Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can Paleo Stop the Infertility Epidemic?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Chaohinon View Post
    If someone is offended by the word retard, then they're not retarded.
    That's not even true.
    Originally posted by Chaohinon View Post
    Quit hiding behind that big head and get a job.
    Ugh you sound like my grandma

    Comment


    • It's just a word. Retarded. I tried to hold back my laughter and shock at a family gathering when my aunt said that retarded is not an appropriate word. What's next... You can't say midget in reference to a Pop Warner team, fattie in reference to something large, handicapped in reference to golf?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by wiltondeportes View Post
        It's just a word. Retarded. I tried to hold back my laughter and shock at a family gathering when my aunt said that retarded is not an appropriate word. What's next... You can't say midget in reference to a Pop Warner team, fattie in reference to something large, handicapped in reference to golf?
        It's an outgrowth of the PC movement stemming from cultural Marxism theory established in the 1930s to destroy western culture and replace it with a communist/socialist one
        Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
        Starting Weight: 294 pounds
        Current Weight: 235 pounds
        Goal Weight: 195 pounds

        Comment


        • so when a guy says 'i've got a chubbie' is that offensive or not?
          beautiful
          yeah you are

          Baby if you time travel back far enough you can avoid that work because the dust won't be there. You're too pretty to be working that hard.
          lol

          Comment


          • Originally posted by bloodorchid View Post
            so when a guy says 'i've got a chubbie' is that offensive or not?
            Well... since they are now 'smaller' chubbies... they are less offensive.
            “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
            ~Friedrich Nietzsche
            And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.

            Comment


            • which means that technically the smallinization it's a good thing
              beautiful
              yeah you are

              Baby if you time travel back far enough you can avoid that work because the dust won't be there. You're too pretty to be working that hard.
              lol

              Comment


              • Originally posted by bloodorchid View Post
                which means that technically the smallinization it's a good thing
                It would certainly create an convenient alignment with the lower sperm counts and smaller 'assaulted' testicles as well.
                It just makes more and more sense!
                “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
                ~Friedrich Nietzsche
                And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by kenn View Post
                  It's an outgrowth of the PC movement stemming from cultural Marxism theory established in the 1930s to destroy western culture and replace it with a communist/socialist one
                  This was the first time I had ever heard of this before. I did a little reading and searching, and I found this:

                  Cultural Marxism began not in the 1960s but in 1919, immediately after World War I. Marxist theory had predicted that in the event of a big European war, the working class all over Europe would rise up to overthrow capitalism and create communism. But when war came in 1914, that did not happen. When it finally did happen in Russia in 1917, workers in other European countries did not support it. What had gone wrong?
                  Fatefully for America, when Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, the Frankfurt School fled - - and reestablished itself in New York City. There, it shifted its focus from destroying traditional Western culture in Germany to destroying it in the United States. To do so, it invented “Critical Theory.” What is the theory? To criticize every traditional institution, starting with the family, brutally and unremittingly, in order to bring them down. It wrote a series of “studies in prejudice,” which said that anyone who believes in traditional Western culture is prejudiced, a “racist” or “sexist” of “fascist” - - and is also mentally ill.
                  They also said that the working class would not lead a Marxist revolution, because it was becoming part of the middle class, the hated bourgeoisie.

                  Who would? In the 1950s, Marcuse answered the question: a coalition of blacks, students, feminist women and homosexuals.
                  Most importantly, the Frankfurt School crossed Marx with Freud, taking from psychology the technique of psychological conditioning. Today, when the cultural Marxists want to do something like “normalize” homosexuality, they do not argue the point philosophically. They just beam television show after television show into every American home where the only normal-seeming white male is a homosexual (the Frankfurt School’s key people spent the war years in Hollywood).
                  What is Cultural Marxism?
                  William S. Lind
                  Cultural Marxism-William S. Lind
                  Last edited by wiltondeportes; 09-23-2012, 10:08 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by wiltondeportes View Post
                    This was the first time I had ever heard of this before. I did a little reading and searching, and I found this:









                    What is Cultural Marxism?
                    William S. Lind
                    Cultural Marxism-William S. Lind
                    “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
                    ~Friedrich Nietzsche
                    And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.

                    Comment


                    • Now I ask myself, well, is cultural Marxism okay? Has this movement really been a bad thing? At least it's not relating to money. We know monetary Marxism doesn't work. What about this? Law and belief are two different things. Separation of church and state, right?

