WA Delegate: (elected The Utterly Shocked Citizens of Imperium Anglorum 288 days ago)
The Supreme Commander of EuroFounder
World Factbook Entry
Welcome to Europe!
One of the most ancient and influential NationStates regions, Europe, founded in November 2002, is known for being one of the largest roleplaying regions with more than 1000+ RP posts a month. We invite you to join one of the largest player-created regions today and visit the
to join in RP TODAY! You can also join us on our new community forum channel! Discord Nations of Europe are encouraged to join the WA and endorse our WA delegate! Every endorsement for the delegate is a stronger Europe in the WA! Attention Recruiters: Advertising in player-created regions is against the rules! Attention Residents: NO ROLEPLAY IN THE RMB! Please don't triple post!
Embassies: the Pacific, Osiris, The East Pacific, USSR, Lazarus, the Rejected Realms, 10000 Islands, NationStates, The Western Isles, and the West Pacific.
Tags: Democratic, Offsite Forums, Social, Neutral, Independent, Featured, Role Player, and Gargantuan.
Regional Power: Extremely High
603 nations, the 16th most in the world.
Today's World Census Report The Largest Basket Weaving Sector in Europe
World Census agents infiltrated a variety of out-of-the-way towns and festivals in order to determine which nations have the most developed Basket Weaving industries.
As a region, Europe is ranked
in the world for Largest Basket Weaving Sector. 5,176 th
Europe Regional Message Board
Welcome to Europe Terosa! Ich spreche Deutsch so das ist alles gut! :)
Waste of time wrote: The United Kingdom of Kalmara Hey guys check out this troll that wont shut up! So before I begin there was a person that.... let us just say he did not use a good public image when discussing politics online. Also that I am a shade of a Socialist. I would consider myself a partial believer in Marxism. So here is the whole thing that can be laughable to some. (First Post) User 1: Say no to racism, say no to fascism, say yes to the left wing! (Then this person who makes himself clear that he is a die-hard Conservative talks and that is when the world goes mad) User A: @User 1, Go live in North Korea you bastard if you dont like democracy and civilisation based on honest work for honest pay. You are brainwashed! User B: @User A,You right wing pricks talk talk "Democracy" while you promote Fascism. User A: @User B, do I look like Mussolini? You don't even know what really fascism is let alone speak about it...Don't use fascism as general word that somehow means something evil when trying to criticize or attack others. It shows lack of political intelligence. Capitalism is based on freedom and democracy. Fascism is something else totally. Grab a book kiddo before trying to speak on a subject beyond your nose and capacity first.Trust me, I read more about economics and politics that I would easily have three PhD on this matter were I to have studied this at university in UK. User C: @User A, Capitalism is based on freedom? LMFAO! User A: @User C, Yeah. In case your a ignorant who have not picked up a book in his life, go to North Korea their freedom loving people more than western Europe or the USA. If you don't like capitalism and the chance of becoming rich one day provided you know financial education and economics... (This were I come in.) Me: @User A, Conservatives are all the same when it come to Socialism. They point to Stalin and Kim Jon-Un and call that socialism. Let me tell you something buddy, that is not socialism, that is totalitarianism and simply methods of oppression. The only reason why we used this against the USSR and allies was because it was politically convenient for NATO to do so. Furthermore, North Korea is not even Socialist or in any practical respects left to begin with. They follow the Juche idea which is their own ball of wax. When we mean socialism, we are talking about countries like Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany, The Netherlands, and Switzerland(to an extent on Switzerland...). We want Democratic principles, however we want to protect against those who seek power, those who will risk everyone to be superior. Our true enemy is the Noble Class. In my mind, assisting people for the greater good and a better more organized society is civilization. In a capitalist society, it is every man for himself there is nothing in capitalism that says to help people or to stop people from getting too powerful. Look at it from a historical perspective, traces and pieces of socialism throughout history flew by under our noses. Some of the most successful Empires in all of History adopted polices that are consider socialist today. For example in Persia. The first Persian Empire(aka Achaemenid Empire) was the very first Empire to adopt veteran and military benefits giving tax discounts and paying for goods for soldiers and much more. This resulted in the Persian army being extremely massive with Rome only matching their numbers later in history. Which brings me to Rome. Rome had "many" public services. Some could argue that Rome was the first socialist state. For example, public baths, running water that everyone could use, and departments that assisted the people. Benefits for families and more. These policies were mostly adopted under Augustus Caesar which is known as one of the best leaders in the world. Not to mention in my homeland in America. Despite FDR not being described as a "socialist", he adopted extensive welfare and instated glass steagle, the most intervention government has done a economic affairs. He is also known as the best