>"left wingers" arguing against free speech and for bailouts>"Right wingers" arguing for both expanding and reducing government Is there even a point to these terms anymore? Is there any point to attempting Austrian economics in a low trust society that's going to collapse?
>>519944295Christian: In sickness and in healthJew: gonna fornicate with this guy opps! Now he's sick. Toss 'em.
>>519944295No. There's not. I want basically;>gun rights, >free speech absolutism>Total deportations>Mixed socialist economy>houses in coastal states start at $150k>cancel student debt and make colleges eat the cost directly>abortions banned only if you are whiteTheres no term for that.
>>519944429>Christian: In sickness and in healthAlso Christian in 99% of written history: I am going to marry this guy because he is rich
>Epstein
>>519944602The term you're looking for is "based."But don't forget to end dual citizenship and kick out all dual nationals, especially Israelis!
>>519944602>Stuff for me but not for thee.You only need these because your base ideology isn't sufficient.
>>519945032>women deciding who they marryLMAO. Crack open a history book. Up until relatively recently (100 or so years ago), in the West, it was the patriarch of her family, usually her father, that would determine her husband. Women rarely had a say.
>>519945367Peter the Great ended arranged marriages in 17th century already, he said they are barbaric.And ALSO, you are just shifting responsibility. Then it was the father who demanded money, very common and we even have a name for it. Not to mention that people from different hindu castes like nobles and peasants couldn't marry. I don't understand how this garbage ended in EuropeEither way, it is degeneracy all around.
>>519945235Oh yeah, and total discontinuation of giving Isreal anything.
>>519945345Are you a retard or just brown? This is absolutely for thee. Do you not live in houses?
>>5199474921) Russia is only one nation, and even without arranged marriages, the father was still choosing who his daughter married. 2) It was typically the wife's family that paid a dowry to the groom, because a woman was considered a burden that the groom would need to care for (which is true and remains true to this day).3) Older men in her family deciding who she marries is the opposite of degeneracy. That is how things are supposed to be. Women are terrible when it comes to choosing a mate. They are simply not equipped to do so. We have seen in the West, over the last 100 years, how disastrous it is when women get to choose. That is backwards. That is degenerate. And it's destroying the West.
>>519947492>ended arranged marriagesand thats a shame because not doing so enables their promiscuity. Funny it was during the 17th century, which is exactly around the time shit like protofeminism was making its first appearances and rebellions were appearing all across europe.>you are just shifting responsibilityI dont think he is, responsibility still befalls on the husband as he would have to take care of her meaning he has to divide resources for her and kids, likewise, this meant for her father that he would no longer need to spend extra resources on her, and given how normalized it was there wasn't much enmity between her father and her husband as they both likely went through the same and understood the risks. Only thing that truly made their parents responsible for is if something happened like her being sterile or cheating on her husband, which could lock her out of her old family's support or lock her out of new relationships as she'd be less desirable for other men and so they had to fend on their own, which meant they had to do even more concessions about what kind of guy would take them. It was a brutal yet honest and simple way
