Lost all respect for Brad Pitt

[watisthis]

I did. I was only told what Hitler said instead of what he actually did. Much like you're doing. ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. For the sake of this arguement, I don't give a FUCK what he said. He was an awful man who used SOCIALIST policies (increase schools, roads, took control of private enterprise, stupid high taxes, robbing Jews of their gold, etc) while the people were helpless against the Gastopo.

Social programs do not equal socialism. What are you not understanding? His actions, destroying labor unions, privatization, etc, were literally against the basic definition of socialism. Fucking Volkswagon, stop being so incredibly dense, my god. You arguing this is like people arguing that since Trump is a nationalist he is also a Nazi.

"Private property in the industry of the Third Reich is often considered a mere nominal provision without much substance. However, that is not correct, because firms, despite the rationing and licensing activities of the state, still had ample scope to devise their own production and investment profiles. Even regarding war-related projects, freedom of contract was generally respected; instead of using power, the state offered firms a number of contract options to choose from. There were several motives behind this attitude of the regime, among them the conviction that private property provided important incentives for increasing efficiency."

"Hitler also suppressed trade unions and refused to give the homes of German princes to the people, as he felt this would move the party towards communism."

The next thing you're going to tell me is North Korea is Democratic, lmao.

Sponsored

 

[Shadow277]

Social programs do not equal socialism. What are you not understanding? His actions, destroying labor unions, privatization, etc, were literally against the basic definition of socialism. Fucking Volkswagon, stop being so incredibly dense, my god. You arguing this is like people arguing that since Trump is a nationalist he is also a Nazi.

"Private property in the industry of the Third Reich is often considered a mere nominal provision without much substance. However, that is not correct, because firms, despite the rationing and licensing activities of the state, still had ample scope to devise their own production and investment profiles. Even regarding war-related projects, freedom of contract was generally respected; instead of using power, the state offered firms a number of contract options to choose from. There were several motives behind this attitude of the regime, among them the conviction that private property provided important incentives for increasing efficiency."

"Hitler also suppressed trade unions and refused to give the homes of German princes to the people, as he felt this would move the party towards communism."

The next thing you're going to tell me is North Korea is Democratic, lmao.

2+2 does NOT = 4? Got it, thanks Troll. Later.

 

[watisthis]

2+2 does NOT = 4? Got it, thanks Troll. Later.

The democratic people's republic of Korea, 2+2 = 4, North Korea must be democratic. Wow, such simple MATH!. The amount of cognitive dissonance it takes to claim that Hitler was a leftist is too severe to be won over by facts. Only extremely right-wing ignorant nuts can be this easily hoodwinked.

 

[matteos]

Ah yes, because the NAZIs were totally for small government and had no intentions in interfering with people's liberties. NAZIs didn't increase government spending on social programs of any sort./s

hitler wasn’t a real socialist. Just to get something clear. I’m not either. I don’t believe it works. I believe it infringes on competivity which is essential in our world.

Hitler told the Germans to invest in the VW beetle. It was the people’s car. I forget the numbers. 5 marks a week and you will get one. He took that money and spent it on tanks to invade Poland. He said one thing and did another. Imagine that.

 

[matteos]

Social programs do not equal socialism. What are you not understanding? His actions, destroying labor unions, privatization, etc, were literally against the basic definition of socialism. Fucking Volkswagon, stop being so incredibly dense, my god. You arguing this is like people arguing that since Trump is a nationalist he is also a Nazi.

"Private property in the industry of the Third Reich is often considered a mere nominal provision without much substance. However, that is not correct, because firms, despite the rationing and licensing activities of the state, still had ample scope to devise their own production and investment profiles. Even regarding war-related projects, freedom of contract was generally respected; instead of using power, the state offered firms a number of contract options to choose from. There were several motives behind this attitude of the regime, among them the conviction that private property provided important incentives for increasing efficiency."

"Hitler also suppressed trade unions and refused to give the homes of German princes to the people, as he felt this would move the party towards communism."

The next thing you're going to tell me is North Korea is Democratic, lmao.

Hitler loves socialism and communism so much he invaded Russia.

and he was so dumb and so full of his own hubris he didn’t learn the lesson of Napoleon a hundred years before.

 

[Shadow277]

hitler wasn’t a real socialist. Just to get something clear. I’m not either. I don’t believe it works. I believe it infringes on competivity which is essential in our world.

Hitler told the Germans to invest in the VW beetle. It was the people’s car. I forget the numbers. 5 marks a week and you will get one. He took that money and spent it on tanks to invade Poland. He said one thing and did another. Imagine that.

He stole assets from other companies, increased public schooling, created the autobahn, and many more socialist policies. That makes him a socialist. I mean, socialist is in the NAZI acronym for F's sake.

 

[watisthis]

He stole assets from other companies, increased public schooling, created the autobahn, and many more socialist policies. That makes him a socialist. I mean, socialist is in the NAZI acronym for F's sake.

The democratic people's republic of Korea, 2+2 = 4, North Korea must be democratic. Wow, such simple MATH!. The amount of cognitive dissonance it takes to claim that Hitler was a leftist is too severe to be won over by facts. Only extremely right-wing ignorant nuts can be this easily hoodwinked.

It actually hurts that you can't comprehend the simple definition of socialism.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

Yea but how do you feel about brad pitt?

 

[Hack]

Yea but how do you feel about brad pitt?

I think he's a very handsome man. But not well-spoken.

 

[watisthis]

Yea but how do you feel about brad pitt?

Love his movies, and as a person, he seems like a stand-up guy and he's quite the philanthropist. However, I do not know him personally I just assume people are all-around decent unless proven otherwise.

 

[Docscurlock]

I lost all respect when he dumped Jennifer Aniston, what a dumb ass. She's hot.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

Yea but he did trade for Angelina Jolie in her prime. She looked amazing in Mr. and Mrs Smith. Gotta give the guy credit. He was slayin it back in the day.

 

[Hack]

I lost all respect when he dumped Jennifer Aniston, what a dumb ass. She's hot.

Yea but he did trade for Angelina Jolie in her prime. She looked amazing in Mr. and Mrs Smith. Gotta give the guy credit. He was slayin it back in the day.

I bet both of those two could be very annoying for different reasons. Jolie seems nuts to me. Aniston does seem decent - if a bit whiny. Still, neither of them has stayed for a long time in a relationship. You know when someone is very attractive but can't stay in a relationship there are some issues.

 

[Docscurlock]

I bet both of those two could be very annoying for different reasons. Jolie seems nuts to me. Aniston does seem decent - if a bit whiny. Still, neither of them has stayed for a long time in a relationship. You know when someone is very attractive but can't stay in a relationship there are some issues.

It is because they haven't given me a try yet.....

 

[bluebeastsrt]

I bet both of those two could be very annoying for different reasons. Jolie seems nuts to me. Aniston does seem decent - if a bit whiny. Still, neither of them has stayed for a long time in a relationship. You know when someone is very attractive but can't stay in a relationship there are some issues.

I wouldn't give them a relationship.

Sponsored