Leftists plan to label misogyny or conservatism as a terrorist ideology, banning you from using paypal/amazon/banking

[NoCopeNoHope]

The judiciary has the right to strip you of all of your liberties, and consequently has the obligation to afford you all the protections that you are entitled to. HR does not.

Here is what will happen. You say something bad. It doesn't even need to be at work. You are then fired from your job. So you seek another employer, but social media has made you famous and depending on the industry, there may be a "no hire list". You are now a social pariah, so you must either immigrate or some how find an employer who acts like its 2000. While this is happening, you forced to spend money and time trying to keep yourself afloat financially. So just like violating a felony law, you bring tremendous strain upon yourself in a "free" society.

The "code of conduct" becomes the new standard for speech to participate in society, not the law.

So the end result is the the same, minus imprisonment.

 

[Fat Link]

Trump doesn't have the right to strike down Section 230 of the CDA, that lies with the federal courts.

If anything, Trump striking down Section 230 would worsen censorship, as social media platforms would no longer be immune to civil liability for content hosted there.

In one of his videos (sadly I forget which one) Tim posted a solution that would work for everyone ie we’d be able to get back on the big tech platforms and libtards would still be able to create their hug boxes on them and be away from us if they so chose as well we would have that option as well but the point with Tim’s idea is that we would be back and thus able to influence normal people and fence sitters to not go the libtard way.

In anycase though I’d be all for social media being completely destroyed if we can’t be a part of it and it’s just going to be a huge leftist echo chamber until the end of time.

What tears? They control every major corporation, bank, media, university etc. They're tearing down statues everywhere, setting shit on fire, assaulting people and no one is doing shit to stop them.

When they lose the election in November.

Well they believe it’s a legitimate contest anyway as opposed to a Jew pre selected affair so they’ll be emotionally crushed when Crazy Joe “loses”.

The going wisdom at the moment is that Trump/Jew’s are allowing all the chaos so people practically have to beg Trump to restore law and order and in this way cucks can’t claim that he’s a dictator if he had smashed their CHAZ and nigger rioting outright.

 

[mylifeistrash]

So what sounds capitalist to you? A system where the government maintains direct ownership of profit-making entities? Are you sure about that?

if the gov / fed is picking winners and losers via giving them money via interest free loans, buying corporate bonds, ETFs via blackrock and the other parts of the gov are buying their services,

then yeah, there's no capitalism involved.

It's all just gov entities shuffling money around.

 

[PPEcel]

Here is what will happen. You say something bad. It doesn't even need to be at work. You are then fired from your job. So you seek another employer, but social media has made you famous and depending on the industry, there may be a "no hire list". You are now a social pariah, so you must either immigrate or some how find an employer who acts like its 2000. While this is happening, you forced to spend money and time trying to keep yourself afloat financially. So just like violating a felony law, you bring tremendous strain upon yourself in a "free" society.

The "code of conduct" becomes the new standard for speech to participate in society, not the law.

So the end result is the the same, minus imprisonment.

Don't see how this is a significant issue. No one is obligated to employ you.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

Don't see how this is a significant issue. No one is obligated to employ you.

Have fun when your parents are targeted for your postings on this site then.

 

[PPEcel]

Have fun when your parents are targeted for your postings on this site then.

What is your solution, exactly? Do you want to legally prevent employers from firing a disruptive employee?

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

What is your solution, exactly? Do you want to legally prevent employers from firing a disruptive employee?

What is "disruptive"? I want it defined in the law to prevent politically motivated firings. An employee shouldn't be fired for things they say if it doesn't explicitly break the law. The employer must prove that the person is disruptive at work.

