'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'The hope that we could ever unite humanity and work together is dead.
I wish it wasn't so but it is.';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8024740
very nice';

'>>8024852
We are simply allowing too many people who are unworthy to hijack our time, attention, and resources. Their selfishness needs to be spurned, we in fact can send people into space, and they can get a job.';

'I don't think we are ever going to get to a Trek future.
We are going to destroy ourselves. While we pollute the planet and kill each other, its a race to what kills us first.';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'I went on the bridge of the D back when it was built in Las Vegas as part of the "star trek experience" . It was awesome';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8026259
never forget what nearly was';

'>>8026311';

'>>8026253

To be fair, a Third World War had to happen in the universe of Star Trek in order for things to get better. Maybe an ethnic cleansing is what the human race needs.';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'In other threads:
>>7966192
>>7966193
>>7970251
>>7976674
>>7985775
>>7985776
>>7995430
>>7995826
>>7999396
>>8000992
>>8001584
>>8001873
>>8002654
>>8002655
>>8002656
>>8002657
>>8002658
>>8002659
>>8009291
>>8011902
>>8015489
>>8016696
>>8018298
>>8019374
>>8019378
>>8019381
>>8027157
>>8027158
>>8027159
>>8027160
>>8027161
>>8027162
>>8027164
>>8027165';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8026259
I visited the Vegas Star Trek Experience also. I know exactly what you mean about how awesome it was to be on that bridge.

I also thought it was interesting that the bridge mostly had things going on in back and up front. I guess I'd always imaged there were other control panels and stations on the sides, but that's not true. Makes sense, though -- the camera sees what's behind the actors and what's in front of them (mosty the viewscreen). No point in putting anything interesting on the sides.';

'>>8028849
>other control panels and stations on the sides

There were, but only in the movie Star Trek Generations (pic related).';

'Trekkie 1';

'Trekkie 2';

'Trekkie 3';

'Sorry the resolution is not out of this world';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8037031';

'undefined';

'The damage Discovery did to the Trek is still shocking to me.

All the woke bullshit they pushed in it, the gay, trans agenda, the girl boss bullshit. Pushing girl boss hero who shits on men and thinks that whispering is acting. It was really hard to watch and after being a life long Trek fan it really wrecked my opinion of it.
Picard season 1 and 2 were not much better, only in Season 3 did they realise what they were doing and try to deliver something the fans actually wanted.

I don't have much hope for the future of Trek now';

'undefined';

'>>8039059
RIP';

'>>8039059
Geez, the amount of whining I hear from so called Trek fans about it being ‘woke’ makes me laugh every time I hear that complaint. It sounds so much like what the bigots in sci-fi would say about TOS and Uhura, or Sulu having substantial roles in the series. And the outcry of Kirk kissing Uhura,, nothing new to me. It’s the same B.S. from ‘fans’ who never understood Trek to begin with when they whine about Discovery. Why are you even in Star Trek fandom to begin with?gvpv';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8039654
Maybe ask yourself why season 3 of Picard did fairly well with audiences while the first two seasons widely flopped.

The answer's actually really simple, for S3 the writers simply stopped throwing woke liberal-left political themes and messaging in the audiences faces at every possible opportunity, and instead they went back to writing good episodes with mostly fun/interesting/engaging storylines like we used to see with TOS/TNG/DS9/Voy/Ent.

Now if they'd done that from the start with ST:Discovery and the various other modern ST shows since, including S1 and S2 of Picard, then ALL of those modern shows likely would have been much better received by ST fans and tv audiences alike and thus there wouldn't have been nearly as much, if any, continuing backlash from the fans/audience as there has been.

