bruno to understand but as a person who might be officially 107 (myself) I don’t know if he fully grasps what the mentality is like.
I was good at school but teachers ignored me. I graduated and was completely unprepared for college. What I discovered is that all you need to be successful is to be able to do paperwork and put things together. So when you specialize all you need is average memory and speed.
i had more abstract ideas yet was slow
i understood concepts highly advanced in a creative way yet could not learn computer programming.
i had no way of knowing certain skills other kids had you needed for STEM fields.
all I had was tv and picture books
Average people can easily memorize a procedure and do it over and over again. This rote learning is why society functions. Yet coming up with the ideas is hardest without some higher insights.
I was never told what a kernel was at school, I never had books explaining the CPU beyond the real simple non informative diagram. But sometimes I did find out these things existed. And I would imagine what they could do. I haven’t had the money to buy real books where you get to understand what’s really going on.
This is why the general public is often just being informed by what they are capable of memorizing and not always about different ways of thinking. So those not able to pass these tests are excluded from certain venue’s of production and literature. Is why the employer has all the power to determine through education who goes where.
to assemble a product then requires no effort at all depending on the level of which is needed to assemble it, making production about the complexity of memorization needed.
no one highers a person like me because I cannot remember the steps required to do the work.
i have no economic utility then
based on the model of production
and is why I am on food assistance
–
by this I would say average people don’t be creative in areas they can just copy.
and also you don’t need creativity is areas you can just calculate.
but copying and calculating is higher utility this serves as the economic force behind the factory school model. This allows the most production but not the distribution of resources as effectively. And is why you need busy work.
i was unable to sustain the busy work outside a controlled highschool environment and was put on assistance.
peepee doesn’t like it when you call her a satanist, because she is a satanist. satanists don’t like it when you call them satanists. satanists try to get other pipo to be satanists and this is much more difficult if pipo know they’re satanists.
^^every accusation is a confession
Do you have any clue why ayn rand was against stealing from the productive class?
She was a woman who was extremely intelligent and proud and society don’t like those kind women.
she was not that nice a person but then you would need to understand what she was fighting against:
“resentfulness”
Bro, who cares if someone’s a fucking Satanist it’s worse being Christian.
Pumpkin, what IQ does one need to write a book over 1,000 pages long?
–
When you told gazir to test figure weights and vocabulary what did you mean by that.
(130 fw + 120 vocab)/2 = 125
how would you know this about me in a quick interview?
Does performance IQ exist on the WAIS 5 ?
my performance is low on the older tests
peepee: i like rand because the only excuse anyone has for not being rich is racism. so if no racism no excuse.
^^^NEXT LEVEL RETARDED^^^
Actually as a libertarian Rand agreed with you & pill that affirmative action is wrong because it’s government interference in the free market
pill confuses civil rights with affirmative action.
his “next level retardation” thinks only certain people have voting rights and unfair treatment under the law should be promoted.
bussing people hundreds of miles is not what it’s about.
its about the right to fairly participate (like how gerrymandering has been pulled constitutionally unfair)
but he cannot distinguish the two
by pills logic all Irish people should take intentionally designed unfair IQ tests to vote just because “Irish” because discrimination is good and most people don’t like them. (That is stupid and shouldn’t be done)
Anyways, since im banned from talking about libertarianism, anyone notice the way the media is not reporting the violence in LA?
90% of the coverage is the soldiers and not the riots.
Jews are intelligent.
You need to provide evidence Jews are behind the biased coverage. I agree they probably are but you need evidence or it’s just disgusting antisemitism
Its interesting that libertarians are also for open borders (except israel?!). Am I allowed say that puppy?
I love how all these cuckservatives are acting like we should give a fuck that people are hurting ICE That’s what they fucking deserve.
Yeah I’m not going to ever respond to Melo if he’s going to act like a complete psycho with no principle of charity.
Suffice to say he is a typical liberal who as it has been shown, can’t understand conservative positions (with the opposite not being true). I can’t continue commenting here with this so I guess Philosopher is having to hold the fort.
Shut up. You can’t even answer simple fucking questions or give coherent rationale behind your beliefs.
IM WAITING
PP, could you please let me have a guest post in which I demolish a passage from Atlas Shrugged?
Sure
I will try to have it done by this time tomorrow
Puppy doesnt like criticism of Ayn Rand Ganzir.
I do if it’s intelligent
Guy literally has a nog beating a White man (who freed the slaves and never asked for them) and he expects that I’m going to ever take him seriously or read his bullshit. Good luck in life, I hope you figure out your whole liberal pluralism ideology and equity propaganda can not be correct for fairly basic reasons.
Holy fuck he doesn’t even know what my profile picture is. What a fucking retard.
IT’S KENDRICK WHIPPING DRAKE
Oh yeah, whites never wanted slaves? Then why the fuck did you take them? So much for that white education system.