 

[mylifeistrash]

What is your solution, exactly? Do you want to legally prevent employers from firing a disruptive employee?

fed reserve allows payments directly between banks like other countries do, so you can bypass via or has guidelines for ba nks to not cancel customers based on political shit etc

or just bank directly with the gov

then other sites / apps can compete without getting their bank pulled

 

[Gymcelled]

In one of his videos (sadly I forget which one) Tim posted a solution that would work for everyone ie we’d be able to get back on the big tech platforms and libtards would still be able to create their hug boxes on them and be away from us if they so chose as well we would have that option as well but the point with Tim’s idea is that we would be back and thus able to influence normal people and fence sitters to not go the libtard way.

In anycase though I’d be all for social media being completely destroyed if we can’t be a part of it and it’s just going to be a huge leftist echo chamber until the end of time.

When they lose the election in November.

Well they believe it’s a legitimate contest anyway as opposed to a Jew pre selected affair so they’ll be emotionally crushed when Crazy Joe “loses”.

The going wisdom at the moment is that Trump/Jew’s are allowing all the chaos so people practically have to beg Trump to restore law and order and in this way cucks can’t claim that he’s a dictator if he had smashed their CHAZ and nigger rioting outright.

The election means nothing anyway. Trump hasn't been able to stop shit and is donating 40 billions to israel

 

[PPEcel]

What is "disruptive"? I want it defined in the law to prevent politically motivated firings. An employee shouldn't be fired for things they say if it doesn't explicitly break the law. The employer must prove that the person is disruptive at work.

"Disruptive" includes bringing disrepute to the company, so under that pretense, an employer can govern speech outside work.

Let's say I own a cafe, and a barista that I employ makes a series of explicitly racist (but legal) social media posts. In order to avoid her, all of my black customers choose to visit my competitors across the street instead. My revenues take a hit. Am I obligated to continue hiring her?

Aside from that, no bigot can reasonably expect to serve to in a management or executive position -- that would expose the company to a great deal of liability.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

My revenues take a hit. Am I obligated to continue hiring her?

Is saying "nigger" against the law? Why limit it to racism? Why not anything that might offend culturally protected groups?

So yes. You need to prove she is disruptive or make saying "nigger" illegal. And it must be bilateral. So a woman can get fired for saying "kill all men" just like a man would get fired for saying "kill all women".

 

[Gymcelled]

Is saying "nigger" against the law? Why limit it to racism? Why not anything that might offend culturally protected groups?

So yes. You need to prove she is disruptive or make saying "nigger" illegal. And it must be bilateral. So a woman can get fired for saying "kill all men" just like a man would get fired for saying "kill all women".

That'll never happen tho. It's always been one sided. But agree it should be 100% censorship or 0% censorship, none of this preferential bullshit

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

That'll never happen tho. It's always been one sided. But agree it should be 100% censorship or 0% censorship, none of this preferential bullshit

The point is here is that we don't live in a free society, so we shouldn't believe as such. The law is at best a rubber stamp for commonly held cultural norms.

To continue this line of argument. PPE mentions "bringing the company disrepute". That disrepute is a function of broadly held culturally held values.

 

[Fat Link]

The election means nothing anyway. Trump hasn't been able to stop shit and is donating 40 billions to israel

Scott Roberts seems to think the Trump presidency is a strategic move by Jews to use Trump as a kind of cypher (I think the word is?) whereby Trump’s presidency will be used to fill the fill nigs and self hating whites (race traitors) with far more misplaced anger and rage for the white race than they already were programmed/brainwashed by Jews to have to begin with.

Then whenever they decide to put a Dem back in the presidential puppet’s chair they’ll then be able to use all that pent up rage to go after/attack whites even more ferociously than they’ve been doing now.

So what this has got me thinking is that Thomas Chittum’s prediction may be only a little off meaning the full blown second US civil war probably won’t kick off in 2020 but rather sometime in the next Democrat puppet’s term.

 

[Smitty]

"Disruptive" includes bringing disrepute to the company, so under that pretense, an employer can govern speech outside work.

Let's say I own a cafe, and a barista that I employ makes a series of explicitly racist (but legal) social media posts. In order to avoid her, all of my black customers choose to visit my competitors across the street instead. My revenues take a hit. Am I obligated to continue hiring her?

