Was he a libertarian?

>Ayn Rand biblethumping

Attached: 150284758289.jpg (655x527, 36K)

It's true, modern America Republicans worship Ayn Rand (except a her atheist stuff).

He clearly meant Republicans basically worshipping Rand while also being fundamental Christians.

>shoehorning political agenda into the children's movies
>seeing political agenda in children's movies when there is none there

They're both equally pathetic.

Rand was an atheist and is treated (quite unfairly) as a pariah by most of the populace. The average randian is regarded in the same vein as the average Scientologist.

the fact that it's contradictory and idiotic doesn't change the fact that it accurately represents the american republican party

It's almost like the right wing in America is completely fucktarded.

Literally who other than Paul Ryan, who just pays lip service and is completely disconnected from any of her ideas, worships Rand in contemporary politics lmao?

Attached: 1563826969647.png (628x850, 126K)

SOMEBODY

>t. Europoor with no understanding of US politics

why was ayn rand so against welfare when she was on welfare herself?

Are you guys European or Canadian and know nothing about our politics?
Ted Cruz was a major presidential candidate and he once took out time during a senate hearing to fucking tell people to read The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged.
We literally have a conservative politician named RAND Paul. He is old enough to be in office. Ayn Rand has been so popular among the right that we are starting to get generations named after her.

christcucks that want open borders to flood the country with cheap labor, not that hard to understand

>why should she take back money that was stolen from her?? Fucking hypocrites!!

She was just a sociopath. Read her letters, she basically delights in human suffering in the lower classes.

because she repressed her rape tantasies her whole life

>Fiona's Parents = Republicans
are you extremely retarded?
they had a fucking K I N G D O M

The only US politicians who have actually put into place anything resembling randianism is Ron/Rand Paul. Every other person is just paying lip service.

No wonder the Republican party loves her so much

Or you just don't understand the difference between the neocon and lolbert aspects of the republican party. Kinds like how right wingers throw both commies and neolibs under the "liberal" label. A misunderstanding compacted by a smug sense of superiority.

Found the commie who doesn’t actually understand the incredibly simple concept of objectivism

ok retard

What do you expect from kikes

>IT'S MUH RAILROAD I WANT MUH RAILROAD BUILT MUH WAY
>PAY the people who are actually building my railroad and give them health benefits?? REEEEEEEE

Rand's books are fucking retarded and all star sociopaths. Objectivism is an ideology for sociopaths. Look at the shit it inspires like Reaganomics and Mister A. Sociopathic.

Ayn Rand probably thinks The Nibelung is the good guy in the Ring cycle.

what exactly did i say that was wrong

Objectivists view taxation as theft, there’s nothing contradictory about taking back money stolen from you. This is the dumbest non dunk retard lefties love throwing out.

The same reason why communists participate in the capitalist system despite claiming to hate it.

What a hysterical non answer from a typical brainlet who supports a system of compulsory force to get his gibs

>both of them support massive tax breaks for the rich and massive corporatization
>both of them support crushing the middle and lower class
Sure is a big difference between the two

Not really, commies participate in the system because they live in it. Rand took welfare because she paid into it.

>these two strawmen are the same I’m smart

Typical self assured prog not even knowing what they’re arguing against lmao

Imagine actually being a lolbertarian retard and not a superior national capitalist

Who here /libertarian/ master race?

What's a national capitalist? I'm assuming both are big free market advocates.

*anarchist master race

FTFY

Take the black pill and join the good guys statist retards

>strawmen
that is literally all the right wing does. it's also what America's left wing does, but America's left wing is a right wing party.

>because they live in it
Wheres the contradiction

Monsieur Hood=AnCap

There isn’t one in either case

You don’t even comprehend what your so called enemies believe retard, you will always lose.

Communes are a thing.
>both commies and neolibs support open borders
>both commies and neolibs support disenfranchising the native white working class in order to prop up non-white/foreign persons
>sure is a big difference between the two
See, I can make retarded false equivalences too.

Capitalism but with minimal or zero foreign labor and immigration

FPBP

>americas left wing is right wing
This has to be the dumbest thing eurofags have ever come up with

Expansion of government, expansipn of welfare, expansion of regulation, using government as the primary means to correct social ills, higher taxes, philosophy based in marxism, leftist terminology and framing for everything. Which part is inherently right wing?