President of the United States by many. Why is it that so many of these leaders adopted polices as such? Rome had the highest standard of living and the world was at awe with them and we still use Roman methods today such as infrastructure and city planning. Let me be clear: Stalin and Kim Jon are not Socialists they are meglo-crazies that used the system so they could be privileged nobles. They were never Socialists and they never will be! User A: , Please keep those fine lies to yourself. Me I am from Romania so don't preach me how "good" is socialism. you have no idea what you are talking about. What are you? Disillusioned with capitalism? are you a child not being able to make end's meet? just recently downsized from you job because I don't get it why people are so mad about. Communism is and was SLAVERY You had nothing Absolutely nothing. Stop acting like the devils advocate because you're making me sick son. If you are too spoiled to make a life or even become rich in capitalism than you are a loser PERIOD. Do you think the state loves you? Do you think it is better to be employee or EMPLOYER? GET EDUCATED AND UNDERSTAND FREE MARKET AND ECONOMICS or face the consequences for you financial illiteracy and ignorance. Now are the best opportunities to become rich. It never was that easy and IT DOES'NT GET easier than this in our time trust me... Me: Apparently you ignored everything important I said. Before you go on calling me a loser in life and work harder like every other right wing prick out there, read my statement and do your research. (Then this troll comes in. He seems harmless at first. But when I am done talking to him, I just want to strangle the life out of him. He is User 2) User 2: Name me one successful left-wing govenment Me: I will gladly list a lot in fact: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Germany, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Poland. It depends on what you are referring to as "left". To an American standard, the Nations above are considered pretty left and radical. These 12 nations are in fact some of the happiest countries in the world with the Scandinavian countries scoring very high. Denmark made it to number 1, Switzerland made it to number 2, and Iceland made it to number 3. All of those countries are on the list I mentioned. User D: , Finland doesn't have left wing government. Me Me: @User D, Are you kidding!? me they do! If you look at the aspects of their Country, they follow the Nordic model. To American respects they are Socialists. They have Private Schools banned, they have extensive services to assist the people. Socialism lurks the nation. So do not go to me and say Finland is not Socialist when it is easily proven that it is not the case. User D: , Economically Finland is free market. Therefore, it's as capitalistic as Japan. Me Me: No it does not work that way. It conforms with its neighbors to the Nordic Model and uses small scale Capitalism. It is NOT therefore economically free as Japan because Japan relies on big business and its society to keep balance. This is considered alien in Finland their economic policies and their government spending indicates that they are indeed Socialist with a "mixed economy". Wrong, Mr. Specter. User D: But socialism is making Finns lazy. Trust me I am a Finn and there is nothing good in that small socialist part. (You can tell next response that I am not sitting here with this stupidity. I am not wasting my time with this fool.) Me: Fin or not I think that is self-centered and uninformed of you. All countries have their rightist. All rightists say that socialism makes people lazy and ill keep it simple it is false. I am not going to try to reason with conservatives because they always deny facts and live in a realm of non-reality. I am just going to tell you in conclusion the world does not work that way. User D: , OK so you are saying that you don't really have evidence of socialism working, it's just based on your feelings like every leftist idiot! Me User 2: , Here are facts for you: At the hight of the Soviet economy it made up 14% of the world economy, while the Americans was 36%. Me In 1908, Eugen Böhm von bawerk predicted all the flaws of communism before it existed. If communism is so good how come nations like Cuba is changing the government to become Capitalist, or how come Hungary rebelled, or when Czech, Polish, and Romanians did too wait I forget about East Germany. How well did socialism work for Yugoslavia? Communism can not work because the laws never changed from 1918 regarding the economy other then Stalin brutal laws but that killed more people then the first world war. Name me one time a capitalist nation has done this to it self. (I am rejecting him because I know this would be an endless debate that I did not want to do. But he antagonized me and caused me to get a little over zealous a little bit later) Me: Look. I could continue this discussion and I would win on the facts because I spent years on this economic issue, but you would deny it like any other conservative. So for the sake of sanity, I will shut down here. User 2: Really? Give me one proof. I was a communist like you, so I have read communist Manifesto. But you read Capital and Interest which says Eugen Böhm von Bawerk says capitalists do not exploit their workers; they actually help employees by providing them with an income well in advance of the revenue from the goods they produced, stating "Labor cannot increase its share at the expense of capital." In particular, he argued that the Marxist theory of exploitation ignores the dimension of time in