Ultimately though S3 of Picard proved that these woke leftist idiots writing and producing Star Trek today CAN actually write good ST shows if they apply themselves to the task, sadly though they've often deliberately chosen not to do that in favour of spreading 'the message' as much as they possibly can.';

'>>8039059
Not disagreeing with you but not agreeing with >>8039654 because since at least season 2 of TOS, Star Trek has been 'moderately' progressive; as in a dab here and there to push forward, just not 'shit sandwich in your lunchbox, take it or leave it.'. But consider this, imagine if those books by Shatner were made for TV. Or any of those novels...that's all, just imagine.
>mind you I've skipped anything post 2005 except for season 3 of Picard';

'>>8039861
pretty sure Picard third season had different writers and different show runner than the previous two. But compare all of picard season two to the TNG episode "The Outcast." And before anyone mentions Janeway being captain....LaForge's mom was a captain on TNG and the same actress was a captain in 'The Voyage Home,' but uncredited for some reason.
The presentation of matters is what needs to be balanced. The old guard, I believe, knew how to do that. There could've been a more balanced way for Picard's message on, e.g., immigration to be more palatable for audiences; but that alone is a load issue';

'Star Trek has ALWAYS been ‘woke’. It’s just the degree of sensitivity of some of the viewers has been the issue. Instead of a ‘once in awhile’ episode where a topical issue is featured ( only as a allegory to the current time) and a character comes and goes, we now have characters that are main or recurring persons. And honestly, season 3 of Picard was not my favorite because the writing was not coherent at times, particularly with the Changelings. Discovery has been for the most part pretty damn good. Keep in mind, todays topic of ‘representation’ has been blown out of proportion by the screaming Extreme Right Wing who never liked Star Trek TOS from the beginning, but just want to say that Discovery is a prime example of a ‘Leftist Agenda’ that threatens all of humanity. B.S. We see the same whiners complaining about Doctor Who, Star Wars, Marvel Universe, etc. They are the same travelling trolls on the net resisting the very existence of LGBTQ issues, race, social injustice, etc. that have nothing else better to do with their lives but complain that their ugly little world is trying to change for a better future. And that IS what Star Trek is all about. That’s what Roddenberry had in mind.';

'>>8039868
It has been progressive, not woke. The difference being that old Trek tried to make you think by being intelligently written (well, mostly), while new Trek tries to shove a message down your throat with the subtlety of a jackhammer, between pointless action scenes.';

'>>8039871
Explain in detail how ‘new Trek’ is shoving it’s message down the viewers throat. ( I use the term ‘woke’ only to paraphrase the critics. Progressive is my preffered term.)';

'>>8039905

to be fair there is an albeit subtle difference between old-school 'progressive' and modern-day 'progressive' a.k.a. 'woke' which has kinda already been repeatedly explained to some degree or other by various Anon's above, so there's not really much more can be said about it without simply repeating some of that yet again

the fact is that Star Trek of old, i.e. the TOS to Enterprise era, all managed to take a topical issue and carefully explore it, usually through allegory, and usually within a single episode, in the hopes that it'd make the audience at least sit up and think about the topic if not openly discuss it

now this method worked, and actually worked well, because it always managed to do this without ever really coming across as, or even actively being, annoying and preachy by dragging out the topic over multiple episodes/an entire season

and sure some folks were shocked or offended by a topic here or there over the years, but really that says more about that minority of folks than about the issue that triggered them

now though, the writers/producers of star trek continually use controversial sjw themes to try and browbeat the audience into virtual submission by constantly enforcing and reinforcing those kinds of themes and even stereotypes that, if properly analysed through actual critical thinking outside of the modern-day progressive lens, most people would realise and acknowledge are not really problems at all, much less significant ones, and certainly not issues that need to be a recurring theme throughout an entire season or more of a futuristic sci-fi tv show

the problem is that todays writers/producers are still hung up on the issues of the past; racism, sexism, and all the other ism's that are a driving force in modern-day progressive ideology, the thing is most of those ism's are now today being actively perpetrated by the very same modern-day progressives that claim to be fighting against those issues, and that's not good';

'>>8040209
Interesting analysis. I feel that the ‘isms’ being brought into current Trek is a manifestation of the fact that those ‘isms’ ( racism, classism, sexism, etc) are still happening in todays’ society. That because those problems are still present, a more direct ( and indirect) approach is needed. Trek needs to be relevant to todays’ topics, otherwise the societal format of TOS Trek will get stale. And yes, the subjects of Gay relationships, transgender issues are relatively new, but they themselves have always been there, just not approachable for a Sixties audience to handle. Roddenberry himself said that society’s progression follows this pattern: Two steps forward, one step back. We will get there to the point of ‘ this ‘subject’ is no longer a issue of conflict, but we have to make those steps to get there. And if those who cannot accept that, well, maybe after time, acceptance will be acknowledged. But we have to be seen to get the conversation started, to say ‘ We are here. We have always been here. ‘';

