While not the commandments of course, the bible does state that a man who lays with a boy, the way he lays with a woman, should be killed. Of course again, the church perverted this meaning to make out that being gay was outlawed by the Bible, specifically at the expense of not being allowed to rape little boys…

Crypto bros who follow ultra distorted stoicism (the only good philosophy is the ones made when slavery was normalised) that believe everyone else is unaware of what very basic knowledge they world they just learned that day.

Well, for not listening is obvious, they are the ones not listening.

Obvious to who? To the person declaring that no one is listening to them? What would the difference between them not listening and you being ignored, as you were wrong look like?

For not being heard is a little more complex. Maybe they are heard but simply their message is irrelevant to the listener, or maybe is wrong or targeted to the wrong audience. I mean, you can try to talk about cricket to me and I will not get your message since I don’t care about cricket. Is it your fault ? No, you cannot know everything I am interested in. But it become your fault if you don’t understand that I don’t care about cricket and you continue to talk only about it.

The problems come when people such as yourself claim the problem to be due to football, despite being caused by cricket, and then when you try to explain to them the problem is actually cricket they tell you they don’t care about cricket. Therefor, the problem must be football.

A too simple example but I get the gist. Short answer: you cannot and it is not your fault.

With the greatest respect, you’re doing that exact thing now.

But the problem with politics is not that until today people are leftist and from tomorrow they suddently become fascists, even if this is what some part of the left like to think, but that it is a process. And since it is a process it is a fault of each parties if they don’t understand it: it is a fault from the left if they don’t understand the process that drive their voters to vote for the right and likewise is a fault of the right if they don’t understand the process that drive their voters to vote for the left.

Lol stalin was always a fascist. Simply declaring oneself to be a socialist doesn’t make someone a socialist. For example, even the nazis claimed to be socialists. I agree with the latter part though.

I am afraid that trying something on a State level is way too dangerous, especially if the “something” already failed more then one time.

Capitalism has failed the 99.9% every single time, yet you’re okay to stick with that. It failed the planet and our our grandchildren. Please don’t come to me with that.

I get the point: there are two opposing blocks and each one is actively trying to make the other fail. So ?

So, by their own admission, it doesn’t fail of its own accord, like capitalism.

It cant be usury, if I call it interest.

Not only is their god all powerful and all knowing, apparently, they also beleive their god to be an idiot.

taking care of junkies or lowlifes for the duration of their lifespan .

They prefer the term shareholders or landlords, thank you very much!

Therein is the hypocrisy of the position. Its the lefts fault for not listening and for not being heard. I mean, could it possibly be because a large group of very stubborn and fact resistant people have declared their the lefts policies literally equal zero? Could it be that people refuse to listen, regardless of what the left says? No, that would be crazy talk. Its everyone else’s fault…

How do you get through to someone who has just declared not-zero to be zero and refuses to accept that what they made up is factually untrue? Is it my fault they do that?

The ones that saw how the supposed alternatives (socialism and comunism) worked out. I don’t know how old are you, but I am old enough to…

That was fascism with red trim and nothing close to what socialism was meant to aim for.

So I much prefer the actual system, it seems to be the least bad of all the other

You don’t seem to like that argument when “the other ones are bad” comes from the left and not trying anything else is the mentality of a depressive who views hope as a dangerous illusion.

Nah, I think USA have a very peculiar definition of socialism, they are too much “me centered” to understand everything else. And while it is true what you say about the American foreing policy, you would have found the opposite in the socialist and comunist states foreign policy.

Youre missing the point. The point is, by their own policy, they admit that socialism doesn’t just fail of its own accord, as they claim it does. The point isn’t that an equivalent doesn’t exist.

The houses price would fall if all these houses would be put on the market at (roughly) the same time…

It seems that you answered your own question. You didn’t need me at all. I was just getting in your way.

Well, if only the left wing would understand the message it would be better, but at least they are not in any position to make more damages.