Nobody is more pro slavery than Melo. If Melo wanted to be anti establishment, he’d be bashing jews. Instead he bashes whatever CNN says.
is why I stay out of such debates
practically nothing to do with the blog topics of IQ biology chemistry neuroscience or physics.
science is not about hateful ideology
Politics is stupid, corrupts everything
education is not supposed to brainwash but to inform
So I clicked on Fox NEws website and theyre showing the riots, but [redacted by pp, June 11, 2025]
Anyways, why is |Rupert Murdoch showing hostility to illegals. He was for open borders until 2016. One of the reasons Fox opposed trump then was because trump bashed immigrants.
Murdoch, is intensely neoliberal. I would even argue Murdoch wanted open borders more than even most dem politicians.
and he’s been married 6 times, once to a chinawoman.
so he’s a satanist.
Yeah one of the main reasons trump is maybe hugging neoliberals so hard with his ridiculous budget is because they despise his immigration (and tariff) policies.
Its the same with Gaza and the neocons. Give them gaza and stop an invasion of Iran.
Its a weird strat. Trump would be the type of guy that would cut the baby in two to make both mothers happy in the tale of Solomon.
What a second? Did Anime just say the reason blacks suffered discrimination was the government? And not the people in the south? Hahaha. Good old libertarian stand up comedy.
Although seriously, the civil rights act should be repealed immediately and the supreme court should reinstate their earlier correct ruling of plessy v ferguson which they ‘overruled’ because law has no meaning for [redacted by pp, 25-06-11] swank.
Still spittin’ facts. They’re a lawless subspecies and insofar as they can have laws, they need to be separated from the rest due to the nature of the physical force needed to keep each other in line. Proof of their nature is found in Nigerian scammers. We should cut off contact (and yes, that includes mineral mines).
Separate but equal, but not really equal either (as that would be like saying men need tampons as well as women).
Jesus christ what a fucking pussy
Elon Musk issues groveling apology to Trump saying that his posts ‘went too far’
I’m sick of this shit.
So embarrassing. This freak is too stupid to be rich & he’s ruining my theory that rich people are smart. I hope Trump cancels all his government contracts, reopens all the investigations into his companies, deports him back to South Africa and threatens any person or country that does business with him
One of the few people who actually has the power to stand up to that fat orange retard and he just throws it all away.
Bad weak to be half-brown?
I’m 100% pro slavery as long as it’s white women as sex slaves. We’ll just cull the men after.
I take that back. We won’t cull the men.
We’ll just make them watch us defile their wives and daughters as they slowly starve to death. They’ll only be good to help produce more white women to force our genetics on.
I’ll force every Christian pastor to watch his wife be slutted out to BBC.
look at this projection because his gf (if she still exists) made him insecure by making him indulge in her rape fetish and now he has to deny that our modern culture isn’t satanic and going to hell.
But just know that you’re a broken rape victim, and you can accept it. Maybe someday you’ll understand if you actually try to raise children
Hahaha this guy hates half his family pretty deranged.
I know. Your comments buckbroke him so much he actively hates half of what he is. It’s possible to be liberal and mentally ill. Also whenever he comments I’m going to ignore it. There’s literally useful he could say at this point that hasn’t had the well-poisoned.
It’s actually hilarious that this is exactly the point: When race is involved, and it might be assumed that another race favors their own race (as Melo does with me, which is true) there is no “debating” in good faith. However, what makes this worse is that Whites are actually the most capable of it according to data. Furthermore, this is between equals, which we know races are not.
So there is no racial equality or equity possible, since there isn’t even individual equality and equity (why communism doesn’t work pt.20) except for in White countries, and it ends up with them being taken over by parasites.
It just doesn’t work.
he needs to go all the way and hate his whole family and himself.
26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
If you read Plessy v Ferguson. Its bulletproof.
Its totally in sync with what the people who wrote the 14th amendment wanted. We know because they wrote letters, diaries and other laws around the same time.
The civil rights act would have been an abomination to Lincoln.
You know, Im a bit weird but I find the chancellor Rachel Reeves kind of good looking. Not sexy duh. But kind of pleasent looking.
She reminds me of Amy Coney Barret on the USA supreme court. Refined looking. Not someone I’d bang or anything.
When [redacted by pp, June 11, 2025] reinterpreted the 14th to mean absolute equality or even affirmative action, that was the end of the USA in my opinion. If you follow that dark road, you open yourself up to paedo rights and bestiality as public acts.
Exactly! People don’t understand how meaningless the world is becoming and how centralized and controlled our actions are becoming because they’re desensitized to it.
I think its the few people like us, who are intelligent, observant, and yet not willing to indulge in the cancerous ideologies and entertainment that have to save the world from this spreading cultural necrosis.
We were put here to do that, as good-looking White men. It’s our burden again. Schizophrenia or not, you’re a good person deep down, I know.
Donald Trump received a phone call from Elon Musk late on Monday before the billionaire expressed regret over some of the posts he made on social media last week, according to the New York Times (paywall), citing three people briefed on the call.
Musk grovelling to trump is stomach turning. The guy is the richest person in the world are here he is begging forigveness when trump publicly didnt want an apology.
