Chink here. I've been living in US for two decades now. I'm an old fat.
As far as I can see, the only difference between a burger and the rest of the world is: true burgers refuse to hand over your lives to authority, whereas the rest of the workd: those people expect their gov to protect them.
Don't let them change you, I admire burgers and you guys are in the right. Keep fighting for your right to not be owned by your government.
I can sense (((they're))) really going for it now.
Other urls found in this thread:
what happeend to christian bale's jaw?
is this a lookism 'shop?
Of course we're right. History is FILLED with out of control repressive governments. We're not giving up our right to defend ourselves because of some communist kids.
Thanks based Asian! May profitable business and a clear line of sight from the rooftop always be yours!
Thanks my rice field friend
It’s what he would look like if he was raised on a steady diet of soy and 21st century western leftism.
The government should NEVER be trusted.
The government should fear it's citizens.
youtube.com
yea no shit, they are going full fucking retard.
Good observation. Luckily, we have the best burger in the top power position to keep the soy burgers from fuckin things up. Like how soy burgers want to disarm burgerville, top burger responds with give guns to teachers. Extreme vs. Extreme.
...
I'm in Cali and I'll vote for gun rights and reject any gun measures. It's futile but they can see that more of us are out here.
Also, buying my first assault rifle next week when my paycheck comes in.
When I go visit China last month, I laugh at those Chinese. They think they're free, they think they're rich, but they can't utter one bad word about their commie gov.
The Jews want us all to be slaves. They made Russia and China communist. US is next.
I'm ready for a revolution, I'm sick of property tax and creeping gun laws.
Give me a local militia to join. Time to stuff sands into the mouths of treasonous Democrats.
A European is disarmed in the face of a dictatorship: he may hate it, but he feels that he is wrong and, metaphysically, the State is right. An American would rebel to the bottom of his soul. . . . Defiance, not obedience, is the American’s answer to overbearing authority.
¶
America is the land of the uncommon man. It is the land where man is free to develop his genius—and to get its just rewards. It is the land where each man tries to develop whatever quality he may possess and to rise to whatever degree he can, great or modest. It is not the land where one glories or is taught to glory in one’s mediocrity. No self-respecting man in America is or thinks of himself as “little,” no matter how poor he may be. That, precisely, is the difference between an American working man and a European serf.
Europeans do believe in Original Sin, i.e., in man’s innate depravity; Americans do not. Americans see man as a value—as clean, free, creative, rational. But the American view of man has not been expressed or upheld in philosophical terms (not since the time of our first Founding Father, Aristotle; see his description of the “magnanimous man”).
¶
The Americans were political revolutionaries but not ethical revolutionaries. Whatever their partial (and largely implicit) acceptance of the principle of ethical egoism, they remained explicitly within the standard European tradition, avowing their primary allegiance to a moral code stressing philanthropic service and social duty. Such was the American conflict: an impassioned politics presupposing one kind of ethics, within a cultural atmosphere professing the sublimity of an opposite kind of ethics.
This country—the product of reason—could not survive on the morality of sacrifice. It was not built by men who sought self-immolation or by men who sought handouts. It could not stand on the mystic split that divorced man’s soul from his body. It could not live by the mystic doctrine that damned this earth as evil and those who succeeded on earth as depraved. From its start, this country was a threat to the ancient rule of mystics. In the brilliant rocket-explosion of its youth, this country displayed to an incredulous world what greatness was possible to man, what happiness was possible on earth. It was one or the other: America or mystics. The mystics knew it; you didn’t. You let them infect you with the worship of need—and this country became a giant in body with a mooching midget in place of its soul, while its living soul was driven underground to labor and feed you in silence, unnamed, unhonored, negated, its soul and hero: the industrialist.
In its great era of capitalism, the United States was the freest country on earth—and the best refutation of racist theories. Men of all races came here, some from obscure, culturally undistinguished countries, and accomplished feats of productive ability which would have remained stillborn in their control-ridden native lands. Men of racial groups that had been slaughtering one another for centuries, learned to live together in harmony and peaceful cooperation. America had been called “the melting pot,” with good reason. But few people realized that America did not melt men into the gray conformity of a collective: she united them by means of protecting their right to individuality.
The major victims of such race prejudice as did exist in America were the Negroes. It was a problem originated and perpetuated by the non-capitalist South, though not confined to its boundaries. The persecution of Negroes in the South was and is truly disgraceful. But in the rest of the country, so long as men were free, even that problem was slowly giving way under the pressure of enlightenment and of the white men’s own economic interests.
Today, that problem is growing worse—and so is every other form of racism. America has become race-conscious in a manner reminiscent of the worst days in the most backward countries of nineteenth-century Europe. The cause is the same: the growth of collectivism and statism.
America’s abundance was not created by public sacrifices to “the common good,” but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America’s industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance—and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.
It took centuries of intellectual, philosophical development to achieve political freedom. It was a long struggle, stretching from Aristotle to John Locke to the Founding Fathers. The system they established was not based on unlimited majority rule, but on its opposite: on individual rights, which were not to be alienated by majority vote or minority plotting. The individual was not left at the mercy of his neighbors or his leaders: the Constitutional system of checks and balances was scientifically devised to protect him from both. This was the great American achievement—and if concern for the actual welfare of other nations were our present leaders’ motive, this is what we should have been teaching the world.
The most profoundly revolutionary achievement of the United States of America was the subordination of society to moral law. The principle of man’s individual rights represented the extension of morality into the social system—as a limitation on the power of the state, as man’s protection against the brute force of the collective, as the subordination of might to right. The United States was the first moral society in history. All previous systems had regarded man as a sacrificial means to the ends of others, and society as an end in itself. The United States regarded man as an end in himself, and society as a means to the peaceful, orderly, voluntary co-existence of individuals. All previous systems had held that man’s life belongs to society, that society can dispose of him in any way it pleases, and that any freedom he enjoys is his only by favor, by the permission of society, which may be revoked at any time. The United States held that man’s life is his by right (which means: by moral principle and by his nature), that a right is the property of an individual, that society as such has no rights, and that the only moral purpose of a government is the protection of individual rights.
We'll always have the Bill of Rights. We just need activist judges to enforce it.
It's a 'shop. This is the real picture.
thank you chinese user. get yourself an AR for the happening
Ak or AR? I'm too lazy to clean.
What the left doesn't get is that we will go to war with them before we give up our guns or take part in any form of collectivism they want us to partake in. And there will be MANY coastal rich people who will take our side and finance our fight.
underrated post