Why is the problem not that the message is from people who have been deliberately miss informed, through no fault of their own, or even that the right haven’t made their message good enough? Why does it have to be someone else’s failing?

Yeah. And I am afraid that there seems not to be an alternative

By design of course. I mean, who would choose to live in an employment based, market fundamentalist society where its socialism for the rich and rugged, free market wage slavery for everyone else, if there was any alternative? You can see it from American foreign policy. “Socialism must fail everywhere its tried.” Not “socialism will fail” or that it will probably fail because its sooooo rubbish. No, they have to ensure it does, as official policy. In that statement they admit that nearly any alternative would be preferable.

The point of capitalism is that the aristocracy hated the idea of having to work for their money, like the rest of us. So, they came up with a system so brilliant that the rest of the population had to be starved, dispossessed of their land, branded, imprisoned whipped and sent to workhouses until centuries of generational trauma knocked the fight out of them.

It was never about utopian efficiency, although it is touted to be the benefit now. The problem is, people don’t realise that the “inefficiency” they look to do away with is all the people below the top having more than just enough to live on. We have nations of workers who have been convinced that they should run their countries as if they were shareholders of it.

And they call socialists utopians.

So people prefer to keep the houses empty and take the cost, knowing where renting it lawfully could led.

Wow, you would think all that market pressure would make house prices fall. Surely people would want to sell those properties, as renting sounds like a death sentence. Its almost as if they’re lying and making a killing as they’re doing it.

and have the message delivered.

How did the message delivery work out for you?

I think that both your lesser evil approach and mine “vote for someone else just because” approach are not good enough to offer a stable solution.

At least we can agree they both suck.

We did but then you lot started ringing bells.

Tbf, were fucked too.

Ok, then a brutal question: why are they opposing the mass deportation of illegal immigrants ?

Theres probably a lot more to it than that. I certain you could even answer your own question. It might be along the lines of “not deported there or not like that etc.”

Where are all these empty houses? Even then, they appreciate in value, even empty and propery price appreciation is the best place for a trust fund based in the caymans to obscure ownership of earnings. There isn’t a bigger effect from a few empty properties than house prices exploding 2 of 300% in a couple of decades.

I don’t understand this idea that the rich are the source of all the problems. Yeah, they may not pay that much taxes but they are also a really small number.

There dont need to be many of them. Their source of power is their wealth, not their number. If it was about numbers, you and I would have that power.

The question is: can we really blame someone that have (or think to have) a problem when he vote for the side that at least acknowledge the problem ? Yeah, most of the time he would not belive in what that side promise but what’s the alternative ?

Thats a fair point. To me, one is clearly the lesser evil. I can agree that lesser evil arguments suck but its the best I can find, personally. I choose the one I see as the side who won’t deliberately make it worse for us and better for the people they represent. Personally, I’m a post structuralist and I don’t think anyone can be trusted enough to allow mechanisms of power and hierarchy to exist.

Probably not.

I’m just saying, I think you and I are past rhetoric, by now.

However, short of a utopian, philosophers revolution, the best I have to offer is a lesser evil argument. Thats where I’m at. The way I see it, maybe wrongly, is that people on the right share my same frustration but that’s been captured by the very powers that force it on them in the first place. They have our neighbours looking down to find the solution and not up, where the problem has always been.

Again, fair enough. They can think that it is a made up problem. But what should be the correct answer ? Because if I say “look, there is too many illegal immigrants around in this area of Milano (Stazione Centrale) and it is not safe because of the petty crimes”, the answer could not be “you are too ignorant to understand why it is not a problem”, you should explain to my how having thousands of illegal immigrant around living by petty crimes is not a problem, if you can (just an example btw).

“The left” aren’t pro illegal migration, never have been and never will be. Thats a right wing trope and anyone who falls for it is a moron, sorry. Not allowing in vast amounts of cheap labour, to bring down wages, benefits the people funding the right wing parties, not anyone remotely left leaning. I’m also willing to bet that the bigger problem is the legal migration system the right wing allowed business interests to fuck into the ground, to stop wages from rising.