                      According to the law, this cultural Marxism is fine by me at a correctly limited level. Not overbearing or too weak either. This means that people basically have equal rights, not equal opportunity. This is more accurately called "socially permissive". Our founding fathers' laws in the constitution were both socially and economically permissive, equating to what you might call a Libertarian today. By contrast, the modern Democrat party is socially permissive but economically restrictive, and the modern Republican party is socially restrictive but economically permissive. The key to the tenets of cultural Marxism being okay within law is economic permissiveness as well! Mind you, I am talking national law. Local law may be less socially permissive in some ways so that those living in that area may live together in unison.

                      However, as a belief system, cultural Marxism is shit. To think that everyone is equal, is to think that no one is special, right, or wrong. It's "Tall Poppy Syndrome". It's the relativism that you find in so many minds of people in all modern society. It's the blank look you see on people's faces because they don't feel strongly about anything--except that they feel strongly about feeling strongly about nothing.

                      The only thing that creates any technological value in this world is objectivism. The only thing that allows for any sense of "mastery of one's self" is objectivism. The only thing that binds communities together is objectivism!


                      PS: Here's a better article on cultural Marxism: http://www.academia.org/the-origins-...l-correctness/

                      Fourth, both economic and cultural Marxism rely on expropriation. When the classical Marxists, the communists, took over a country like Russia, they expropriated the bourgeoisie, they took away their property. Similarly, when the cultural Marxists take over a university campus, they expropriate through things like quotas for admissions. When a white student with superior qualifications is denied admittance to a college in favor of a black or Hispanic who isn’t as well qualified, the white student is expropriated. And indeed, affirmative action, in our whole society today, is a system of expropriation. White owned companies don’t get a contract because the contract is reserved for a company owned by, say, Hispanics or women. So expropriation is a principle tool for both forms of Marxism.
                      Last edited by wiltondeportes; 09-23-2012, 11:07 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by wiltondeportes View Post
                        This was the first time I had ever heard of this before. I did a little reading and searching, and I found this:

                        What is Cultural Marxism?
                        William S. Lind
                        Cultural Marxism-William S. Lind
                        Yeah, Lind made a video too...

                        Comment


                        • Like I said, our political system has basically two parties; each are correct in one sense (permissive) but wrong in the other (restrictive). The general public sees no truly correct things about politics, so they ignore and fight the non-rational debate of whether economic or social permissiveness is more important (whether they should be Democrat or Republican). It's a crime against humanity that Libertarianism is not the spirit of the public. This is the sad irony about this "cultural Marxism" if it were truly the origin of our current state. They succeeded in removing the average, middle class from politics and giving the blacks, feminists, gays, and other special interests all of the power. Only a special interest person truly seeks restrictive (aka totalitarian) measures in government. Cultural Marxism has given way to these totalitarian people having the most power in our government.
                          Last edited by wiltondeportes; 09-24-2012, 12:11 AM.

                          Comment


                          • We'll I'd argue that the corporations have all the power (specifically bankers), and it was the blacks, feminists, gays and other special interest groups who gave them that power because they all thought that government could be beneficial to them.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Grok View Post
                              We'll I'd argue that the corporations have all the power (specifically bankers), and it was the blacks, feminists, gays and other special interest groups who gave them that power because they all thought that government could be beneficial to them.
                              Last I checked, the power in this country starts with the votes cast at every election. If the average, middle class person stops caring about politics while the special interests people start caring more; you get a situation where slimy politicians rise to power by paying off their special interest buddies. If the whole of America woke up to the truth of Libertarianism, people would fix a lot of shit. They would take power back from these bankers that run the country. It's harder to have a slimy politician in a system where there is no special group to pay back once you get into office. All of a sudden, the candidates you have to vote for must have real policies to compete!
                              Last edited by wiltondeportes; 09-24-2012, 01:09 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by wiltondeportes View Post
                                Last I checked, the power in this country starts with the votes cast at every election.
                                It certainly doesn't end there.

                                There is quite a bit of corruption that takes place during the election process. Any Ron Paul supporter should be fully aware of that. Romney would not have received the nomination from the GOP if it were not for a bunch of corruption which doesn't have anything at all to do with voting.

                                There is also all the statist entites which educate (indoctrinate) and inform (brainwash) the voter as well. Nearly every American is educated by the state itself, and the statist mainstream media (that includes Fox News) will not give equal time to a candidate who does not promote their own self interest.

                                So, the power lies with the voter?

                                So, are you going to vote for the anti-war candidate this time?

                                By the way, which candidate is the anti-war candidate? I forgot, was it Romney or Obama?

                                If the power lies in the voter, then how come there is nobody in the Presidential debates talking about ending the wars?

                                How come there is no Presidential candidate talking about ending corporate welfare?

                                Voting between one socialist fascist statist warmonger and another socialist fascist statist warmonger doesn't really give one very much "power".

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X