Was she an Authoritarian?

Attached: fairy-godmother-shrek-2-80.8.jpg (210x240, 7K)

So libertarian nationalism

Communes still require participation in the capitalist system, ie: private property

Even Bernie is a nationalist retard. Progressivism is as American as apple pie, which is German btw. By Euro standards every US politician is right wing.

The part where they actually don't care about the lower or middle class at all and do the same thing Republicans do and shovel more money at the top 1% and get into more wars. Obama was literally just the same president as George Bush but with some social reform like gay marriage.

Conservatism is progressivism driving the speed limit

>By Euro standards
By western euro standards, the current president of Czech Republic, an ex-communist and lifelong socialist was a far right candidate, so as far as westcuck yuros go, they can suck my dick and go reveal another statue of rich jew Marx.

Sure but national capitalism sounds better and the libertarian idea of 0 taxes is retarded

>is a nationalist
Nationalism is not inherently left or right, and hes only nationalist insofar as a marxist would naturally oppose threats to the working class from the "capitalists" importing labour to depress wages.

As of recently he has walked all that back anyway and went full leftist retard

>progressivism is
Non sequitur

>by euro standards ever us politician is right wing
Just restates his position without any additional nuance.

Yeah im thinking eurofags are in fact retarded

>care about the lower or middle class
Go throw another 25 dollars Starbucks milkshake at someone, you class champion.

If the land is owned by one person who lets a commune use his land no strings attached and does not interact with the commune in any way apart from merely owning the land, is that commune participating in the capitalist system?
Not an argument, just a thought exercise.

That makes zero sense

Both are relative concepts and are opposite one another

>libertarian idea of zero taxes
Libertarianism is not against taxes entirely, only as a rule. Income tax would die but there is room for things like property taxes depending on your flavor, and tariffs are entirely seperate from libertarianism as far as im concerned

>not being an unironic fascist in the current year

Attached: 14663282080823.jpg (1024x1024, 83K)

Nationalism is inherently right wing. The right wing’s focus is literally conserving culture. Globalism is inherently left wing. You’re as dumb as the retards who say fascism is a politically neutral term lmao

As far as the supreme court is concerned literally everything you do is connected to interstate commerce, including "not" doing something. So likely yes if you want to be autistic

Left and Right in each respective country is two alternate visions of the same system.

Even your WOKE congresswomen just want gibsmedats from Capitalism. They don't want to replace it.

You should unironically try to have some sex

but i unironically have sex with your mom every night

Virtually every progressive cause is fought initially by conservatives then championed as their own cause years later when it has been inoculated into the larger culture. Gay marriage, Medicare, medicade, social security, world war, etc. conservatism is an intellectually bankrupt ideology and are no different than progs ten years ago.

My mom died in 2005

>nationalism is inherently right wing
It isnt
>conserving culture
Conservatism isnt inherently right wing. A communist wanting to "conserve" his backwards retard political system isnt somehow right wing
>globalism is inherently left wing
It isnt
>fascism is a politically neutral term
Your version of the left right paradigm is no doubt completely arbitrary and self serving, as it was designed to be. Total and complete state control over industry in your mind im sure could be left or right wing, so its meaningless

i dont see how thats relevant

>Nationalism is inherently right wing.

Sure thing Amerifat.

Attached: https _cdn.cnn.com_cnnnext_dam_assets_180909125002-06-north-korea-military-parade.jpg (1200x675, 168K)

Real libertarians are against taxation entirely, only minarchist retards view a system of compulsory force as vaild

My heart is in the anarchist position, but I'd fucking kill for a minarchist society.

Engage in agorism when possible.

>Libertarianism is not against taxes entirely, only as a rule. Income tax would die but there is room for things like property taxes depending on your flavor, and tariffs are entirely seperate from libertarianism as far as im concerned
Thats also dumb though the well being of the people and the state should be put above whatever retarded libertarian principles there are

>hurr politics exist in a vacuum and authoritarian ideologies like Stalinism can not borrow concepts from the right wing

This is your mind on left vs right dementia

Is my favorite Jew in this thread?

If my child was a communist, I would kill myself too. There is no way to fail harder at life as a parent than that.

