Jair Bolsonaro vs. Fuzzy Bear

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

And no, Bolsonaro is no statist. He has expanded individual rights (not that any government could expand what was naturally given by God, but that he has turned back the tide of socialist attempts to crack down on those natural rights), supported free commerce, and is a true believer in Western values and Economic Freedom. He ought to be a hero to any true conservative.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that rounding up political opponents and shooting them in soccer stadiums="defending your rights".

Offense is the best defense.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that rounding up political opponents and shooting them in soccer stadiums="defending your rights".

Offense is the best defense.

So using that logic it would have been completely justified for Fidel Castro to jail and kill political opponents after the Cuban revolution. I’m sure you agree, right?

No, because Castro was doing so to suppress, not defend, our rights.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that rounding up political opponents and shooting them in soccer stadiums="defending your rights".

Offense is the best defense.

So using that logic it would have been completely justified for Fidel Castro to jail and kill political opponents after the Cuban revolution. I’m sure you agree, right?

No, because Castro was doing so to suppress, not defend, our rights.

Pinochet was paranoid that he was gonna get overthrown in a coup. So was Castro. That’s why they did that. Trying to maintain a hold on power at all costs seems a hell of a lot like suppression to me.

Pinochet acted to save Chile and stop socialism. Castro acted to destroy Cuba and expand communism

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that rounding up political opponents and shooting them in soccer stadiums="defending your rights".

Offense is the best defense.

So using that logic it would have been completely justified for Fidel Castro to jail and kill political opponents after the Cuban revolution. I’m sure you agree, right?

No, because Castro was doing so to suppress, not defend, our rights.

Pinochet was paranoid that he was gonna get overthrown in a coup. So was Castro. That’s why they did that. Trying to maintain a hold on power at all costs seems a hell of a lot like suppression to me.

Pinochet acted to save Chile and stop socialism. Castro acted to destroy Cuba and expand communism

“Castro acted to save Cuba and stop capitalism. Pinochet acted to destroy Chile and expand neoliberal capitalism.” It’s all relative my man. I’m on the left but no, I’m not a Castro fan. Why? Because he was repressive and crushed his opposition. Pinochet did the exact same thing only from a right wing perspective. You can’t claim to value “human rights” and “freedom” while defending someone like Pinochet.

Sometimes you must suspend your normal principles to stop major threats. Most of the time, the draft would be something I stridently oppose. During war time? It is necessary and must thus be utilized. Similarily, do I like Pinochet shooting dissidents in soccer stadiums normally? No. Would I be willing to pull the trigger myself in a time of crisis and a communistic threat? Hell yes.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that rounding up political opponents and shooting them in soccer stadiums="defending your rights".

Offense is the best defense.

So using that logic it would have been completely justified for Fidel Castro to jail and kill political opponents after the Cuban revolution. I’m sure you agree, right?

No, because Castro was doing so to suppress, not defend, our rights.

Pinochet was paranoid that he was gonna get overthrown in a coup. So was Castro. That’s why they did that. Trying to maintain a hold on power at all costs seems a hell of a lot like suppression to me.

Pinochet acted to save Chile and stop socialism. Castro acted to destroy Cuba and expand communism

“Castro acted to save Cuba and stop capitalism. Pinochet acted to destroy Chile and expand neoliberal capitalism.” It’s all relative my man. I’m on the left but no, I’m not a Castro fan. Why? Because he was repressive and crushed his opposition. Pinochet did the exact same thing only from a right wing perspective. You can’t claim to value “human rights” and “freedom” while defending someone like Pinochet.

Sometimes you must suspend your normal principles to stop major threats. Most of the time, the draft would be something I stridently oppose. During war time? It is necessary and must thus be utilized. Similarily, do I like Pinochet shooting dissidents in soccer stadiums normally? No. Would I be willing to pull the trigger myself in a time of crisis and a communistic threat? Hell yes.