This isnt about your imaginary barista but multi national corporations exerting political control through the pretext of economic freedom, there is no reason to asume an IT or middle managment guy would "damage" the business of his employer by stating his opinion, this is just appeasment of virtual lynch mobs and nihilistic agendas and you try to sell it as a case of economic liberty, liberal dumbass.
You especially are going to be affected by this the most of anybody on this forum with your business/law degree and ugly face,.

Scott Roberts seems to think the Trump presidency is a strategic move by Jews to use Trump as a kind of cypher (I think the word is?) whereby Trump’s presidency will be used to fill the fill nigs and self hating whites (race traitors) with far more misplaced anger and rage for the white race than they already were programmed/brainwashed by Jews to have to begin with.

Then whenever they decide to put a Dem back in the presidential puppet’s chair they’ll then be able to use all that pent up rage to go after/attack whites even more ferociously than they’ve been doing now.

So what this has got me thinking is that Thomas Chittum’s prediction may be only a little off meaning the full blown second US civil war probably won’t kick off in 2020 but rather sometime in the next Democrat puppet’s term.

Scott Roberts is a subversive snake who is trying to break the last line of trust between "whites" and the government so he can profit of the chaos, or so he thinks. How is this demagogy not spreading self hate under whites?

 

[PPEcel]

Is saying "nigger" against the law? Why limit it to racism? Why not anything that might offend culturally protected groups?

So yes. You need to prove she is disruptive or make saying "nigger" illegal. And it must be bilateral. So a woman can get fired for saying "kill all men" just like a man would get fired for saying "kill all women".

My example isn't limited to racism. Racism isn't the point; my business' reputational and financial loss is.

I will give another example. Let's say I own another cafe. The barista in question, instead of being racist, is a foid who writes a long post about how much she hates shorter, unattractive men. She hates having to deal with subhuman customers. Men who are nerdy, bookish, and unathletic, as far as she is concerned, are cockroaches who should never reproduce. The post goes viral.

This cafe, however, is located next to an engineering school. In order to avoid her, some of my customers -- nerdy, bookish, and unathletic men -- visit one of my competitors instead. I lose money.

No, I don't think an employee's speech should be explicitly illegal before an employer has the right to fire her. As far as I'm concerned, bringing the company into disrepute constitutes disruptive behaviour.

That'll never happen tho. It's always been one sided. But agree it should be 100% censorship or 0% censorship, none of this preferential bullshit

It can happen.

I wrote a post a week or two ago about a Harvard grad who lost her job after joking about stabbing conservatives.

https://incels.is/threads/a-female-...g-individuals-who-say-all-lives-matter.219237

This isnt about your imaginary barista but multi national corporations exerting political control through the pretext of economic freedom, there is no reason to asume an IT or middle managment guy would "damage" the business of his employer by stating his opinion, this is just appeasment of virtual lynch mobs and nihilistic agendas and you try to sell it as a case of economic liberty, liberal dumbass.
You especially are going to be affected by this the most of anybody on this forum with your business/law degree and ugly face,.

I'm not studying business/law.

And this is about economic liberty. I suppose that doesn't concern two-thirds of our user base, though, since they're either NEETs or hopping from one minimum wage gig to another.

 

[Smitty]

The social and political situation in USA is much more worse than European one, at least here we still don't have tranny kids or mass-rioting blacks for example, or no-penalty for foids who accuse someone of a fake rape. Here is still possible to rebuild something, in USA all hope is lost imho.

Dude the second largest political faction in Italy is literary the communist party and in London, Paris and Germany blacks have been rioting for weeks. Europe is fucked and the normies here are all brainwashed leftshitters.

I'm not studying business/law.

And this is about economic liberty. I suppose that doesn't concern two-thirds of our user base, though, since they're either NEETs or hopping from one minimum wage gig to another.