>then championed
Ok? Where are you contradicting me?
>conservatism is a bankrupt ideology
Oh you're using the colloquial "conservative" that has no real meaning. There exists libertarians that favor the income tax, and communists that suck apple's dick. Not really sure what the meaningful point you're trying to make is. That most people are fucking retards?

Engage in agorism always brother. Just embrace anarchism it’s the only intellectually consistent ideology on the table.

>collective rights over individual rights

This is how genocides start. No one knows what’s in by best interest but me.

scientologists are probably less smelly and less autistic than randians

Ah I see, you’re just a butthurt conservatard. Enjoy your constant L’s brainlet.

The philosopher kings rule platos republic

shhhh

Attached: 06F8DF55-4F72-44D2-99F9-28DC1CB12EB2.jpg (427x416, 29K)

>real libertarians are against taxation entirely
On what basis? A tariff on incoming goods has nothing to do with compulsory force on any citizen. One can derive property tax from a social contract theory where government exists over x jurisdiction, therefore it can levy tax on x, though i dont necessarily agree. How do you propose to fund the government?

Plato’s republic is literal idealism and the cause of the majority of the deaths of the 20th century

Because objectivism fail has been completely picked apart by scholars of philosophy. Even the Ayn Rand society admits that the majority of people who adhere to objectivism are young people who end up growing out of it

If you’re a real libertarian you don’t have a state in the first place

Libertarians are retards full stop because they can't comprehend the idea that people are motivated by something other than money. In the absence of state power, private power will exist.

And if that private power doesn't like what you've got to say on the internet? You're banned.

And they'll pass your details onto competitor's companies so they can ban you and freeze your financial accounts.

Yes the strength of the people and the nation should be put above what personal freedoms and principles you have

>This is how genocides start.
And whats wrong with getting rid of big nosed parasites?

>he well being of the people and the state
Completely relative concepts that can be (and are) taken in numerous horrible directions. A libertarian would assert that the peoples well being is best served by a lack of authoritarian cunts presiding over them, supported by a system of law.

Libertarian principles just means society does it instead of the government essentially, theres no moral framework to agree with inherently other then not fucking with people

Good thing there’s no state to enforce a monopoly on social media or banking so I can take my business elsewhere ;)

muh state power is right wing

duhhhh

Im not a conservative dipshit, you probably didnt understand a word i said because your mind is pozzed

That would be anarchy and wholly different from libertarianism as a system of governance

I would be an anarchist but third parties wont let me

Yeah because thats working out in modern day america lmao

Libertarianism/free markets are a system that demands tens of thousands of small businesses. It will never work in the reality of having a few hundred absolutely fucking massive businesses.

>NRX retard
Have sex

Stalinism is literally right leaning communism

>continuing your conservatard screeching

You should also consider having sex

>because they cant comprehend
Thats why people are libertarian brainlet
>lists a bunch of shit the government already does as a con against libertarianism
>its "just so"

>lists tortious interference with contract, a tort libertarianism would still support
>current law already allows for this
Uh huh

The state was the only artificial means in which lower and middle class people could restrict foreigners flooding the labour market and plummeting wages.

What you're calling for would sink the minimum wage to 3rd world standards.

Murray rothbard, the founder of US libertarianism called Mr. Libertarian, was THE ancap. Modern libertarianism is a statist bastardization of his actual vision and it’s followers are largely classical liberal retards. Before his movement libertarianism was a left wing ideology.

What is "that"?

Our current government would assert they put the people first you stupid fuck, by the way

What I’m calling for would abolish minimum wage entirely dumbass

>NRX
what the fuck is nrx

>Have sex
t. incel

Found the retard

Rand Paul isn’t named after her, dipshit.

His name is Randal. Rand/Randy is what his wife calls him so he uses that as his professional name

>NRX fag doesn’t even know what it is

Top lel, the average /pol/ack

The thing is though m8, there is no state enforced monopoly on social media. That was all of the private sector monopolizing things all by itself.

You have to be a literal retard to think that when Twitter bans you for hate speech that the US government is REALLY the one to blame.

Have you considered that monopolization happens in social media because the end-user is stupid as fuck?