So if there’s someone who’s otherwise innocent who just happens to be a member of the Communist party on the other end of the gun you’d go ahead shooting them just because there are some vague communist threats or riots going on? Didn’t know you were a fan of collective punishment like that.

Also put yourself into the place of a Chilean socialist in 1973. You’ve finally got a president that you like who was elected by the people. Now a foreign country intervenes and installs a far right dictator whose sole goal is to “stop communism”. You think you’re gonna want to stand idly by and let him take power without anything stopping him? Or say the army overthrows Trump tomorrow and puts in Biden or Pelosi in his place and goes around rounding up Republicans and bans the party. I’m sure you’d love that, huh?

Of course I don't expect the communists to sit down and take it. That's why we have guns. And yeah, if a coup overthrew Trump tomorrow that would also be cause for violence. Oh, and you can't be "an innocent communist." There is no such thing. All of communism is nothing more then an ideology based on theft. Being a member of the communist party is like openly identifying yourself as a member of a robber gang.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that rounding up political opponents and shooting them in soccer stadiums="defending your rights".

Offense is the best defense.

So using that logic it would have been completely justified for Fidel Castro to jail and kill political opponents after the Cuban revolution. I’m sure you agree, right?

No, because Castro was doing so to suppress, not defend, our rights.

Pinochet was paranoid that he was gonna get overthrown in a coup. So was Castro. That’s why they did that. Trying to maintain a hold on power at all costs seems a hell of a lot like suppression to me.

Pinochet acted to save Chile and stop socialism. Castro acted to destroy Cuba and expand communism

“Castro acted to save Cuba and stop capitalism. Pinochet acted to destroy Chile and expand neoliberal capitalism.” It’s all relative my man. I’m on the left but no, I’m not a Castro fan. Why? Because he was repressive and crushed his opposition. Pinochet did the exact same thing only from a right wing perspective. You can’t claim to value “human rights” and “freedom” while defending someone like Pinochet.

Sometimes you must suspend your normal principles to stop major threats. Most of the time, the draft would be something I stridently oppose. During war time? It is necessary and must thus be utilized. Similarily, do I like Pinochet shooting dissidents in soccer stadiums normally? No. Would I be willing to pull the trigger myself in a time of crisis and a communistic threat? Hell yes.

So if there’s someone who’s otherwise innocent who just happens to be a member of the Communist party on the other end of the gun you’d go ahead shooting them just because there are some vague communist threats or riots going on? Didn’t know you were a fan of collective punishment like that.

Also put yourself into the place of a Chilean socialist in 1973. You’ve finally got a president that you like who was elected by the people. Now a foreign country intervenes and installs a far right dictator whose sole goal is to “stop communism”. You think you’re gonna want to stand idly by and let him take power without anything stopping him? Or say the army overthrows Trump tomorrow and puts in Biden or Pelosi in his place and goes around rounding up Republicans and bans the party. I’m sure you’d love that, huh?

Of course I don't expect the communists to sit down and take it. That's why we have guns. And yeah, if a coup overthrew Trump tomorrow that would also be cause for violence. Oh, and you can't be "an innocent communist." There is no such thing. All of communism is nothing more then an ideology based on theft. Being a member of the communist party is like openly identifying yourself as a member of a robber gang.

I see you’re really trying hard for the “most edgy person on atlas” title.

But anyway if you think all communism means is theft, where do you draw the line? Is all taxation theft too?

Taxation is theft when it is unequally distributed and when it is not used for a specific, clearly definable, and mutually beneficial and limited purpose. We should switch to a clean per head equal tax.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that rounding up political opponents and shooting them in soccer stadiums="defending your rights".

Offense is the best defense.

So using that logic it would have been completely justified for Fidel Castro to jail and kill political opponents after the Cuban revolution. I’m sure you agree, right?

No, because Castro was doing so to suppress, not defend, our rights.

Pinochet was paranoid that he was gonna get overthrown in a coup. So was Castro. That’s why they did that. Trying to maintain a hold on power at all costs seems a hell of a lot like suppression to me.

