reminder that libertarianism is objectively better than nazism in every sense.
only whites can be free. freedom is an entirely "white" concept. mudraces beg for big government to come and oppress them and tell them what to do. whites prefer to be left the fuck alone.
"freedom" can only exist within a white ethnostate.
there is no reason that i white ethnostate cannot be a free ethnostate.
Other urls found in this thread:
The Nordics were commies before they had a mass influx of shitskins. While it seems to be true that libertarianism is only likely to occur within a white ethnostate (nonwhite libertarians being extreme outliers within their racial groups), it is not true that white ethnostates will automatically tend toward liberty. Being white is only part of the equation.
...
I concur.
Cantwell and Molyneux only get it partially correct when they point out that whites have certain interests.
It is not merely whites, but high-IQ whites, who have certain interests. For this reason we must exclude not just non-whites, but the mentally feeble as well.
>The Nordics were commies before they had a mass influx of shitskins
IGNORANCE. WRONG
you've been listening to too much bernie sanders
the nordics don't have a socialist system at all. they finance their social programs through tremendous wealth inequality and high taxes on the poor and middle class, whilst basically leaving the rich untaxed. the meme you're spreading is fake.
but i agree that NOTHING "automatically" tends toward liberty. it's got to be fought for. it's NEVER a given that a society will be free no matter what. but ONLY white societies can even have a chance to be free, historically speaking
Precisely. Given the choice, I'd rather live in a white society than a black one, and in a high-IQ neighborhood than a low one.
>don't have a socialist system at all
>finance their social programs
So they have a socialist system. The existence of any social programs and wealth redistribution is socialism. Eat a dick, commie.
>So they have a socialist system. The existence of any social programs and wealth redistribution is socialism. Eat a dick, commie.
ok first of all no. there is private property in sweden and the community does not own the means of production as a whole. the government redistributes some wealth, JUST AS IT DOES IN EVERY CAPITALISTIC SOCIETY IN THE WORLD, EVEN FAR RIGHT NATIONS LIKE SWITZERLAND.
you don't know what socialism is, stfu lol.
the system they have over there is LIGHTYEARS different than what the american left want to do to this country and what many european leftists want to do to their countries. their economic policy is based on sound principles and theories, and are crafted by people who actually want to see their nation succeed economically, rather than intentionally crash it and bankrupt us like Obama wanted to and like many of the demoncrats in the US want.
i don't necessarily think it's the best but i wouldn't 100% be opposed to a system like the one they have in sweden being used in the US if we fucking ran it properly, as they do.
you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. by definition, the last thing it is is socialist.
like your argument is literally "omg they have taxes and social programs therefore socialist". if that's true then the US has been a socialist country ever since its inception omfg lol, so stupid.
nothing wrong with wanting liberty, but libertarians go pretty retarded when it comes to capitalism
Correct. Further reminder that Libertarianism is incomplete Objectivism. Objectivism without the epistemology. youtube.com
objectivism is a garbage-tier ideology, way up the autism spectrum from even libertarians
>reee not real socialism: the post
Yes, the U.S. is also socialist. Not to the extent of the Swedes, but it it still very much infected by leftist cancer.
>their economic policy is based on sound principles and theories,
Ahahahaha
>even libertarians
Fuck off whatever you are
Individualism is cancer. You only give a Shit about yourself and not your people. If all you care about is yourself your family will stop giving a shit about you then you have what is happening now a break down in the family unit in the West. Break apart the family destroy western civilization.
Man I don't even think communists are people, and social programs =/= socialism
>Yes, the U.S. is also socialist. Not to the extent of the Swedes, but it it still very much infected by leftist cancer.
so your theory is that the cold war was socialism vs communism.........interesting.............oh wait no it's not you're just stupid.
>reee not real socialism: the post
no faggot this isn't a situation where you have an avowedly socialist nation or communist nation, sweden literally is not socialist. it's no more socialist than the US was at the height of its capitalistic pride. it just has great economic growth because of their low taxes on the top decile, which means they can AFFORD good social programs without burying themselves in insurmountable debt, because rich people create more jobs and everyone lives happily. they LITERALLY use the lefts hated "trickle down economics" meme.
fuck retard.