>Stalinism is literally right leaning communism

Cool story Trotsky. It's not REAL Communism, is it?

Twitter, Facebook, and google all receive billions in subsidies yearly and constantly lobby for preferential treatment. That is basically a state monopoly dumb conservatard.

>this person doesnt know my obscure words so they must be retarded

Imagine thinking this is an intelligent or interesting response

I swear conservatives are the most banal people

Ah yes putting the people first by drowning the country with cheap labor and making the average person poorer

>hurr I don’t know what my ideology is called I’ll lash out in pain

Attached: B447F466-29E8-4007-B43A-74F0FF3786AA.png (614x500, 253K)

Exactly, so you'd sink the real minimum wage to 3rd world standards.

Flood the fields, the factories and the offices with foreign labor. It's just economic actors going about their lives. No nation. No race. No ideology except for economic gain.

I had zero idea that people had the idea that republicans were Ayn Rand lovers..
is this what's taught in other countries?

Attached: 1486536768345.png (473x392, 451K)

>gets directly refuted
>results to being a faggot
Every time

Ill qualify my last post by saying libertarianism is just colloquially referring to a sort of minarchy as opposed to anarchy. The point is that you dont need to be an anarchist to be libertarian. Again, i would be anarchist if not for malevolent third parties

>so lacking in self awareness you dont see how your own terms being used for bad makes them meaningless
Not the brightest crayon in the boz are you? Virtually everyone says their ideology is best for everyone dipshit, its a meaningless assertion

That’s what private borders are for

You didn’t refute shit hoss, I actually believe you should have some sex

They didn't achieve success because of a state subsidy though. Their popularity was a result of MUH MARKET.

Who said I was a conservative?

If you want to push your ideology, whatever it is, first you must achieve some measure of power to implement it. And once it is implemented, you must use force to keep it that way lest ANOTHER ideology come along and try to push their will one you.

But do tell me more about true Communism. Perhaps the shitshow in the Spanish Civil War?

>haha what do you mean you dont know this obscure word that has some slight similarities with your ideology ur so dumb haha

Attached: 1531515216849.jpg (480x480, 35K)

BUT that's racist so it'd technically never work cause it'd never be allowed

Well by putting the people first it can be kind of inferred that i mean the average citizen of that country not corporations that bankroll politicians into importing cheap labor

The economy and motivations for people would be so entirely different in anarchy its not possible to directly speculate on specific effects

Maybe goods will be so much cheaper that wouldnt be a problem. Maybe people would discriminate hard if left to do so. Maybe without welfare immigrants wouldnt be willing to immigrate in the first place. Maybe the economy becomes so efficient the plebs dont have to work as much to support themselves. You just dont know

Private corporations would have no incentive to restrict migration at all.

The extremely rich may form enclaves like they do in South Africa to get away from the filth and the crime, but they won't enforce nation wide borders. The idea of the nation wouldn't even exist.

No it was not, they’ve been receiving subsidies for years and have lobbied for preferential treatment since their founding. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Fuckin saved

>completely deconstructed his modern pozzed notion of what a conservative is
>his counterargument is "have sex"
>hoss
Lmao

Yeah that’s the point, large corporations would not exist in their current capacity and would not be a problem without a monopoly on force supporting their endeavors. Do you have an incentive to keep strangers out of your house?

soooooooooooooooooooooooooo
was the Dragon a Centrists?

>if I redefine modern conservatism as the paleoconservatism that has basically never existed I win da argument

Imagine being this person

Highest quality bait I'd rather catch this than fish

Im not really sure how you still dont underatand that "what is best for someone" isnt entirely arbitrary

A good portion of leftists think killing people on the right would be best for society. Im sure some retards think bailing out corporations is good for the average citizen because they employ average citizens

Most people including yourself cant see the forest for the trees. So maybe flesh out your ideology a bit more than "the people and state shouls be put above libertarian ideals".

I didnt even get to what happens when whats best for the people conflicts with what is best for the state lol.

We can only make observations based upon the past to as what a future dominated by your ideology would look like.

Late 19th century America or England for example.

But even then there was a national ideal. What you're advocating for is something more akin to British India, but we're all Indians and the CEOs of the SP 500 companies are the British Raj.

Without a monopoly on force, the restriction of migration is impossible without collusion between other forces.