'>>8039871
100% agree with this. Big difference between being progressive and full on hard left woke.';

'>>8040245
>But we have to be seen to get the conversation started, to say ‘ We are here. We have always been here.‘

The problem is you can't force people to have a conversation on any topic by simply trying to ram the topic down peoples throats 24/7/365 while also inferring, or straight up calling, that those people are racist/sexist/whatever-ist because they don't immediately fall on bended knee and blindly accept the political narrative surrounding that topic that you're trying to push; that's been repeatedly proven over a very long period of time now to be actually wholly counterproductive such that it generally results in those folks getting exceedingly pissed off with the group(s) pushing the topic/narrative

The other issue as well is that 'the message' is flawed because it's always based on the false premise of a systemic bias, i.e. a larger group being biased against a smaller group, be it through racism, sexism or whatever, and yet nobody pushing 'the message' is ever capable or willing to step forward and point at a definitive example of a clear systemic bias that people who don't follow 'the message' might actually be willing to stand up and help fight against, instead the systemic issue always exists as some murky ethereal thing that's just 'out there' somewhere, but which nobody can ever pin down or define. This too is counter-productive and results in people getting pissed off at the folks pushing 'the message'

And this isn't to say there aren't racist, sexist, or other types of biased people out there, of course there are, and always have been sadly, but they are rarely examples of a systemic problem, rather they are almost always individual cases of personal bias that should be treated as such rather than lumping everybody whether innocent or guilty into a larger group simply because of some bias on the part of the person or group pushing 'the message'';

'>>8040245 >>8040552

The big issue the woke left has is they feel like they are free to use lies and active discrimination to fight what they falsely perceive to be systemic discrimination. Except you can't openly discriminate against others and then expect actually intelligent folks to support your BS, it doesn't work like that.

Take this whole woke left narrative of all straight white men are evil, or asking blacks for ID to vote is racist, or that women are not allowed by the patriarchy to be equal in everything, or that you get to call everyone the woke left doesn't like racist or sexist or fascist or being 'literally hitler' and so on whether they're guilty or not, that's all horrendously counter-productive, and it's made worse because the people the woke left attack are generally not the ones causing any problems in society, rather the problems are generally actively caused by the woke left themselves with their questionable narrative and even more questionable tactics.

"Oh but black people are all victims and have no chances in society, so we need to make a Star Trek episode in 2024 showing all the black characters excelling without the white mans help..."

Wait, says who in 2024 are all black people victims? Oh that's right, it's mostly WHITE liberally-leftist women... who weirdly often won't let their black 'friends' speak for themselves when questioned by non-leftists. And yet if you were to talk to a lot of black folks who haven't fallen into the woke left trap and can actually think for themselves, they'll straight-up call BS on the whole woke narrative.

And isn't it funny how the left pushed for womens rights for decades, except actual womens rights are now worth approximately fuck all in the grand leftist victimhood hierarchy because trans rights now override everything, even if that results in young girls being raped at school or women being seriously injured and put in hospital, at the hands of a trans 'girl' or 'woman'';

'>>8040565
here's the thing, any time you, or anyone uses the terms 'woke' and 'left', I already realize that your bias is set, and trying to talk to people of this mentality is an exercise in pointlessness.
If someone wishes to discuss these things with such minded people, sure, go ahead, but as we've seen, this just results in walls of text on a wallpaper forum, and no mentalities are changed or even moved.
And they're more than willing to keep moving the needle further away from Trek world because of it. Unless you're talking section 32...which got canceled.';

'>>8040721
wassa matter, did the big meanie Anon just unpack everything and hit the nail squarely on the fucking head so hard it triggered you?

you do know yours was a standard cowardly leftist response to whenever they get painted into a corner by harsh reality - at all costs deflect and try to steer the conversation away from that hard truth so they don't have to acknowledge it

anyway, star trek has always been progressive, it's just obnoxiously so now more than it ever used to be, and that's a fact';