You shouldnt bee too smug about it, upper middle class yuppies will be hit by automation the hardest and as a professional you are the most likely to be affected by a twitter lynch mob, nobody gives a shit about some NEET or warehouse worker yet apparently they are the ones advocating employee safety even though its in your interest, honk honk.

 

[Gymcelled]

My example isn't limited to racism. Racism isn't the point; my business' reputational and financial loss is.

I will give another example. Let's say I own another cafe. The barista in question, instead of being racist, is a foid who writes a long post about how much she hates shorter, unattractive men. She hates having to deal with subhuman customers. Men who are nerdy, bookish, and unathletic, as far as she is concerned, are cockroaches who should never reproduce. The post goes viral.

This cafe, however, is located next to an engineering school. In order to avoid her, some of my customers -- nerdy, bookish, and unathletic men -- visit one of my competitors instead. I lose money.

No, I don't think an employee's speech should be explicitly illegal before an employer has the right to fire her. As far as I'm concerned, bringing the company into disrepute constitutes disruptive behaviour.


It can happen.

I wrote a post a week or two ago about a Harvard grad who lost her job after joking about stabbing conservatives.

https://incels.is/threads/a-female-...g-individuals-who-say-all-lives-matter.219237

I'm not studying business/law.

And this is about economic liberty. I suppose that doesn't concern two-thirds of our user base, though, since they're either NEETs or hopping from one minimum wage gig to another.

It's a 1 vs 1000 situation tho.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

My example isn't limited to racism. Racism isn't the point; my business' reputational and financial loss is.

The reputation and monetary losses stem from whether the affected group is culturally protected or not. Who determines what groups are culturally protected? Those who also control the law makers typically.

 

[Reprobus]

All American political figures are garbage. The only people who worship trump are whites, and its solely for the fact that he has the same disgusting nature as they do.

But I guess he's the lesser of other evils. Imagine living in a world where you have the settle for the guy who's still a piece of shit but not as worse.

Peak clown world

View attachment 287987

I’ll choose trump over a foid any day

 

[solblue]

I find it ironic that left tinged groups are now using unchecked corporate power to their advantage. Honestly, "status quo" Joe is the best choice for avoiding another four years of this. No way will the "he is dividing us" rhetoric still be propped up if Joe's in office. Better incremental improvements than nothing.

 

[Deleted member 20195]

If true, it's things like this that gets people like Trump elected. Leftists tend to shoot themselves in the foot.

 

[your personality]

I made a thread about this. My idea was to go to a country and essentially offer them a tax base of single males who live in otherwise uninhabited areas. Russia is prime for something like this.

My thread for those interested:

https://incels.is/threads/would-you-move-to-incelistan.172502/

Russia would be hard for ethniccels to go to.

Also what you are suggesting has been tried many times but rarely works out as well as people planned. All people in the community for single males would have in common is a distrust of foids. There's nothing stopping people from getting into conflict otherwise over small things unless guys LDAR and keep space from others, otherwise mogging and the tension that ensues is inevitable.
It would be awkward for a lot of guys. It would be like guys that get offered a job by their friend and later get fired by the same friend.

Utopia breakaway civilizations have been tried before. They work better in theory in practice. But maybe with some fine tuning it will succeed at some point.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

Also what you are suggesting has been tried many times but rarely works out as well as people planned.

There are several male only communities and communes that have existed for several hundred years. All of them are religious based. Buddhist temples, monasteries like Mt. Athos and several other isolated dumping grounds for males exist and are very peaceful. Mt. Athos is almost 1000 years old. This is contrasted with female only communities that last less than 50 years on average.

There's nothing stopping people from getting into conflict otherwise over small things unless guys LDAR and keep space from others, otherwise mogging and the tension that ensues is inevitable.

I disagree. Mogging isn't really an issue if we are all incel. The blackpill and its tenets are what unites us. And tbh, that is a pretty strong thing to be united by, especially when you are universally hated. Its like the religious places I mentioned above. Everybody there would understand why they are there and would seek to improve the place. Human male competition is controlled by access to breeding. If every man can breed and is banned by law from mating with women, we should see a drop in intermale competition.