Libertarians are actual retards
Have fun with your NAP and open borders, hopefully the new ruling party gives you a swift execution or a cuckshed if you’re lucky.
all ideologies that reason from first principles are garbage
Rather, you should judge an ideology by it's endpoint. What will society look like if it's achieved, and do I want to live there
It's like strolling through a catalog of potential future earth's and picking one out to live in.
The only way to judge the impact of your ideology is not dogmatically clinging to some principle, it's by The only way to judge things is through
hypotheses --> test --> analyze --> hypothesis
Develop strategies for how you will accomplish the future vision you have in your head. Which means you need to do an in depth study of human nature. Genetics, psychology, neurological structure, history....etc.
>thinking all libertarians follow rothbardian ethics and open borders
So I can't be a libertarian if I'm not white?
Capitalism only works in the public interest if it's contained within an ethical framework. Things like vigorous antitrust, ethical consumer and worker protections, and an economic model where private gains are reasonably enjoyed by workers as well as executives are not natural to capitalism (they are socialist devices), but we see them as important parts of a sustainable capitalist model. Without them, in the long run, only the financiers and owners in the economy profit from unbridled capitalism, and at the expense of a consumer class unable to leverage any political power to buttress the public interest.
>all ideologies that reason from first principles are garbage
>Rather, you should judge an ideology by it's endpoint.
An endpoint cannot be KNOWN you unspeakable fucking dipshit. So how in the fuck can be used as a criterion of philisophical assessment.
if you're not white you should go back to whereever you came and try to preach libertarianism to your own people. they won't listen though. probably shoot you or throw you from a rooftop instead :(
>An endpoint cannot be KNOWN
that's why we test, reason, and hypothesize. To figure out the endpoint
It's called using your brain.
>Without them, in the long run, only the financiers and owners in the economy profit from unbridled capitalism, and at the expense of a consumer class unable to leverage any political power to buttress the public interest.
this is so fucking stupid and it's sad because you will probably go to your grave not knowing how ignorant you are.
fucking corporations cannot even exist without government subsidies and all of the special bullshit they get from our giant, leftist government. it is well known that before our government started giving out corporate dole left and right that smaller, individually owned businesses drove corporations into the ground. there simply was no competition because people ultimately work harder for their own money.
fucking people like you are the ones building the corporate slave state. you buy into the "keep the rich in line" platitudes THAT ARE SOLD TO YOU BY THE ELITE, RICH, RULING CLASS and are too stupid to see how they have actually benefited them, and destroyed the beauty of capitalism, and turned you into a corporate fucking slave.
newslfash, government will always fuck you over. want to be happy? want to be successful? want to be fulfilled? then get rid of as much fucking government as you can and stop buying into its lies.
>social programs =/= socialism
One of the underlying principles of socialism is the redistribution of wealth. Once you head down that road, you allow socialism to take root even more securely within the psyche of the population.
Sweden is a socialist shithole and whining about it won't change that fact. Turn your proxy off, Sven.
You make a lot of naive assumptions about how private economic priorities line up with public interest, to say nothing about the mawkish fraternity you imagine will somehow make people more charitable and selfless in a more dog-eat-dog world. We could argue pointlessly about the morality of the profit motive and whether capitalism's self-correcting mmuh free market would prevent unethical or abusive agents from gaining increasing levels of control in markets (or political power by extention in libertarianism), but I doubt I could change your feelings-driven opinions that your dunce-tier political ideology is built around. Every single capitalist economy (literally every open economy today) uses anti-trust laws to prevent monopoly, because there's no case study in history that suggests completely free markets don't always end in monopolies controlling their markets (like in early-20th-century US), while there's mountains of evidence in history that private companies don't care at all about public interest on its on merit, and that the more entrenched they are (one they control a larger share of their market), the less they care about public interest. Just for good measure, public interest refers to education, health, shared infrastructure, national defense, legal justice, environmental planning, basically everything that doesn't concern only a company's private gains or ownership. Schools, hospitals, utilities, transportation, national defense, municipalities services etc can't function as individual, profit-generating enterprises. They usually cost more than they can generate, and the goverment eats the cost (pretty poorly desu). How could a consumer driven economy function if citizens had to pay out of pocket for everything they rely on, that the state prints money more or less to pay for today? You can't have a country without a state taking care of these non-profitable public services
Your emotional meltdown doesn't count as an argument when it's completely rooted in idealistic political philosophy
...
lol. boy oh boy. simply saying "no i am right" and calling me "sven". nice argument. high level of discourse here on Sup Forums since the end of the election. that's for sure.
there was a time when this board wasn't full of plebs and people actually knew what the fuck they were talking about here.
libertarianism excuses degeneracy
not for nothing but omg irony. you're completely dismissing everything i said by saying "not an argument" lmfao irony irony irony irony irony.
yeah, my argument is an argument. it's very much an argument. and until you can come back with something concrete, a fact, some logic, some kind of reasoning or SOMETHING i'm just gonna laugh at you.