production, which he discussed in his theory of roundabouts and that a redistribution of profits from capitalist industries will undermine the importance of the interest rate as a vital tool for monetary policy. From this criticism it follows that, according to Böhm-Bawerk, the whole value of a product is not produced by the worker, but that labour can only be paid at the present value of any foreseeable output. also read Karl Marx and the Close of His System you can argue that this book was made in the 1800s but so is communist manifest. Me: Marx did have some flaws. No one cannot deny that but we can learn from Marx. Do not get me wrong the Socialism evolution is so complex and hard to understand sometimes I have a hard time grasping the richness of its history. Read "Das Kapital" then we will talk. User 2: I have, now I have come to no Marxist have mentioned his work since 1960s because hiss ideas predicted what would happen to the Soviet Union. (I attempt to reinforce my message, but he is seeming to ignore it...) Me: Look. I could go on and rant endlessly and mercilessly what went wrong with Marxism and what people and yourself misinterpenetrate about Marxism. There is two things though one: I do not see a point in sitting here for 30 mins to a hour ranting on about this philosophy when you seem that you are convinced that Marxism is somehow the bane of society or whatever you believe. People believe what they want to believe and I have to face that reality. and 2) I could say how great Socialism is until I am blue in my face, but it is not me that is the problem that society needs to change, it is themselves and they can only do it themselves. So until when buildings and society comes crashing down upon them and they are living in the slums when their family is starving when people will see a need to change. I see it already, but everyone is different. (Then I noticed User D's statement that I had no legitimate proof that left-wing methods work. So I replied in Zeal.) Me: OK Mr. Know-it-all, give me some of your "facts" that prove your point because I do not believe you have presented any either. (Then he instigates which infuriates me) User 2: User D does not need to state his facts I did for him, You only proof is your option I state real quotes this is from the Soviet union spent 50% to 70% of there industrial out put in the Military the USA put much less yet even when over 50% of the Soviet economy was going in the Military it was only 1/3 of budget of the American military, Why because the Soviets where only making money in Oil and when oil prices dropped they could not trade oil for Iron, coal and food which they where in shortages. This is happen in Canada right now but since Canada is capitalist they can focus the economy on something else. Communism can not work it does not evolve. As Yavlinsky said (he was an economic adviser) The Soviet system is not working because the workers are not working. As someone who could get executed for treason for saying that would? What else could he say, communism can not work because nobody is motivated to do anything. Me (extreme Zealous me): The Soviet Union is not a good example of Socialism and some would argue that the USSR was not Socialist to begin with. If you want me to present my facts then fine! Fact 1: The 2008 crash led to the worst economic downturn as most of us know. In the 1990's Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall Legislation of 1933 which was a bill proposed by FDR during the great depression. This bill did "big socialist government" regulation on banks and guess what. Ever since the beginning our the USA, banks crashed usually every 15 years. Under the Glass=Steagall Legitslation, it did not happen once. This regulation and intervention and standard setting allowed for economic stability and might in this country to thrive until the repeal. Fact 2: One of the aspects of Capitalism is the "free" open market economy. But Capitalism fails us when Businesses collectively work and cooperate with each other to make record breaking profits. This was an effective monopoly on good and/or services. The Sherman Antitrust Act banns Business activity that is non-competitive yet today this is widely ignored by the corporations. Capitalism brought Banks to be the most reliant institutions that an economy has. Yet I was made just to exchange currency and store money. Some would argue that Bank have been around for centuries, but the Bank business only became this big under Capitalism. Capitalism however did not just bring the rise of banks, but much more dreadful topics. I will now counter your arguments. Counter 1 on Soviets had a larger Defense Budget: Yeah, however you got to take into account something. The Russian throughout History were always insecure and paranoid towards other nations they have always acted that way. You can see that with the situation in Ukraine today. More importantly, the was a Cold War. I have also noticed you used the "lowest point" the US spent on military during the entire Cold War which can be misleading. The Soviet Union was not "Communist" as much as they called themselves that. They were Socialist and pinning Socialism to the Soviet Union annoys me because you know there is more example than Leninist governments. One thing I would like to add. Not a necessarily a fact, but it is important. What I have noticed with right Wingers is whenever something goes wrong in a Socialist country, they blame it on Socialism assuming it has to be perfect in order for it to work. It annoys the crap out of me and I am picking up that vibe. I hope that is not the