Or if I ask for more kindergartens so I can have children you cannot answer to me that we are already too many and the next week say that we need to welcome more immigrants because the population is declining.

How do you think tax cuts for the rich are paid for? All the money that should be going towards those things are going into the wealthy pockets of the people who then convince you the problem is anything but them.

Ok, assuming you are right, where is the benefit of a housing crisis where young people could not buy an house

The housing crisis for you and me is the record profit boon for landlords and property developers. Very few groups support the right wing more than they do. They’ll have to switch to topping it up with public money going into their pockets soon enough, for a longer term solution, like they do in the UK.

Given that the left was in power (in one way or another) for more than 20 years of the last 30 years,

Youre saying they haven’t been in power for 6 years but its still all their fault? That seems a stretch.

Continuing to call me “part of the problem”

I never said that once let alone continued. Please drop the victim complex and some people do stupid things. I do stupid things too. However, believing the right wing will save people from themselves is a stupid thing i don’t do. But sure, keep acting the victim and blaming everyone else. See if that makes me vote for you.

I can do that too you know. I just choose not to.

Mid twenties teenagers with 30 year old parents.

Some right wingers. Many not

To me, you described a cowardly act that we agreed is carried out by most right wingers.

Oh well, the one about Trump was

Fair enough “never” was too far.

No, the reason people in Italy vote right wing is because the left wing has nothing to offer.

Thats just an overly sweeping, thought terminating, cliché thats only ever said by people who would never vote left of Reagan anyway. You’ll excuse me if I don’t bother arguing that “da left” policies =/= zero, I’m sure.

agree. But you are missing the point, which is that they voted for the only side that at least acknowledges there are problems.

I think you would struggle to show me anything with “the left” saying there are no problems. They might not agree with made up problems that don’t contribute to the difficulties people face but that’s not the same thing.

Wrong, the choice is between a side (the left) that consider you as part of the problem and a side (the right) that promise you to solve the problem. What do you think a person will vote ?

Of course, I must be wrong. Its not wealthy business interests who benefit from the housing crisis or falling wages. No, clearly its the left! Sorry, I’m not going to fall for the “considers you part of the problem” rhetoric. Youre either lying to push some “you can’t even be white these days” trope or are genuinely part of the problem and deserve it.

It is really simple: the left had its chance, they failed and so people vote for the alternative. To continue to vote for the same people that create the problem is not that intelligent either.

The right have been in power in Italy and the UK and have been for years. When will you lot grow up and admit your own mistakes and abject failure to do anything other than make already very rich people far richer? The right wing are the ones who had their chance and their time is over, for now, and much deserved. They only ever have one goal which is why they only ever achieve one thing: that.

Similar here in the UK. Its like, yeah, even if the model you’re proposing was better (it isnt), you can tell for a fact that its for the benefit of the wealthy and at the expense of the 99%, simply by whos saying it.

I mean, its like taking parental advice from a convicted paedophile. In the same way, why would anyone take advice on socialised medicine from someone you know is trying to fuck your socialised healthcare system.

Also, having the NHS as a direct competitor drives down the price, much like social housing did to house prices.

Its why certain types hate those two things.

Would you still feel that way, about the very first part, if I was to remind you that some of the Russian oligarchs were crime bosses who took power and wealth by force?

Admittedly, it doesn’t have the hereditary rule part but that, for me, would simple fall under “the difference is the passage of time.” I see it much like the difference between a cult and a religion.

For sure, I totally agree with what you’re saying. I was only using the word in the 40k version where nearly everything is hersasy, not the sensible version of the word youre using.

I think our planet would be described as a free-range human labour farm, to anyone who was able to view it independently. Well, lots of it not so free-range. Its why they’re coming for reproductive freedom. They’re doing for the same reason a beef farmer wouldn’t give their cows reproductive freedom.

Yeah but how’s that supposed to maximise wealth extraction by our economic overlords?