See
wut? do you even have the slightest bit of knowledge of the history of the united states of america?
it was founded upon people fleeing big government and oppression. then when the east coast started getting built up, people fled west. this country is entirely, at its core, rugged individuals who only want to be left the fuck alone. that's why we cling to our guns and say we will go to war against the government if they ever start fucking with us.
those are the people that made america the capitalist powerhouse that it was for so long. it has fallen FAR due to intentional immigration, brought on by globalist forces who are intentionally trying to dilute that rugged individualism and subjugate our society. but it's certainly not in doubt that "liberty and individualism" were the things that made this country great to begin with.
Truly, featuring such stunning arguments like
>Sweden is not socialist
and
>their economic policy is based on sound principles and theories
>by definition, you aren't forced to respect NAP
>nobody respect NAP
nice system
>that's why we test, reason, and hypothesize
And why in the living fuck cannot one test, reason, and hypothesize to then formulate Objective principles?
People who actually do this and don't inject their own baggage discover Capitalism to be both the best economic system ever created and the only moral one.
Unexaggeratingly 100% of the facts on it's side.
dude you write this entire wall of text and you say "hur durrr there will be monopolies without antitrust laws" and then you claim that is a rebuttal to my comment stating that corporations cannot exist without subsidies?
dude those monopolies in the 20th century you refer to WERE ALL FUNDED BY THE GOVERNMENT. this is where you people are fucking retards. you see a problem caused by the government and then your solution is to give MORE power to the government, and then you're all flummoxed when the government doesn't fix the problem and your life gets worse.
fuck off, you preppy, pretentious, leftist douche. you don't know the first thing about what you're talking about. you deserve the slavery you're going to find yourself in. this is why you idiots all end up working at starbucks for 9 dollars an hour.
you are embarrassing yourself at this point
Both sides are libertarians. That's the whole point.
There are no objective principles about human nature, that's dumb. All humans are different.
Society that works for anglo-saxons might not work for native americans
Libertarians would be a good opposition party but they would be a disastrous ruling party. A true libertarian led government would become so weak that someone would take it over, as it was done all over the 20th century
there is no libertarianism on the left. none. only people who want to use libertarianism as a guise for their open borders ambitions in order to topple the US and ultimately create an authoritarian, big government shithole.
Reminder that up and coming libertarian speaker Dave Smith got cucked by Chip Chipperson, a character with the iq of a 12 year old
If it's the best option, why do you lolbertarians keep putting 100% retarded fucks as the mouthpieces for your party?
If you don't suck, maybe you should get your fucking message straight and kick out the cunts like Gary "WHAT IS ALEPPO?" Johnson and not be such faggots.
wrong. this is only true of "left-wing libertarianism" which isn't really a thing since left-wing immediately implies big government.
the united states is the total proof that right-wing libertarianism works, it turned us into an economic and military powerhouse for 200 years. it's only once we turned more leftist that things started to fucking blow for us.
the whole "libertarianism doesn't work" argument is essentially totally invalidated by the united states and its history.
>AP
100% libertarian, just using a libertine/socially liberal talking point
>McAfee
Pretty sure this is a joke, don't remember though.
>GJ
Running for president, shilling for bernie bro votes. Never seen any evidence he's radically divergent from libertarianism, though, he just takes a different route than Ron/Rand.
Hoppe is the final redpill. We can only have an anarcho capitalist utopia after the liquidation of all degenerates who live non-family oriented lifestyles. These individuals must be forcibly removed from society or converted into consumer goods for use by non-degenerate individuals.