'>>8039871

Nope. You're objectively incorrect. Sorry. Don't waste time arguing it. Just accept the fact that you're wrong - and bigoted for unironically complaining about wokeness - and make the necessary changes.';

'>>8039059

Wow, look how threatened you are by the progressiveness that's always been present in Star Trek from day one. You're a disgrace to Star Trek fandom, you absolute fucking clown.';

'>>8039861

Nah. Season 3 of Picard was more popular because it catered to nostalgia and was packed to the gills with (mostly) clunky, heavy-handed fan service. Take out all of the fan wank and you're left with a pretty subpar story that's only slightly better than that of Season 2.';

'whine, whine, bitch, whine';

'>>8041090';

'>>8041091';

'>>8041092';

'>>8041093';

'>>8039059
Agreed one hundred percent.';

'>>8041091
Garbage.';

'>>8029225
Worf was excellent';

'>>8041068
Uh, we're already at the "you're a bigot" stage, huh? How's that been working out for you lately?';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8041291
That's not Star Trek, it's several solar farms in X3.';

'>>8039059
I get it, but Discovery for me is just bad writing. Its not that there is "woke" content, its that its written for people so simple that the woke is all they need to consider it good content.
I think SNW does a good balance of this. I havent finished S2 yet, but I was impressed with S1. They ended the season with Pike being to diplomatic for intergalatic politics/warfare, not woke. Consistently in the season not everyone makes it. People are broken down for reasons besides their sexuality or race, although these things are not ignored. Staff have conflicts, but remain relatively professional and have genuine respect for each other. The show also does a decent job at creating episodic adventures with serial themes that tie the episodes together.
By the Singh/Kirk Canuck episode it seems the whole point of the show will be re-establishing the Trek universe for a timeline that at this point in ours has past some major events like the Eugenic wars without destroying thecontinuity of events that lead to TOS/TNG, or at the very least creating a what I hope will be a respectful clean break between the timelines that can reintroduce old personalities as new characters and old stories from new persoectives. Ultimately breath life into the franchise that can hold love for the past and clear space to boldly go into the future.
I could see this universe fitting very neatly into a rebooted Movies era and evetually TNG era thats taken a bit more seriously than TLD, a show in concept Im not against but like Discovery seems to be aimed at the simpletons in the woke and Wubalubadubdub crowd


Unless someone wants to spoil my dreams by what I havent seen in S2/S3 please do so';

'>>8041069
Hear, hear. You are so right.';

'>>8039059
>only in Season 3 did they realise what they were doing and try to deliver something the fans actually wanted.
>I don't have much hope for the future of Trek now
They listened to fans, recognized they fucked up, and began course-correcting. Isn't that a good sign?

>>8039863
>mind you I've skipped anything post 2005 except for season 3 of Picard
Strange New Worlds is actually good, you should give it a try
All you need to know about Discovery is that [spoiler]Pike makes a time-travel Faustian bargain to save the Federation, and he knows his crippling injury from The Menagerie is predestined to happen as a result.[/spoiler]

>>8041576
>it seems the whole point of the show will be re-establishing the Trek universe for a timeline that at this point in ours has past some major events like the Eugenic wars without destroying the continuity of events that lead to TOS/TNG
I don't get why fans (and now the actual producers/writers) are so hung up about making sure it all lines up "properly" with the real world. What are you going to do when 2063 comes and no Vulcans show up in Montana? Let fiction be fiction ffs.';

'My main issue with new-Trek is all the faggotry.

You don't become an intergalactic spacefaring civilization that colonizes hundreds of planets, develops the tech to teleport molecules hundreds of miles almost instantly, and eliminates most diseases, and still have homosexuals or transsexuals in your society. Gender dysphoria and all LGBTQ crap realistically should fall under the "disease" category when the Federation talks about having done away with war, disease, famine, and suffering to build their little space utopia.';

'>>8039059
> pretends to like Trek
> complains about things being woke
Trek has always been about representation and progressive social politics.
Discovery really is pretty bad, but not because it has female leads, but because it is a 2 hour movie, stretched over 10 episodes, with no sense of pacing, levity, or sense in the characters. Brunham isn't bad because she's black, a woman, or because Martin-Green's acting skills - she's a horribly inconsistent character, written to neglect everything Starfleet stands for while at the same time rising in the command structure for causing a war out of personal spite.
And don't even get me started on the spore drive...
Picard is basically only fan service with much of the same writing issues.