What incentive does a corporation have to limit migration? It certainly ISN'T an economic one. They want cheap labour the same as they want cheap commodities.

I’m an agorist not a dirty commie, I can defend myself I don’t need your retard ideology to protect me from college Marxist retards thanks

Attached: 3eb.jpg (602x481, 47K)

Youre the one using the modern pozzed redefinition

For fucks sake you acknowledge that they dont conserve shit lmao. Do you think liberals in the US are actually liberal too?

Why does unfettered immigration matter without a state and with private property rights

>based upon the past
>19th century america
>19th century england
>anarchy
Ok, you arent a serious person

Why would I use paleoconservatism to describe modern conservatism when there are virtually no relevant paelocons in power?

From a taxation/market standpoint those are some of the most anarchic times in World history

Individualism is a poor group survival strategy. It's for this reason militias are dogshit at fighting in comparison to well trained troops.

If everyone held themselves as the highest authority, civilization would cease to exist.

Im not going to write an essay specifically detailing everything i believe in faggot, the point i was making was that collectivism and society as a whole should be put above muh freedom that lolbertarians so adamantly defend

What an empty assertion. Individualism has literally caused the largest boom of peace in world history.

>without a state and with private property rights
Whats stopping a state from being established if that were to happen?

“Society” is a subjective platonic ideal with no basis in reality. You’re doing nothing but deciding for other people what is best for them.

Other individuals voluntarily funding

Why would you use modern colloquial definitions for comparing grandiose political theories?

It would be easier to just say they arent conservative than to try and fit a square peg into a round hole because that is what youve been conditioned to do. Paleoconservatism is a stupis term because those people want change not conservation. Neoconservatives have the best claim to conservatism because they want the status quo to continue

But conservative is a stupid term to use to begin with to describe specific positions, isnt it?

sort of like shitlibs sucking Islamic dick. you don't have a leg to stand upon as far as consistency goes buddy

>huge war that left the US untouched causing them to be established as the dominant economic power
>nah bro it was individualism haha

Because everything we've seen in the last 40 years in the West would turned up to 11.

As long as one nation or people have more than another nation or people, their material wealth will be coveted. Even if no meaningful welfare system exists they will still move to try to acquire more wealth.

The Europeans that moved to America in the 19th century didn't do so out of a desire for welfare gibs. There was no welfare gibs. They moved because America had an abundance of resources and you could live a better life than you could in Europe.

Nigga what the fuck are you even arguing about lmao

>You’re doing nothing but deciding for other people what is best for them.
You mean like literally everyone else?

>US politics dumb!
>this fucking apelike creature got elected
explain yourselves euros

Attached: boris-johnson-pic-rex-149163468.jpg (615x409, 33K)

>hurr the US wasn’t founded on individualist enlightenment ideals and the entire modern 1st world doesn’t centralize around individual rights

>collectivism should be put above muh freedom
Just as meaningless. A minarchist could easily read that and agree with you, because they think a state is necessary

You dont need an essay, you just need to stop pussyfooting around because you dont want to admit how much control you think the state should have over everyone. Or maybe you dont even know yourself, youre just stupid.

I see virtually no evidence supporting this NRx meme constantly pushed by /pol/. immigration is harmless without state power.

Youre trying to use terms that have meaning, only you want to ise the self serving modern pozzed versions of them

If what i said was confusing to you it just means you've literally never thought about the words you use

Pretty much any other country wouldve prospered if in that situation it wasnt because of individualism

Nah I think you’re just dumb eurotrash who can’t form a coherent thought

That doesnt sound like much of a guarantee to stop a state from forming

He just wanted people to GET OUT OF HIS SWAMP

So he was more among the lines of conservative if we look at that viewpoint/perspective.

Could you expand on that?

Youre just copying 1:1 government influenced economies to non government influenced economies, without government. Maybe you wont, but people in your position wont even concede that an economy would become better without modern government

By the way, immigration is one of the reasons im not willing to go full anarchy

All youre doing is autistically nitpicking words and the same can be applied to literally anything else

You seem completely incapable of thinking beyond your place and time, true slave mentality

Shrek voted for Trump.

>conservatard calling an agorist an old fashioned slave

I love this site

>We literally have a conservative politician named RAND Paul.

