houseoftolstoy @[email protected]

Recently found out about a channel called "whatever" on youtube. Similar to the style of Fresh and Fit. I can save everyone a lot of time summarizing how the conversations usually go.

Brian: In general, women want a guy who is more dominant.

One or more of the women guests: No, no, I and one other friend I have totally like guys who are more the submissive type.

Even if such statements are truthful (doubt is heavy here), the guest always treat exceptions like they are equal to the norms.

Also, since it was set loose earlier than planned, it makes sense that it was not quite as deadly as they were wanting it to be.

Along with that, the vaxx causing heart issues might be fully intended too, as it would allow them to kill the elderly once more without raising suspicion. Pushing it for everyone was indeed retarded, but I do see the booster campaigns targeting the elderly the most, which supports that theory too.

I just thought of something. We know for a fact that Covid was a result of gain of function research, and that even in the early days, the mortality rate of infants and toddlers was almost 0, which is quite different than what we see with the flu, where they are more vulnerable.

This makes me wonder if the primary purpose was to cull the elderly in the first place. Given the problems with funding Social Security and Medicare, it certainly would cut down a lot of those costs.

And the US likely would intervene because of the people running the show through their puppet Biden would no way let their sacred "democracy" get stopped because the people in the country decide to see how the numbers really pan out in a full scale conflict.

Let nations decide their own fate? NO! The "democracy enthusiasts" cannot let other countries settle things out on their own! They have to interfere so that globohomo can march on!

Looking back at the whole Brazil election (with likely "fortifications" by the CIA), I have to wonder if Bolsonaro did choose to cross the Rubicon if that could have sparked WWIII. I really doubt that countries like the US would not double down on making sure that the "correct" result was kept in place by sending their own military. And after that, all bets would be off with who else might decide to enter the fray. Which could mean WWIII.

Maybe all this would not happen, but I have to wonder.

If your reaction to the Chinese spy balloon is "I can't believe that the Chinese are spying on us!" I have some bad news for you. Other countries are always spying on us, just as we are spying on them. Us finding on example of how it was being done should not make you shocked that we are being spied on.

Besides, our own government does it, and they hate us more than the Chinese government does.

The nurse shortage in many parts of the US shows that we cannot guarantee that there will be a ready supply of labor for a given field. Any moron who thinks that nationalizing health care will fix this issue does not consider that capitalism is not the cause, nor do they actually have a means to fix the shortage issue. They simply see healthcare as an unlimited resource that is being withheld by rich greedy people.

Besides, it was government vaxx mandates that caused the shortages.

That is why I see China having a chance more than many other countries. What good is it being "the best" in aspects such as GDP production, military, technology, or any other major aspect of a big player in the world if you cannot even keep up a replacement birth rate. You cannot have a lasting major power if you cannot even sustain it with human capital.

So if China ends up making the changes they would need to make to reverse course, they may just win by default.

Among the major players in the world, I can see China being more likely to have a future. That is because I see articles about how the Chinese government is going directly against feminism. Granted, these may be small actions, but let us consider the current Chinese system. What exactly is stopping them from hitting the gas and really "taking women's rights away?" Nothing really, since they do not have to worry about elections.

Those that equate "freedom" with getting happy outcomes or getting provisions show that they do not understand actual freedom. Freedom can give you the means to succeed, but it can also result in you failing as well.

For example, if you hit a baseball of a tee, you are far more likely to hit the ball. But if you are someone wanting to hit a home run, hitting a ball off a tee would limit that capability. "But I want to be free from striking out," means you do not understand freedom.