What makes lockdown "inherently political"? Last I checked, pandemics didn't vote.

They're making a post regarding censoring certain subs for having political leanings on a sub that is against censorship, especially in regards to political leanings. It's like if irony was a post.

The term nigga dates way back to the 70s. It's not "5 years ago" also, 5 years ago was 2015, which was practically the height of SJW shit.

Saying "this one guy I know did this" isn't proof. I'm not pretending they're two different words. One is a variation of the other because the original has heavy racist connotations. >but I guess its all part of this linguistic war the left is waging, trying to control how people talk. Ok, so you're either some edgelord teenager who thinks being against the norm is cool, or you're some old fuck who think the current generation are spoilt children.

Answer my question. When have you seen a black person use nigger in the same context as when they use the term nigga? Call what I say "leftist drivel", but it is what it is.

>they use both terms interchangeably anyway. They don't, though. When have you ever seen nigger used in the same context as nigga? The soft "A" version was made as a replacement to reclaim the word for the black community, whereas the original hard "R" variant is steeped in racial oppression throughout history.

But that's what I mean. I've never grouped protesters with looters. Some people refuse to separate the two because, for some retarded fucking reason, they have the mindset of "with us or against us", as if there are only two sides in this situation. All the looters are doing is giving the police and the media a reason to treat these protests as little more than a means to commit felonies, instead of what they actually are. Whether it be Antifa, undercover cops, white supremacists or just thugs, they're pieces of shit, and them attacking cops and pedestrians, destroying property and instigating riots are ruining what these protests are about.

Exactly. That's why there is the distinction between those who are protesting, and those who are going out stealing and vandalising from local businesses and the like. Hell, we have seen some of these rioters and looters being combatted against by those who are simply protesting and don't want there to be violence. It adds nothing and only exists to damage their movement, and I'm not even gonna go into the whole police officers and white supremacists disgusing themselves as protesters and shit. The laws that govern the US aren't broken, but those with the power to dictate them are. That's why it's a systemic problem. In a perfect world, all would be held to the same scrutiny, but reality isn't that fair. That's why situations like this can crop up and be mishandled by those who dish out the law, and those who judge. It isn't the laws that need to change, but the police force. There needs to be a reform, and they should be held to the same level of accountability as the public, if not, worse, as they are meant to uphold the law. How we do that, I don't know, but the protests are better at getting things moving over sitting on our asses and expecting things to change. Social and legal reform doesn't happen if the people don't stand up to injustice. It's worked before, and it'll work again, so long as the people don't exist within some authoritarian society.

You're right. Had it not been for the government, I would still be going out, putting myself at risk, endangering my loved ones and those with compromised immune systems. If not for them, I wouldn't have a clue how to deal with a disease, for I am but a humble peasant who never had an education. If only I were as smart as you, whose political discourse is so full of intellectual product, and totally doesn't resort to calling others names. Please, oh wise one, grant my limpwristed self more of your big brain knowledge, for only you know how to deal with this current pandemic at hand.

Hope that thesaurus wasn't too heavy for this. /s But, regardless of my thoughts on the situation, am I wrong in regards to how they were banned? Opinions aside, let's not act like how they argue wasn't a factor.

The title of this post also implies that their opinion was the only reason they were banned. Like, that may have been part of it, but let's be honest here. Acting indignant and condescending was definitely a big part of it.

Jesus. No wonder you got banned. There's expressing an opinion that most disagree with, and then there's this, which is a good cross between being opinionated, and being a sarcastic jackass because others respond to your opinion. You weren't banned because you had an opinion. You were banned because you speak with condescension towards others who dare to speak against you. The opinion itself, along with the air of superiority, is what made the mods think you were a troll and banned you. I'm not gonna tell you that your opinion is bad or wrong. I'll withhold my thoughts on that. It's your opinion, and I'll leave that at that. What I will say, though, is that you're ignorant on the situation we're in, whether it's due to a lack of knowledge or just willful ignorance. I get it. The situation fucking sucks. We all want to get back to normality as soon as possible. That said, our best recourse to fight back this is to spend as little time outside and with others so we can kill the spread of this disease. Its gonna be a while before we're in the clear, but the better we do to combat this, the sooner we can get out and live our lives again. It sucks, and its gonna suck for a good while before things change.

Yeah, you're right, and I'm pretty sure they aren't gonna give a shit about a new one, since it's a sub about drinking fucking water. Say what you will about their stance on political views and far left boot licking, but this is probably the least politically charged content you could have.

Even then, the only flaw in the original sub was the name and not the actual content. It's not like the subreddit had a toxic community, or the content was inherently toxic to begin with. Not only that, but from the basis of the quote, I'm pretty sure it would only count if the actual ban was to do with the content of the sub. If it's just a name that was the issue, I highly doubt they would take issue with another subreddit popping up that corrected that issue. Otherwise ban evasion as a rule is inherently flawed in its purpose, since its standards are incredibly loose at that point.

How is that ban evasion? The only reason they got banned was the name, which they changed. Plus, they were quarantined when r/hydrohomies was made. Can't really ban evade if the second wub was made before the ban.

Him: Please help. Our government does nothing for us, theyve let us down, we cant do anything. You: lol, fucking gook

Yeah, and it became a meme, such as an image of the Joker with a question including these statistics. Dunno why the post got locked, since I've seen other posts with this statistic in it on that subreddit.

All I can see from the comments is people asking if there's really a point in there being an all women exclusive event, when GDQ have always been inclusive in their events. I guess discussion = bad and celebration for no reason other than inclusivity = good?

Agreed. If this whole Trump/Russia collusion situation does prove to be true, he should absolutely be removed from office. However, this whole video situation basically places a "Boy Who Cried Wolf" effect on CNN and the case itself. It adds even more shade and makes the outcome of the case even harder to pinpoint.

Since fuck face can't actually do anything but drool instead of present a valid argument to you, I'll try to explain why your opinion is wrong, or at least, isn't good. Regardless of opinion on PV, it doesn't change the fact that a CNN official has outright stated that the whole Russia thing is practically baseless conjecture. Sure, the video is heavily edited, and yes, it would be great if we had the full thing unedited, but it didn't change what the guy said, nor did they crop the audio to make it look like he said something he didn't.

You mean the discussion about the post which is about how r/politics is censoring anything to do with this story? How is talking about r/politics not relevant on a post that's about r/politics?

Who is this Seth Rich guy? Let me look him up... "DNC staffer, Wiki leaks connections" Hmm. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/murdered-dnc-staffer-seth-rich-had-sent-44000-internal-emails-to-wikileaks-report/article/2623186