Such degenerates include socialists, homosexuals, drug users, and nature worshipers.
fuck you, you retard. gary johnson is literally in the meme i posted. did you not even fucking read it? i don't get to choose what the "lolbertarian" party does. they aren't a right-wing libertarian party, clearly, they're a left-wing libertarian party, which isn't even really a thing, since their polices are naturally going to end in tyranny for us all. left-wing libertarians are just people who hate the united states and want to see it destroyed. you're comparing apples and oranges. two totally separate things. they are entirely separate and polar opposite ideologies. sorry if they fall under a similar linguistic umbrella and that confuses you.
I thought most of them were just drug abusers and pedophiles honestly. Basically just white niggers.
What are "public goods". Like Defense, enforcement of law and protection of citizens etc. Private industry cannot provide these things effectively like a Government.
dude there is no leftist libertarianism because those are just policies that every sensible person knows are going to completely destroy the united states of america.
libertarianism doesn't mean "lets destroy the US". that's just, unfortunately, what the "libertarian part" has been subverted into. that's why i say there's no left-wing libertarianism. "lets open our borders so that tons of people who vote for big government and socialism can flood in here and turn us into authoritarian commies" isn't "libertarianism", in my view. in my view those are just the positions of someone who hates hte US and wants to destroy it.
real libertarianism is right-wing libertarianism, where you're trying to protect the freedoms of the people who live in your country, and allow them the right to self-determine their lives and their own fates, which makes them stronger and makes your population stronger, rather than natsoc, which turns the population into herded sheep, or an ant farm.
Liberty is the reason people came here
The us took the concept too far when it began to normalize faggotry, feminism and nigger culture all because of muh freedumbs
Fucking retarded burgers can't even understand their own memes
i agree bro, i've never advocated for the abolishment of any of those programs. just because someone says "libertarian" you don't have to automatically assume the most extreme form of it.
but the reality is that those things you mention, even when we include defense, are a small part of the yearly budget, the majority being made up of entitlement programs :(
Go back to the_donald faggot
This post reeks of rebbit
>The us took the concept too far when it began to normalize faggotry, feminism and nigger culture all because of muh freedumbs
no. what's happening in the US today isn't "liberty" at all. it's an inversion of the same old authoritarianism that you see at work in other places. in the middle east, you get thrown off the roof if you're gay. in the US, you get fucked over for being a straight white male. 10 years from now you'll be thrown off the roof for it, no doubt. that's not "liberty", it's just authoritarian leftism. you can't just equate "leftism" with "liberty" and say "look see?! that's degenerate!"
leftism has nothing to do with "liberty", in reality, because leftism is inherently centered around big government and telling other people what to do.
"liberty" is giving people the freedom to be gay, or feminist, or whatever. "normalization" and culturally forcing it down peoples throats is an entirely different thing that should not be conflated.
yawn. poor angry nazi.
Holy fuck you're retarded
Liberty is why we have the degenerate culture that has destroyed our society
Fucking lurk more faggot
>haha look how much I don't care which is a sign that I'm winning the argument
LURK MORE FAGGOT
oh really? or is it because of "anti-liberty" measures like affirmative action and the civil rights act? because of shit that destroys the freedom of association? because of a left-wing globalist establishment that took over europe and the EU and has used its financial and political ties to infect the US? or is it because of the welfare state?
or are you just someone who is made so uncomfortable by gay sex that you literally want to institute fascist government to prevent people from having sex you don't like.
hmmmmmmmm i bet that's it. i bet ur a pretty boy too. come over here and bring that pretty little asshole to me. i'll bone u good and make u into a nice woman.
The reason the founding fathers embraced an ideology of individualism was because they were English. And the English had been ruled for centuries by the Normans, an alien ethnic group of Nordic stock that ruled the land with an iron fist. Many of the castles you see in England today were built by the Normans in order to crush rebellious thoughts among Englishfolk
This is why English philisophical tradition is so heavily anti-state, because England has been ruled by foreigners for centuries.
The thing the founders wanted was self-rule for Englishmen.
bring dat boipussy here, nazi.
>let me embrace the faggot meme because its edgy XD
>how to discredit yourself 101
i luv it when u show me who is boss, big sexy
This entire thread is why and how reddit and normies ruin Sup Forums. Not even referring to the topic of this thread. Just the pure faggotry back and forth ultra mega autism bantz that go no where and are not funny. I miss Sup Forums.
No it's because of all the things I listed and none of the things you listed
Now stop posting here and lurk more faggot
bow to your king and queen.
does pic related trigger you?