Pinochet acted to save Chile and stop socialism. Castro acted to destroy Cuba and expand communism

“Castro acted to save Cuba and stop capitalism. Pinochet acted to destroy Chile and expand neoliberal capitalism.” It’s all relative my man. I’m on the left but no, I’m not a Castro fan. Why? Because he was repressive and crushed his opposition. Pinochet did the exact same thing only from a right wing perspective. You can’t claim to value “human rights” and “freedom” while defending someone like Pinochet.

Sometimes you must suspend your normal principles to stop major threats. Most of the time, the draft would be something I stridently oppose. During war time? It is necessary and must thus be utilized. Similarily, do I like Pinochet shooting dissidents in soccer stadiums normally? No. Would I be willing to pull the trigger myself in a time of crisis and a communistic threat? Hell yes.

So if there’s someone who’s otherwise innocent who just happens to be a member of the Communist party on the other end of the gun you’d go ahead shooting them just because there are some vague communist threats or riots going on? Didn’t know you were a fan of collective punishment like that.

Also put yourself into the place of a Chilean socialist in 1973. You’ve finally got a president that you like who was elected by the people. Now a foreign country intervenes and installs a far right dictator whose sole goal is to “stop communism”. You think you’re gonna want to stand idly by and let him take power without anything stopping him? Or say the army overthrows Trump tomorrow and puts in Biden or Pelosi in his place and goes around rounding up Republicans and bans the party. I’m sure you’d love that, huh?

Of course I don't expect the communists to sit down and take it. That's why we have guns. And yeah, if a coup overthrew Trump tomorrow that would also be cause for violence. Oh, and you can't be "an innocent communist." There is no such thing. All of communism is nothing more then an ideology based on theft. Being a member of the communist party is like openly identifying yourself as a member of a robber gang.

I see you’re really trying hard for the “most edgy person on atlas” title.

But anyway if you think all communism means is theft, where do you draw the line? Is all taxation theft too?

Taxation is theft when it is unequally distributed and when it is not used for a specific, clearly definable, and mutually beneficial and limited purpose. We should switch to a clean per head equal tax.

Ah I see that most American politicians (even on the Republican side) are members of robber gangs then.

Well, they aren't communists, so it's more like pickpocketing, but yeah.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Pinochet is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Chile's broken system. He has protected Chile against the scourge of leftism. He is by far and wide the best President Chile has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Pinochet is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

I'd vote for Pinochet too, so as long as he wouldn't murder folks (exceptions for communists/terrorists) and wouldn't tread upon our individual rights. Pinochet was a good leader at stopping the commies, but he was wrong to suspend democracy and establish a dictatorship. That was tyrannical.

So you're openly admitting you want to kill communists?

I don't believe in killing people for simply expressing their political opinions. That was not the situation in Chile. The Socialists in Chile had taken over with a vast minority of the vote, were using terroristic tactics, and were seizing property and attacking dissidents. They were also closely cooperating with Cuban and Soviet foreign groups. In those circumstances, it is certainly appropriate to use military force to defend one's rights.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that rounding up political opponents and shooting them in soccer stadiums="defending your rights".

Offense is the best defense.

So using that logic it would have been completely justified for Fidel Castro to jail and kill political opponents after the Cuban revolution. I’m sure you agree, right?

No, because Castro was doing so to suppress, not defend, our rights.

Pinochet was paranoid that he was gonna get overthrown in a coup. So was Castro. That’s why they did that. Trying to maintain a hold on power at all costs seems a hell of a lot like suppression to me.

Pinochet acted to save Chile and stop socialism. Castro acted to destroy Cuba and expand communism

“Castro acted to save Cuba and stop capitalism. Pinochet acted to destroy Chile and expand neoliberal capitalism.” It’s all relative my man. I’m on the left but no, I’m not a Castro fan. Why? Because he was repressive and crushed his opposition. Pinochet did the exact same thing only from a right wing perspective. You can’t claim to value “human rights” and “freedom” while defending someone like Pinochet.