Attached: 1562396779612.jpg (179x282, 8K)

>same can be applied to literally anything else
>"The state should not regulate business", said the national socialist
>"A business owner is entitled to excess profits", said the communist
>"The government should force sikh women to give trannies brazilian wax jobs", said the libertarian
>"The government should disallow me from McNuking my neighbor", said the anarchist

>retard still thinks im conservative
>ive been arguing on behalf of anarcho capitalism for half of the thread
Very high iq, and redpilled

>anonymous poster defending conservatism the entire thread thinks people know which posts are his and is confused as to why people think he’s conservative

Truly a big brained autist

have sex

>ancap is triggered by the statement “conservatives are progressives driving the speed limit”

I don’t understand

Denying i was conservative didnt seem to work, i tried that first

Its stupid

Yeah, individualist enlightenment ideals from people that practiced slave labour.

It was ALWAYS contradictory propaganda.

You can't govern by those ideals because those ideals are ungovernable. Thus, the first President in American history was an authoritative military general who had no issue with putting down tax rebellions.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

Acting just as if he was King George responding to the challenge for sovereignty. But the sovereignty is within the state, not the monarch in this different system, and never think otherwise for a second.

When the state refuses to enforce it's sovereignty or power, other power grows in it's wake.

Its not contradictory if you just take for granted that niggers arent people

It was a mistake bringing them here but its not contradictory

Nah it’s just you bro

How is the notion of a state contradictory to enlightenment philosophy?
>not a monarch
Washington may as well have been a puppet for congress. It wasnt until all the revolutionaries died that states stopped threatening to or implying going to war over slights to perceived liberty. Then the civil war happened anyway over it.
Washington is lucky the people were gullible retards that WANT a king figure

>immigration is harmless without state power.

Low IQ people are going to do low-IQ things (crime). What difference does it make if there is state power approving the migration or private corporations.

As for the argument against high IQ migration, it doesn't manifest in violent crime, but instead the people coming over still harbor affinity for their own kind and loyalty to other states. Not even combating this with the current system's feeble attempt at assimilation will result in ethnic enclaves and ultimately colonization.

Just because the ideals weren’t followed by its initial implementation doesn’t make them invalid, it does the opposite.

I agree with all of your points btw but individualism isn’t why slavery existed.

It would be better for corporations and their shareholders, yes. Not for the people at large though.

Remember, the threat of Communism was the motivating factor in the development of the welfare state. It was Bismark that instituted the first pension system, and he did it to knock the stool out from the Socialists.

Again, the mid-20th century in the West was PURPOSEFULLY created in such a way as to elevate as many people to at least middle class wealth as possible, and this was in response to the threat of Communism.

Look at West Germany vs East Germany.

But if that threat of Communism is no longer there and you concentrate wealth, people are going to try to redistribute that wealth via force because they realize they aren't getting as much of the pie as their parents or grandparents 40 years ago.

It's obvious that niggers never should have been given person-hood, but this is contradiction to liberal philosophy and not in support of it. All men being created equal is simply just a lie.

If we're talking about absolute individualism, it is.

If those ideals can't be followed at even the initial implementation then they can never be followed. They never have been implemented either. They are lofty ideals that have always been twisted and used for justification for others. Kind of like the bible.

Remember, Liberia has the same constitution as the United States!

wtf I guess I'm aa Cruz Missile now

>implying socialism is any different from fascism
based and commie propaganda pilled

retard

I’m not a believer in the constitution in any sense, I’m an anarchist. But individualism was not the cause of those atrocities it’s the solution

Why even get the pseudo-/pol/ds all ramped up!? Criminy sakes....

The original poster is retarded but there are, in fact, philosophers trying to reconcile Objectivism and Christianity. Look for Gabriel Zanotti and the likes of him.

This. (I like that pseudo- pol thing btdesu)

Now we gotta hear the canned politic banter they screencapped during the 2016 election and are just now presenting it as a political view.

based retard

Everyday this board accomplishes a new low.