narrative you are pushing for. Counter 2 on the Workers "Laziness" Poland is famed in the EU for one thing: one for its high Productivity ratings. Look they are like the rest of Europe they have good health care and paid leave. Poland was ranked usually around 120 productivity, Lets compare other countries. Oh, look Norway is at 122 and Finland 102 last year, 106 for Canada. As you can see this myth that people are lazy because they are on programs that our Socialist is false and it is simple. The United States is on par with most of these nations yet the United States is ranked 70 in the World Happiness Index while the "Socialist" States have always dominated the Happiness Index ever since they started recording it. Your theory is just incorrect. Socialism in my mind is the practice of "equal Economic OPPORTUNITY" not equality. I have spent a good portion of my evening looking up what economists have to say. So do not come to me saying that I am basing this purely off of my opinion because I am not. (Then another User comes in somewhat on my side. Clearly, I am not alone.) User E: @User 2, You are making correlations where there is none. The Soviet economy was weak, yes. But you cannot blame it all on communism. The czars had refused to embrace industrialization fully like other Western nations. You simply cannot catch up to the US in manufacturing power within two decades. You also cannot do it when you don't have the manpower or the resources of a nation like the US. You point out oil as proof that communism doesn't work, because oil prices fell and led to collapse. You are completely wrong. Does that mean the USSR must have flourished during the oil crisis of the 70's? But the Soviet economy was showing signs of stagnation in the 70's. How can that possibly happen when oil prices were at an all-time high!? No, the USSR fell when their economic stagnation reached the point where shifting to a market economy was the only way to revitalize it. The changes came too late to prevent collapse. In addition, you use the USSR as the embodiment of communism. The Soviet Union is as communist as the United States is democratic. Not very much. Educate yourself, please. It's hard to take someone with grammar this poor, seriously. User 2: @User E, Ummm they did. First thing, is they could not industrialize the entire nation it was too much land (they had more industry then Austria Hungary yet after world war two guess what Austria was being rich and the minimum wage better then the Soviets), secondly why would that affect workers not doing work if there was no industry the coal miners, It took 6 Soviet Coal miners to be as efficient as an American coal miner, thirdly name me an other Communist nation that had more power then the Soviet Union? And my last point I learned English two years ago Try speaking to me in German or French. Communism can not work because in the perfect world were there is no government and no "greed" so money does not exist I would take guns and start a revaluation I may not want materiel wealth in this world I would want POWER there is no one too stop me in, I read Communist Manifesto and I doubt you read any book Against your option. You provide no Evidence why Communism can work I can provide Evidence that Capitalism works We had the same system that the Sumerians used and it is still here. Me: @User 2, You are missing his point. Just look at the Soviet government. Their whole communist model ever since Lenin died was a sham. They had an establishment just like Germany, the EU, the US, you name it. Look like Benny He said, the US goes on about how we are about freedom and liberties. It is a sham. His point is that you keep pinning the Soviet government as a model for the entire fabric of Socialism. This is false. It shows you do not understand the fundamentals of Marxism and the Material Dialectic. The Russian Empire as he stated actually did NOT fully mature industrially and this explains their disastrous failures against the 2nd German Realm in WW1. Even after Lenin first adopted the NEP, the Soviet Union was being crushed in the Steel and Heavy Industry compared to Western nations. You excuse the Russian Empire's slow industrialization due to the large landmass. You forget the terrain across most of the Empire, it is cold, barren, unfertilized, and tundra. In contrast, the US had lots of flat open and rich fields and had lots of resources to work with. The Russian Empire due to their immature economy and the economic climate did not. Even other nations like the Ottoman Empire and China had problems catching up to the western nations because of unrest and immaturity of their economy even though they had plenty of resources. Which now brings me to Stalin's five year plans. Ill give Stalin a tiny bit of credit he did achieve some thing, however at dreadful costs. He killed 10's of millions of people some accounts even say close to 100 million which is half of the Soviet population in the 80's to put that into perspective. In fact, I am a huge supporter of Khrushchev's desalinization act and Gorbachev's Glasnost. Nevertheless, he did increase the production of Heavy Industry, Steel, and Coal significantly. Now brings me to your statement on workers. This is utter Falsehood. The Soviet Union had the 3rd largest workforce while an unproportionately high industrial production rate. Growth skyrocketed during the Brezhnev years. During the 80's when Gorbachev took office, the economy started to decline. However this was not because of workers being 'lazy'. It was because for as much as I love Gobachev, it was his policies. The production rate