>acting like a degenerate faggot to try and prove your point but only ends up proving my point
Leddit xD
>le trigger meme xD
LURK MORE FAGGOT
i was here in the Sup Forums days, actually, but i spent most of my time on godlikeproductions back then. switched to Sup Forums full time a few years ago.
wah wah wah wah awh wah wah awh wah wah wah awah ahw ahw ah wawa hwa wah wah wah wah awh wahaw wah muh reddit muh reddit
muh reddit
muh reddit
chang ur diapers.
>I'm gay im gay im gay I'm gay im gay im gay im gay xD
LURK MORE FAGGOT
where would this ethnostate be? i cant say i disagree with any of it, but how exactly do you plan on purging any country of its "colored community?"
I heard u liek mudkipz
isn't it funny how 90% of the people complain about the lower level of discourse on Sup Forums recently can only say "wah wah wah wah but muh redddit, go back to reddddddit!" when they hear things they don't like and disagree with?
what you're really saying is "wah wah wah wah give me my nazi safe space! i don't want to defend my undefendable ideas!"
libertarianism socialism is just ancom-ism, bolshevism, 5thcolumnism, or as i like to call it, judaism
Otoh saying muh boobies, weed, and force the jew to bake a nazi cake is just liberal libertarianism.
Some people will be more paleocons like ron paul and court populists, nationalists, religionists, and etc.
Others will be more beltway libertarians like employed by reason magazine and take more "socially liberal" positions. This is why people say liberrarianism economically conservative and socially liberal, which is wrong. But it makes a nice talking point at a time where right wing puritanism is more in recent memory while left wing extremism is not well understood, like circa 2007-2013.
The point of libertarianism as I see it is it difuses cultural wars and wedge issuss by making them irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you like guns and I like weed, because we can shake hands and agree to stay in our own little ghettos without oppressing each other. If you're not up for that, then great, be a fascist or a communist. On the other hand, when people try to argue you can't be a racist and a libertarian or a cuck fag and a libertarian, they miss the point. Either can be libertarian since libertarianism is just an ethical philpsophy about how you should interact with others.
Personally, I have been following Gary since the last primaries, and rather like him. He said some retarded shit this cycle and I don't defend him, but it never rose to the point where I assumed he was morally compromised rather than just being a politician.
Although the current state of the LP post-2016 has made me rethink that a little. I find it a little hard to determine whether SJWs subverted the party or if any of the opposite is happening, the party is attempting to subvert SJWs. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to a leftward shifted LP if it basically functions as a honeypot for commie subversion with no real strategic value for them.
no it's not funny because I'm not a reddit faggot like you
Stop posting and lurk more faggot
Why don't we take back south Africa and make it a white ethnostate?
im gagging why are you posting about this coalburning jew
I even stated that I am not referring to politics in any way. But I guess you could just gloss over it and post whatever you want that fits your world view regardless of whatever anyone says. Even if they are right. So much for political discussion.
because it's 90% shitskins. how would you get rid of them?
I'm sympathetic to your argument, but are you seriously defending the civil rights act nigger?
in a purely theoretical sense, there could be an expatriation program. or you could just give them something like florida for the niggers and texas for the mexicans. lmfao. sounds stupid. it IS stupid.
in reality, what's going to happen is civil war. look around you. the united states is on the brink of race war. it's only going to get worse and worse and worse and worse.
the most practical answer to your question, if change were to happen peacefully, would be to strip nonwhites of the franchise, allow total freedom of association so that they self-organized into black and white communities (which is what they do naturally, when the government doesnt fuck with things) and then quietly encourage repatriation.
also cut off all of the fucking welfare and entitlement programs for them immediately. srsly not even joking that will kill nearly half of them off from starvation. they will riot and try to rise up, then you put them down with military force.
the rights in this nation only extend to whites and citizens (which must also be white) as far as im concerned. blacks are just monkeys and i feel no more sympathy for them dying than i did harambe.
he is your god, bow to him
>29 posts by this ID
you are one dedicated troll
If a society is comprised of wise and virtuous enough men that a free and libertarian (or close to it) can prosper there, then they are also wise and virtuous enough to cooperate in a just and effective hierarchy of authority.
Free association and free markets might be the best for optimizing the short-term economy and maximizing the utilization of resources, but it does nothing towards realizing the long term, or creating great works of value beyond that of the economic.