Strange New Worlds is the only silver lining IMO. It's not perfect, though none of the OG shows were great in the first seasons either. But at least it's steers away a little from the established characters, the fan service is toned down quite a bit. And it has a much more reasonable episodic structure.';

'>>8043213
you must've missed all the social justice and trans issues in the original shows you pretend to have watched.
Star Trek has always been about empowering and highlighting minority and standing up against backwards ideologies like the one you're portraying.
what you're saying is literally the positions of multiple villains on the OG shows';

'>>8043213
Be glad DS9 came out when it did then; had it come out even 10 years later and Ira Behr had gotten his way with the shows direction we wouldn't have been watching Bashir and Dax together by series end, it would have been seven full seasons of Bashir and Garak ... *facepalm*


>>8043245
>>8043246
>Trek has always been about representation and progressive social politics.

Yes it has, but with the first few series Trek NEVER really ever felt the need to endlessly beat the audience over the head with the big stick of social justice about certain 'controversial for the day' topics, rather it would usually approach those topics in a way that simply gave the audience a random slap upside the head now and then to make sure people were still paying attention and to give them something new and deep to talk about, because at the end of the day the ST folks knew their audience were mostly mature and capable of dealing with that stuff without completely losing their minds.

But with modern (post Enterprise) Trek, now it very much feels like the producers and writers are actively treating the entire fanbase like we're a bunch of uneducated children who aren't capable of conscious critical thought and logical conversation, and so the Trek folks now ARE routinely beating the audience over the head in pretty much every single episode they shart onto the tv or film screen.

At this point it feels like a(n increasingly) large portion of the fanbase have (rightly) just had enough of this and are now saying to the Trek folks just fuck off already, y'all have one job, take the extensive universe you've been given access too, and just expand on that universe with more fascinating and exciting stories and adventures while at the same time keeping your own personal modern political fantasies and ideologies out of the fucking picture because we the people just need decent entertainment rather than being endlessly preached to by a bunch of largely oblivious morons.';

'undefined';

'>>8039654
Dialate tranny. Ynbaw';

'>>8039654

There is a distinct difference between "progressive," and "woke." Star Trek has always been progressive ever since The Original Series. The idea of presenting a future where racial differences, poverty and war have all been solved on Earth and people learned to work together towards a common good is a progressive idea, not woke. The fact of having a black woman as a Bridge Officer, or a Ruskie at the Con at the height of the real world Cold War was never thrust into your face or shoved down your throat constantly; there were just there. The moral dilemmas and ethical connundrums in countless Star Trek episodes were written intellligently to make you think, they weren't preachy or written in such a way to force an idea on you, like much of writing inside and outside of nu-Trek is today. Please understand that someone can be anti-woke, but open to and even enjoy progressive themes in entertainment.';

'>>8039905
>>8041068
You're a faggot and ST dies with your faggotry, enjoy knowing that.';

'>>8044139
it is extremely funny how much of a weird spaz you are about this. can't put the toothpaste back in the tube when it comes to progressive and lgbtq+ values, so either die frothing-at-the-mouth-mad or grow the fuck up and stop being such a whiny loser lmfao';

'>>8044139
I'd have thought TNG era Picard taught you better than that.';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8044168
>can't put the toothpaste back in the tube when it comes to progressive and lgbtq+ values

oh for sure there's at least a couple of ways to make that happen, don't worry about that, it absolutely can be done, and quite effectively too


>>8044217
if you'd bothered to read ANY of what was previously written above you'd have seen that TNG is considered in a similar vein as TOS, in that it wasn't all preachy and woke like modern ST has become, because TNG focused on social commentary on a per episode basis rather than dedicating the whole series to shoving certain ultra 'progressive' topics down its audiences throats.

that's the fucking difference in all this, that's why old trek up to ST:Enterprise is widely considered acceptable viewing to most ST fans, because none of those 5 early series (TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT) continually beat the audience over the head with the big stick of wokeness, but yet still occasionally tackled controversial social topics in a thoughtful, intelligent, and sensitive manner; while most of what followed Enterprise is widely considered to be utter woke garbage because the writing clearly shifted to be little more than thinly veiled woke ultra activism vaguely disguised as 'entertainment', and that's what a sizeable chunk of the trek fanbase finds very distasteful.