plummeted as unemployment started to rise at an alarming rate. The rapid privatization in an economy that was not ready for such a fundamental change. On top of that. it seemed that the Soviet Union was losing the Cold War fast as Ronald Reagan started to outspend the USSR in the military budget. In all the Soviet economy was just unstable. Here is a PDF on why the Soviet Economy declined in the late 80's and early 90's https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/mharrison/inactive/command.pdf User 2: you are ignoring the question tell me how your socialism would work? (I am just not having a good time with him. At this point I am like, "Oh my god!!! Are you seriously asking that question after all of that?!?!) Me: I am not hardcore Marxist firstly if that is what you are wondering. I should not have to answer that question secondly because it already works in plenty of countries. If you go to Scandinavia, they have the highest happiness ratings and some of the highest trust in their government. The main point is it works and has worked ever since Sweden made the first reforms in their government in the 1920's. Now how and why, is very complicated and it is better if you just look at the history and economic of those countries yourself. Ill say this though, the Danish Welfare Society was created in the 1820's. Something that we have achieved in the last 50-60 years the Danish and other achieved 200 years ago. User 2: The free market still exist there you can have different pay, that not socialism that's liberalism. Me (with a face-palm): Again, that depends on what you define as socialism. However, some argue that any general services to the public in essence is Socialist. For example the Fire Department, the public Hospitals. Socialism is an economic theory and it seems that you don't seem to understand that nor do you seem to understand the fundamentals and foundations of socialism. The free market is limited there and there is no free enterprise. Even under Lenin and his NEP, there was small scale capitalism. So you cannot just say they are leftist and in any scene socialist. Because you will lose that argument. User 2: You still do not give me one proof that Socialism works, I can give proof capitalism works because it is still around since human Mesopotamia and it still here stronger then ever. (I want to throttle his throat because I have been sitting here for two days telling why Capitalism fails, and why Socialism works. He is like fact deaf with me!) User 2: No Capitalism was never used until the 1830's when Britain used it. So now you are implying that you do even understand what Capitalism is. I am not going go over again why Socialism works. Because I have and you are ignoring what I am saying. I have taken actual data and evidence why Capitalism fails and actual social experiments in other countries why Socialism works. I am not going over economic history with you because if you don't even understand basic economics. Therefore I do not see a point explaining stuff to you. So please, do yourself a favor and educate yourself. User 2: You think I need education? really? Bullionism Agrarian capitalism Mercantilism Industrial capitalism and modern capitalism now let me explain Profit motive The profit motive is a theory in capitalism which posits that the ultimate goal of a business is to make money. Stated differently, the reason for a business's existence is to turn a profit. The profit motive functions on the rational choice theory, or the theory that individuals tend to pursue what is in their own best interests. Accordingly, businesses seek to benefit themselves and/or their shareholders by maximizing profits. In capitalist theoretic, the profit motive is said to ensure that resources are being allocated efficiently. For instance, Austrian economist Henry Hazlitt explains: If there is no profit in making an article, it is a sign that the labor and capital devoted to its production are misdirected: the value of the resources that must be used up in making the article is greater than the value of the article itself." other words, profits let companies know whether an item is worth producing. Theoretically in free and competitive markets, maximizing profits ensures that resources are not wasted. the idea of Profit motive has been around for a long time this is the basics of Capitalism, And I will agree with you you can make an argument that capitalism has not started until the 1500's. (At this point I have been showing this to my friends and family. They said he was a troll and it was not worth talking to him.) Me: OK you're done! I have spent several days talking to you and reasoning with you warning you that conservatives cannot be reasoned with.You have proven my point. So as a result,I am end this conversation here to keep my dignity and my sanity. All the arguments and counters has shown you have been projecting your behavior on me,and that reason is not in your world of thought. We are done because frankly I do not want to talk to you anymore. Any more responses will be recognized from here on out as trolling. User 2: but I keep giving facts and you have not, you said that Sweden is a communist nation even though it fits the bill of a Capitalist nation, You give no proof of why your system works I give 30 lines of why mine can you have raged quit because Capitalism works. (Total bullshit! If anything, he proves why Capitalism is a system based on greed.) Me: Save your breath. The more you talk the stupider you seem. It is like arguing with a physical dummy the more I argue with it, the less it can be reasoned with. You