 

[youthislife]

Yes, and that's why i laugh at the idea of "freedom of speech". If you're not a leftist or a libtard, your opinions and views don't matter to society. I mean what's the point of free speech if whenever i say my opinion i get harassed, judged and falsely labeled?

If you're not pro women, pro LGBT, pro immigration, pro degeneracy, pro Jews, you'll be treated like a scumbag in society despite the "freedom of speech".

 

[your personality]

There are several male only communities and communes that have existed for several hundred years. All of them are religious based. Buddhist temples, monasteries like Mt. Athos and several other isolated dumping grounds for males exist and are very peaceful. Mt. Athos is almost 1000 years old. This is contrasted with female only communities that last less than 50 years on average.

You would have to keep it under wraps and prevent word from getting out to others like normies and women, because as soon as they hear about these male only communities and communes they will start advocating that they be shut down if they are growing.
Currently I don't think male only communities and communes are growing that much since they revolve around giving up desires and copes like technology. A lot of people despite virtue signaling about putting down their phone and going outside cope with technology, incels included.

I disagree. Mogging isn't really an issue if we are all incel. The blackpill and its tenets are what unites us. And tbh, that is a pretty strong thing to be united by, especially when you are universally hated. Its like the religious places I mentioned above. Everybody there would understand why they are there and would seek to improve the place. Human male competition is controlled by access to breeding. If every man can breed and is banned by law from mating with women, we should see a drop in intermale competition.

You have more faith than me. I just look at how easily even mgtow channels on youtube have sometimes devolved into fighting with each other, the beef between Paul Elam and other people in mgtow to show that even if there is a group of males that are united by their distrust and wariness of women they are still many dividing lines (mainly race and political orientation differences) that can still lead to infighting.

All else considered, I find the idea of every disenfranchised unattractive sexless male moving to male only communes consitutes a retreat and people in western society that only respect strength would see it in the same way. Some amount of low value males would have to stay in gynocentric countries to blend in while fighting against laws that keep getting more misandric and clamping down on men's copes.
If every sexless unattractive male moved to your proposed male only commune, it would immediately arouse suspicion and attract unnecessary attention. By a number of incels staying behind in gynocentric countries and refusing to completely LDAR, there is some chance that a few of them can vote in the political process to stymie interventionist policies that a gynocentric country might take to undermine a nation of a male only commune. Western countries have done this with the Middle East and used any excuse to intervene or draw attention to them so there is no reason to expect them to be any different once they find out or see signs of a growing male only commune in the world.

TL;DR: unity among men that share a common idea is still more difficult to completely achieve than a lot of people would think. Some amount of incels should remain in gynocentric countries if they are hesitant in moving so that their influence in the political process by voting is not just limited to one specific area but is everywhere across the world that there have been incels.
@PPEcel feel free to add any feedback if you want.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

You would have to keep it under wraps and prevent word from getting out to others like normies and women, because as soon as they hear about these male only communities and communes they will start advocating that they be shut down if they are growing.

They won't shut them down because there is no real excuse to. Trying to do so would be politically difficult, especially if it was a nuclear armed power.

Currently I don't think male only communities and communes are growing that much since they revolve around giving up desires and copes like technology. A lot of people despite virtue signaling about putting down their phone and going outside cope with technology, incels included.

They were more as proof that male only places can exist for long times. Nonreligious examples like remote oil fields and submarines also show this, albeit with les permanence. Whether a central unifying goal is needed is the real question. I think if an environment more favorable to us existed, we would make our way there independently, much like mayocels go to SEA. Only here it would be because we are done with foids in their entirety. Why should we, as single men, continue to support a society that hates us?