The solution is a free (or nearly free) market, save for nationalized industries of things that are, by their very nature, common to all. This coupled with reasonable taxation to fund both the defense and, if need be, expansion of the nation, along with funding great works that would otherwise not be considered by the efficient market (monuments, preserves and parks, the theoretical sciences and distant exploration) would result in the best state of affairs.
In short; leave that which effects the individuals to the individuals, and nationalize that which affects all.
Individual people get hungry. Individuals sleep in their own homes. Individuals get sick.
Everyone uses the same roads. Everyone drinks from the same water and breathes the same air.
does it make you personally uncomfortable to lay eyes on his beautiful, masculine yet soft, face?
how do you feel knowing that he has done more for right-wing populism and right-wing politics than you ever will?
how do you feel knowing that your own shitty nazi movement probably owes more to him than it does to you or any of your keyboard warrioring friends??
how does it make you feel to know that right now, at this very moment, there might be two men out there somewhere having rough, sensual buttsex??
McAfee is wrong. It's not 75% men, it's more like 98%.
Actually a famous libertarian from here said in one of his videos about that. Men have this thing "I will live and die by my principles!" if it means temporary shame, hunger, fighting and so on.. While woman will always look for the most powerful establishment atm and fuck principles. It makes sense.
Free market absolutism just leads to transhumanism. Literally a dystopia
>give Texas to Mexicans
Texas would be free before that happened. Don't forget, Texas was it's own country. It couldn't just be given away
In short; the state and its interests remain "above" the people's, but it does not necesarilly intrude into the people's lives.
The state collects its taxes, builds its roads and walls and utility plants, builds its monuments and readies new lands for its people.
It's people fill that which is left vacant by the state, pay their taxes, and in return are free to do as they wilt within the law.
In short, the state can be seen as a gardener; tilling new soil, building new walls, and occasionally stepping in for the common good from a superior position.
The people, meanwhile, are the wild, bountiful garden. They are free to grow and produce as they wish, free to compete and cooperate with each other as they wish, with the gardener taking only some from them, and no more than needed.
True, Libertarianism is better than Nazism (no shit)
the rest is simply not true... Freedom is an idea capable of being held by any race of people. The fact that certain ethnic groups have high populations of people that support massive government involvement doesn't mean that the people aren't capable... It's a cultural thing and Libertarian/conservatives have done a shitty job at spreading the message... because it truly is a good message
There is a gulf between the mainstream and the acedemic in almost anything.
Feminism mainstream is shallow entitled dreck. Academic Feminism is toxic Jewry.
Mainstream libertarian is tepid hedonistic drivel and academic libertarian is jaded bitterness at government and people.
In this scenario the people would need a real way to btfo the state if necessary. Some way to keep them in check.
great post
>If a society is comprised of wise and virtuous enough men that a free and libertarian (or close to it) can prosper there
it is certainly true that we need to make sure that only white, landowning males who pass a literacy test can vote.
no niggers, no spics and no women. i have nothing against women but their brains aren't made for deciding the fate of the nation. they will vote for big government and entitlements and open borders time after time after time after time because 1) they just don't give a fuck 2) they're too stupid to understand how these policies ultimately effect them and their families negatively.
Fawkin gabage she was just helping the Chippah do pushups
I like both of them.
I have a soft spot for Milo, because he made us popular, not that that's a good thing, but he delivered power to us at a time that we needed it. It could have been someone else, if it wasn't him, but he & his institution saw a lonely, right-wing hiveminded floating through cyberspace, being bullied on all sides by well-connected Jews and feminists, and stuck their necks out for us. It was a mutually beneficial decision, but I always said I was going to love the shit out of whoever the first Milo figure to come along was.
it was a little tongue in cheek. i was just point out that something analogous to what we did with the native americans might be in order. put them on reservations. problem with that is that we keep giving away parts of our nation and that makes us weaker too. plus who wants to live next to niggers? nobody. so why would our nation want to live next to a nigger reservation?
i honestly don't care if we put them all on a boat, tell them it's going to africa, and then sink the fucking boat. it matters not to me. they're a cancerous tumor that must be dealt with.
i think texas used to be part of mexico though.
fuck off, Milo is trying to resurrect his dead career by posting about himself all over Sup Forums.
Nobody wants this fucker around.