If Musk was an ashkenazim he would translate the money into real power. But because musk is a bit on the spectrum hes just doing campaign donations. Durrr!
President Donald Trump declared on Tuesday that the Pentagon will reinstate the names of seven military bases previously named after Confederate leaders,
Thank you president trump for respecting veterans and patriots and those the fought the good fight.
True, the confederates were forced into owning slaves so that the poor third world blacks on the ships that semitic peoples (who then still owned most of the slaves in the US) brought to us. Then they were forced to fight for the economy they didn’t create because they thought it was the key to their survival, but mostly for the right of sovereignty.
They truly ruin everything every single time, high IQ and openness or not.
Now it’s remigration or extermination. Sad it has to come to this!
Oh, those poor white people forced to own other humans as property.
😥
Not even American and he’s bowing down like a clown. Lmao
Melo I’m literally ignoring your comments you moron. Go back to using fake accounts like the shrimpy bitch you are and maybe I’ll accidentally see them and the Christian White man will finally give you your precious Gold Star.
That’s right run away you little bitch.
I bet it infuriates you that a non-white mongrel has a higher IQ than you.
teleport, read pipo’s minds, etc….
NO!
there’s a difference between believing, not believing, and disbelieving.
AND 90+% of jesus’s miracles were medical.
just like those of recent saints.
the vatican is very scrupulous about this shit.
but at the same time all a medical miracle means is that there is no explanation for why the patient recovered.
Nobody fucking cares about religion.
??
Objectuively, youre more religious than even Mugabe which is saying something
You think naming a millitary fort after Al sharpton or Chris Rock is a great idea.
I was going to give President Trump a C based on his bs budget and personal corruption. But cometh the hour, cometh the man!!
Im pgrading him to an A based on his effort to fight the invaders that have pillaged LA. They are literally waving Mexican flags everywhere lol. How is this not an act of war? Multiple cities under attack.
The only available step now is for the president to invoke the insurrection act and….do the deed. Puppy wont let me explicitly say it, but it must be done. [redacted by June 12, 2025]
Yep, it’s quite a surprise. Honestly, while Trump often disappoints, it’s true that he’s great on his feet. So all the great things he does happen to be surprising like this. And the 50 or so South African refugees he invited before he showed the SA president a video about the White Farmer genocide in his genetically inferior ruled country.
Hopefully trump forces all the roads, bridges, libraries etc to go back to the official names given following Reconstruction. When Trump said whether they were going to name a fort after Al Sharpton I burst out laughing. But, more seriously, they actually wanted to.
Maybe Fort Oprah would have been on the cards. Or the .Golden Gate Oprah Winfrey Bridge’. ‘Magic Negro Boulevard’. Etc Etc
[redacted by pp, June 12, 2025]
My personal opinion on the Civil War?
They should have let the south secede. The south and the north have nothing in common economically, socially, culturally, legally to this very day. Its always been a shotgun marriage.
This is possibly the most important moment in trumps entire 2 terms. He has to stay strong because the neocons are going to pile on the pressure to let the immigrants run riot.
Well theres a loophole to the insurrection act, if trump doesnt want to go that far. He can hire mercs.
Im sure plenty of J6 militia would sign up in 10 minutes, maybe even for minimum wage.
Does Mugabe literally just get drunk and rant about Christianity?
Is he autistic?
Holy shit these protests are amazing.
And polls just dropped showing while most people don’t agree with the rioting, the vast majority think Trump is taking his deportations too far. Immigration used to be his strongest metric and now that’s sinking too. Most people disagree with deploying national guard or the marines, and think these deportations will make the economy much weaker.
Biden was doing WAY better around this time during his presidency.
Fake [redacted by pp, 25-06-12] polls as usual. The same polls say americans love open borders and open borders Biden was polling at 34% approval.
Remember guys, this is an emergency. Any illegal, any time: https://www.ice.gov/contact
ICE tip reporting by phone
U.S. and Canada: (866) 347-2423
Other Countries Across the Globe: (802) 872-6199
TTY for hearing impaired only: (802) 872-6196
I’ve already made it a contact in my phone.
You can use it in Canada and other countries guys.
Thanks Lurker. I’ll add this to my phone. Sharing now on facebook and linkedin.
Oh god his cuck level is over 9000!!!!!
Not really, I’m not the one for a centralized corporate and banker techocracy like you.
I actually don’t like modern police or the armed forces but sometimes they do good things, like forcefully restraining insolent genetic and more inferiors
I’m actually a technological primitivist. But you’d know that if your IQ was above 50.
Nothing you do helps advance technological primitivism.
Plus, it’s not about being primitive it’s about being de-centralized.
If we’re going to be pedantic let’s go all the way.
Pete Hegseth just openly said he wouldnt abide by a court ruling to withdraw troops!
He’s such a bad politician. Hes supposed to say he would and eventually it would have went to the surpreme court anyway, which would almost certainly rule that the president can control the border.