I just look at how easily even mgtow channels on youtube have sometimes devolved into fighting with each other, the beef between Paul Elam and other people in mgtow to show that even if there is a group of males that are united by their distrust and wariness of women they are still many dividing lines (mainly race and political orientation differences) that can still lead to infighting.

This is true in any group. MGTOW and the blackpill still exist and are growing despite these things. Its a normal part of being in a group.

I find the idea of every disenfranchised unattractive sexless male moving to male only communes consitutes a retreat and people in western society that only respect strength would see it in the same way

So? How does their opinion affect us? We will continue to exist and they will not. Our ideas are sounder than theirs. We will grow strong while they devolve into third world status.

Some amount of low value males would have to stay in gynocentric countries to blend in while fighting against laws that keep getting more misandric and clamping down on men's copes

Most of us are in western societies. Do you see any rollbacks of the feminist agenda? The agenda isn't set by the democratic process, but by elites and violence.

Western countries have done this with the Middle East and used any excuse to intervene or draw attention to them so there is no reason to expect them to be any different once they find out or see signs of a growing male only commune in the world.

All this means is that we need to make any intervention too bloody for the West.

 

[Sleeper]

jokes on them i'm already alienated from the capitalist-liberal system

 

[your personality]

They won't shut them down because there is no real excuse to. Trying to do so would be politically difficult, especially if it was a nuclear armed power.

Need a lot of high IQ scientists for that.

They were more as proof that male only places can exist for long times. Nonreligious examples like remote oil fields and submarines also show this, albeit with les permanence. Whether a central unifying goal is needed is the real question. I think if an environment more favorable to us existed, we would make our way there independently, much like mayocels go to SEA. Only here it would be because we are done with foids in their entirety. Why should we, as single men, continue to support a society that hates us?

A ban on outside cultural influences would be needed to keep from reminding people of what they are missing or indoctrinating them into thinking they need love from a woman otherwise they want to kill themselves.

This is true in any group. MGTOW and the blackpill still exist and are growing despite these things. Its a normal part of being in a group.

True but it is still somewhat of a utopian ideal. And it's awkward seeing infighting among people you thought were close to imo. Look how quickly people have been expelled from communities like this for sounding bluepilled. I wouldn't blame riskwarycels of not wanting to fully commit to a separatist homesteading type cause, although I'm sure they wouldn't try to stop anyone from trying and would wish them the best of luck.

So? How does their opinion affect us? We will continue to exist and they will not. Our ideas are sounder than theirs. We will grow strong while they devolve into third world status.

I hope so, but ideas are kind of cope. I have seen this by the scum that keep throwing shaming tactics at mgtow on Youtube. They shame them regardless of what points they make and joke about them dying out. Ideas and sound argumentation mean nothing to this world if they see you as lower status.

Most of us are in western societies. Do you see any rollbacks of the feminist agenda? The agenda isn't set by the democratic process, but by elites and violence.

I have to admit things are getting real bad now. A prominent men's rights lawyer was killed for simply trying to fight for legal rights for men, the SPLC has declared the organization he was part of (National Coalition for Men) a male supremacist hate group, every spot that men try to set up to discuss issues is shut down, slandered and libeled.

I don't see rollbacks of the feminist agenda and it's mostly a lost cause and the crackdown on anyone that pubicly speaks about men's rights or incel issues in western countries will probably continue to get worse.

Yet moving to another country is still a large commitment, especially when there are no guarantees it will work out. It is also in a way admitting defeat: society has us out and has now forced us to retreat to some remote wilderness in the world and we have acquiesced.
I don't think every incel should do this if they don't want to. They deserve to live with the same rights and protections as everyone else in western countries.

All this means is that we need to make any intervention too bloody for the West.

You need advanced weaponry, legions of armed soldiers, sophisticated explosives, security analysts, a border wall... all of that costs money. Many incels are not very rich, where will the money come from?

 

[Transcended Trucel]

def decent chance of it happening. I think it will still take a few years maybe a decade before social credit system officially setup here in the west