have ignored most to everything I said and fabricated statements to fit its place, and then accuse me of authenticity. It is utter none-sense. No more... there is no meaning talking to you. User 2: But if you want Socialism to work you need to convince people like me that it can work, yet you still can not back up your claim that Socialism works. Considering I am in the military if you even try a revaluation you would need to convince me to try not and hurt the workers revaluation because I have the guns, and you do not. Make one argument on why Socialism works and you can win this debate, show me your sources and why people would risk there lives for the workers revolution. Me: I have backed my claim you have only used two pieces of evidence that just imply the lazy worker myth. You are convincing me the more you talk that you are indeed a troll. If you are not a troll, then silence yourself because frankly I am done with you. You are already convinced and you will believe what you want to believe leave it at that and leave me be. Last thought: I do not have to convince anyone. If any, the only person I have to convince is myself. Because in this world, the Socialist movement is growing apparent or not. As Capitalism exploits the land and people, it is the people who decide of they will stand up for themselves or not. I am not going to Spanish Inquisition on them because there is not need to. The time will come in Human history when people will gain contentiousness. I and my Socialist brothers and sisters just have to be patient. User 2: then how come in every nation's communist party is losing power? (A bold and somewhat snobbish attempt to shut him down.) Me: Apparently you do not understand what the phrase "I am done talking to you is" do you need clarification or are you going to continue antagonizing me. User 2: then do not respond because you clearly lost, you have only stated your option and I have giving facts researched by economist from the early 1900s and from now, you have only accused me of not reading Communist manifesto, good day sir.
Wow, what a wall of text. I sure as hell won't be reading that.
I don't understand the purpose of you showing us your own post either. Are you waiting for our approval? Because this seems so much like making a bad picture and showing it to mum and daddy so they'll put it up on the fridge.
And why are you trying to start an argument about left vs. right? Because there have been a lot of those in here and it starts to get boring after 15 times. And please don't say that you're not trying to do that because it's so obvious.
Woschia wrote: The Federal Aristocracy of Thracia and Crimea Wow, what a wall of text. I sure as hell won't be reading that. I don't understand the purpose of you showing us your own post either. Are you waiting for our approval? Because this seems so much like making a bad picture and showing it to mum and daddy so they'll put it up on the fridge. And why are you trying to start an argument about left vs. right? Because there have been a lot of those in here and it starts to get boring after 15 times. And please don't say that you're not trying to do that because it's so obvious. Firstly, I thought I would like to show this because I thought this is something to show because this was an area for politcs and other ooc stuff. I just wanted to hear your guys' thoughts on this because I am thinking for a moment that I was crazy or something.
I do not want to start an argument. This was not posted on here to start an argument.
I am getting a vibe from you that you are angry or something related to that. I mean not to get anyone angry, nor do I want to really interact with people too much that are angry. I am sharing my thoughts and I cannot get this off my mind it keeps bothering me.
wrote: The United Kingdom of Kalmara Firstly, I thought I would like to show this because I thought this is something to show because this was an area for politcs and other ooc stuff. I just wanted to hear your guys' thoughts on this because I am thinking for a moment that I was crazy or something. I do not want to start an argument. This was not posted on here to start an argument. I am getting a vibe from you that you are angry or something related to that. I mean not to get anyone angry, nor do I want to really interact with people too much that are angry. I am sharing my thoughts and I cannot get this off my mind it keeps bothering me.
So you just posted a gigantic wall of text so you could clear your conscience and say things you couldn't say to the other guy in here. Well, he can't see your response in here mate. Tell it to him.
And if it's not to start an argument, please stop saying that you're a socialist/Marxist between every other post. People are gonna jump into it like wildfire. And honestly, I don't think anyone in here cares if anyone is a socialist/anarchist/fascist/syndicalist or whatever. We're just here to have a good time. If you do want to have an argument about politics, share your views on the subject and not just say what you identify as in the first part of your posts. Because if a person does that, it looks like he's bragging about his ideology, trying to show how superior he is to the others. I'm not saying you're doing that, but it gives the impression that you are.
And no, I'm not in one bit angry. You're misinterpreting my tone. I just wanted to say how pointless that post was.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading that argument
Should have been a book though
Literally lost 54 days of residency on a missclick.
I am saddened at the outcome of the UK EU referendum.