Sometimes you must suspend your normal principles to stop major threats. Most of the time, the draft would be something I stridently oppose. During war time? It is necessary and must thus be utilized. Similarily, do I like Pinochet shooting dissidents in soccer stadiums normally? No. Would I be willing to pull the trigger myself in a time of crisis and a communistic threat? Hell yes.

So if there’s someone who’s otherwise innocent who just happens to be a member of the Communist party on the other end of the gun you’d go ahead shooting them just because there are some vague communist threats or riots going on? Didn’t know you were a fan of collective punishment like that.

Also put yourself into the place of a Chilean socialist in 1973. You’ve finally got a president that you like who was elected by the people. Now a foreign country intervenes and installs a far right dictator whose sole goal is to “stop communism”. You think you’re gonna want to stand idly by and let him take power without anything stopping him? Or say the army overthrows Trump tomorrow and puts in Biden or Pelosi in his place and goes around rounding up Republicans and bans the party. I’m sure you’d love that, huh?

Of course I don't expect the communists to sit down and take it. That's why we have guns. And yeah, if a coup overthrew Trump tomorrow that would also be cause for violence. Oh, and you can't be "an innocent communist." There is no such thing. All of communism is nothing more then an ideology based on theft. Being a member of the communist party is like openly identifying yourself as a member of a robber gang.

I see you’re really trying hard for the “most edgy person on atlas” title.

But anyway if you think all communism means is theft, where do you draw the line? Is all taxation theft too?

Taxation is theft when it is unequally distributed and when it is not used for a specific, clearly definable, and mutually beneficial and limited purpose. We should switch to a clean per head equal tax.

Ah I see that most American politicians (even on the Republican side) are members of robber gangs then.

Well, they aren't communists, so it's more like pickpocketing, but yeah.

I'd argue that welfare is a mutually beneficial purpose, as the poor get aid and that allows them to get ahead and then they have the potential to buy more things, and thus they can participate in the economy more. A market economy requires people to buy things, but if only the rich can afford to buy things, that kind of defeats the point of a market economy.

no

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

You are literally dangerous.

"Republicans pounce!!!!"

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously Bolsonaro, he's a truly underrated dude

Ummmmmmmmm, I hope you're joking

Not in the slightest, I'd prefer him over Trump in a heartbeat too.

Bolsonaro is a far right authoritarian who wants to destroy the Amazon, he is by far one of the worst democratically elected leaders.

Bolsonaro is incredibly pro life. He is a valiant defender of free markets. He supports the traditional definition of marriage and natural law. He is a diehard anti communist. He has reformed Brazil's broken pension system. He has freed the gun laws of Brazil, and reduced the size of government. He is by far and wide the best President Brazil has ever had. He is a great guy and a great leader, who has supported Israel and backed America abroad. Unlike Fuzzy, who is a RINO on economic issues, Bolsonaro is the kind of strong and fighting conservative that America could do with on our own front, and I would crawl over broken glass, under fire, to vote for him.

Bolsonaro also said that if his son were gay he'd rather have him dead and praised use of torture during Brazil's military dictatorship. You seriously have no problem with that?

Of course I have a problem with the first statement. At the same time, it pales to me in significance when put up against Fuzzy's support of Obamacare and Bolsonaro's other excellent policy positions. As for torture, I've never had a problem with it's usage. Considering the circumstances in Brazil at the time and to some extent today, the use of torture would have certainly been justified at the time, as would have a military coup for most of the 2010s.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

A fundamental characteristic to consider here is that most Latin American nations are incapable of true democracy for the present time, in the same way that many European nations have been for most of their history. When a people are so inclined to an inherent tyranny of the majority, it becomes necessary for courageous citizens to do all they can to safeguard the rights of the minority. While in the United States we have a political culture and a people who believe fundamentally in the principles of individual rights and limited government, when you have political cultures of statism and tyranny such as can be found in Latin America, it is an entirely different set of circumstances.