so if the writers and producers had kept to the same formula used in those early shows, nobody now would really give a shit about controversial social topics occasionally being discussed in these modern trek shows; but the writers and production staff just couldn't do that, they couldn't help themselves and they just had to push their woke activism to the fore making it the primary object of each new show, and now they're all making surprised pikachu faces because a big chunk of the fanbase up and turned round and told them all to shove their woke activism up their asses.';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8045331

Oh my fucking god, just admit you're a bigot, already.

Seriously; stop fucking around and trying to sound like you have the slightest idea what you're talking about. You're making a colossal ass of yourself, and that goes for every other single dipshit that thinks as you do.

And don't even waste keystrokes or screen taps to tell me you're not being bigoted. Anyone who unironically uses the term "woke" as you're using it harbors some level of prejudice. If they didn't, they wouldn't have any reason to complain about anything being "woke", because it wouldn't bother, upset, or trigger them. So, just accept what you are, and either fix it or embrace it.

>a big chunk of the fanbase up and turned round and told them all to shove their woke activism up their asses

Yeah, no. It's not that big a chunk by any stretch of the imagination; they're just a very vocal minority crying "WoKe!1!!" like it's a verbal tic. The only reason it seems like more is because they have so many more outlets to shart out their blather. And, guess what: they're always going to be wrong, and they're always going to lose. Star Trek isn't going to get less "woke", as you label it, and they ain't going to give a tenth of a shit if the whiny bigoted halfwits who bitch and moan about Discovery or Picard or Strange New Worlds "shoving wokeness down their throats" take their balls and go home.

The anti-woke mob are watching entertainment media move forward without them, and they don't like it, so they're bellyaching about it. GOOD. Fuck 'em. I hope everything they love keeps letting them down and they die angry, because it's the least they deserve.';

'>>8047548
Congrats on being part of the problem and not part of the solution; hope you get some pro help for your anger and denial issues.

Also, those Anons you're bitching about have a point, if for example Picard was so perfect why did the ratings for seasons 1 and 2 comparatively tank after the audience widely complained about the poor (i.e. woke) writing, and then miraculously season 3 was considered a vast improvement by the audience because the shows writers suddenly dialled back the wokery and started writing regular Star Trek again?

Now did the studio change direction out of the goodness of their hearts, or did they wake up one day and smell the coffee and realised they were onto an obvious critical and financial loser if they kept pushing the woke message? Of course the latter option is the answer.

And it's not just Star Trek, look at the huge mess Disney are now in, not just with how they've mishandled all the various Star Wars shows/films they've churned out, but generally with most/all their other modern-day content too, near enough all of which has been widely panned by audiences and some critics for being far too woke for words.

And even beyond Disney, there's plenty of other big name studios that have pushed headlong into the realm of woke nonsense and have almost immediately faced enormous critical backlash and increasing financial losses.

The simple fact is the big studios all got greedy, they thought they had a captive audience they could browbeat with woke politicised messaging and they all got the surprise of their lives when the audiences started resoundly rejecting the woke ideology and instead called for better non-politicised writing.

Sad thing is, 'hollywood' can do good non-politicised non-woke writing and thus make some excellent shows if they put their minds to it, e.g. The Expanse, Dune, Oppenheimer, Sound Of Freedom, to name a few, but those are now the exception rather than the norm and that's just sad.';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>8047571

You're a sad little creature. I've never seen someone dance around the truth so clumsily in my life.

Just embrace being a bigot. Don't hide behind the "woke" shield and pretend like you have any kind of tolerance.

YOU are the problem, not the solution. You'll always be in the minority with your opinion; you'll always be wrong, and you're always going to lose.

Find a way to accept that truth, or die miserable and mad knowing that the rest of the world is leaving people like you behind.';

'undefined';

'>>8050142
AKA the Javelin Argument by Lucretius from over 2,000 years ago';

'undefined';

'Anyone has mor of the Fighters?';

'>>8026324
Impeccably dogshit takeaway.';

'undefined';