Because she view it as restitution for the money that was stolen from her. As simple as that.
Taxation is theft and fuck jannies and niggers

Plato’s Republic is more Fascistic than anything tho

DONKEY

STOP VIOLATING THE NAP

Not the same, commies can choose not to parcipate in the market yet they do because it benefits them. Ayn Rand (and all objectivists) are forced to pay taxes, so collecting welfare money is the only restitution they will get.
One group voluntarily gets into the contradiction, the other just wants its money back.

>everyone who worked on Shrek hated it
>if you pissed off Katzenberg he'd punish you by moving you to the Shrek team
>the movie made an ungodly sum of money
>they had to make 3 more

Being an animator is suffering.

Imagine having All Star playing in your office 24/7 for several years straight

he was a NIMBY moderate

I bet the animators are the ones who started making those All Star memes, as a coping mechanism.
youtube.com/watch?v=eT3BFzSD6YY

>tfw we never got more dreamworks biblical kino because Shrek did so well
LA animator JJ Villard worked on Shrek 3 and said it was the worst job he ever had and almost killed his passion for animating. He said everyone there were coke addicts, sounds like a terrible meme company.

based shrek

Could you imagine a Dreamworks movie about king David? It would be kino as fuck.

not him but can you elaborate on that responsible for deaths thing?

>the left wing in America has Antifa tankies and ex Klansman boomers wtf im a nazi now

>Ayn Rand bible thumping republicans
shitpost?

>the strength of the nation should be put above personal freedoms
That's right goy, we need to reduce violence, better give up your guns, you've got to think of the children after all
Better give up free speech too, after all hate speech and indoctrination has no place in our tolerant society inclusive of minorities
Criticizing the government's policies and corruption? People need to trust in the state to be kept in line... it's for the greater good, who cares if some dissenters get sent to jail anyways?
Government has spy cameras set up everywhere and are watching you in your own home? Why do you feel entitled to privacy anyways? Are you a terrorist or something? If you have nothing to fear you have nothing to hide

So how does that boot taste

Absolutely based, self-made trust fund kiddos SEETHING

>liberals actually think like this
kek

Attached: 294EFF51-B1C6-48F5-8505-BCA4FC36BD61.png (220x338, 96K)

>you want “gibs” for your chemo? try not getting cancer, poorfag lol
>wtf how dare you call me a sociopath?

>GIVE ME FREE SHIT AND SUBSIDIZE ME TO EXIST WHILE I SIT ON MY ASS DOING NOTHING
>...no
>fucking sociopath, everyone with a modicum of ambition, rationality, or pragmatism is a sociopath, being an overemotional NEET manchild that cries at the drop of a hat is so fucking based

well shit it turned into an ayn rand beta orbiter thread. at least none of you'll ever reproduce

>IF YOU COULDN’T AFFORD CHEMO YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE GOTTEN CANCER, PARASITE!

>WTF?!?!? MY EBT-FUELED DIET OF SODA, POTATO CHIPS, AND FRIED MEAT HAS GIVEN ME MY THIRD BYPASS IN A YEAR, AND THE TAXPAYERS ARE GETTING TIRED OF PAYING ME TO EXIST?
>THIS IS LITERALLY FASCISM. #RESISTTRUMP #COMMUNISMNOW #FUCKDAPOLICE

>YOU MEAN YOU AREN’T MY 1980S WELFARE QUEEN STRAWMAN BUT YOU’RE JUST A NORMAL PERSON WHO CAN’T AFFORD THEIR CANCER TREATMENT? WELL SUCKS TO BE YOU POORFAG LMAO

>OTHER PEOPLE SHOULD PAY FOR MY OWN BAD CHOICES! WHAT? GET A LOAN? GET A JOB? SAVE MONEY? FUCK YOU FOR DARING TO IMPLY THAT I SHOULD HAVE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY! I HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE UNEMPLOYED, SMOKE EVERY DAY, AND BLOW MY MONEY ON STUPID SHIT, AND THEN GET BAILED OUT BY THE TAXPAYER AGAIN AND AGAIN WITHOUT ANY PERSONAL CONSEQUENCES!

Communism, fascism, basically all statism is founded upon the Platonic ideal of society. Aristotle is founded in reality, the majority of modern history’s struggle has been between these two ideals. Arthur Herman’s The Cave and the Light goes through this in detail era by era if you’re interested in the topic, it’s fascinating.

based dubs