Peak Oil is You

Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)

Page added on September 30, 2018

Bookmark and Share

12 Reasons Why People Refuse To Address The Idea That We’re Headed For Near-Term Societal Collapse

General Ideas

The starting point for a generative discussion of the deep adaptation agenda is a difficult one. Because to begin to rigorously and imaginatively discuss this topic first requires us to accept the likelihood of near term societal collapse. By which I mean that within ten years, in whatever society we are living in, that we will find ourselves in a situation where our normal means of income, sustenance, security, pleasure, identity and purpose all disappear. As it is impossible to predict the future within complex systems, “ten years” is not my prediction, and I mention it as a device to help focus this discussion without making people run out the room to stock their bunker. Please note that I am not suggesting we have the whole ten years: we might have less than that. Haven’t a clue about what I am talking about? Then please read my paper on Deep Adaptation.

As I have been talking with people about this topic over the past few years, I’ve become aware of the barriers accepting near-term societal collapse and therefore barriers to rigorous and creative thinking and discussion about what we might do about it, personally and collectively. I have also become aware of the barriers I had for a few years to avoid addressing this topic with the seriousness it merits. So before outlining either the analysis of our environmental predicament or the new agenda this opens up, it may be useful to outline some of these barriers to useful dialogue. I do that as part of my invitation for you to either avoid – or momentarily suspend – such responses and adopt a “what if” perspective on societal collapse. Only then can one explore what a deep adaptation agenda might mean for oneself, one’s work and wider society.

I am not a psychologist. I presume there is a lot of psychological theory related to what I am perceiving when I discuss climate-induced collapse. Some theories like confirmation bias, wilful blindness, cognitive dissonance and the relatability of new information are ones that have reached me via the mainstream. But rather than attempt a poor hack of psychological theory to validate or explain my perceptions, I will instead share a purely layman’s perspective of the attitudes and responses I have encountered. I will therefore leave it to psychologists to come to my aid in elaborating on these experiences. In the following discussion, I may also be exhibiting certain fallacies that psychologists could point out for me. Any feedback is welcome (in the comments below). For ease of future discussion, I will label each of the following twelve types of dialogue-barring response with a somewhat catchy title.

The “Problem Person” Response

The first response that is a barrier to discussing deep adaptation is an “ad hominem” response, where we question the credibility of the person sharing the analysis. It is a response we all have when confronted with uncommon views. Is he credible? Is he an expert? Is this view widely shared? These are obvious and important questions to ask. But should not mean you avoid looking at the evidence yourself. Therefore, when asked that question, I suggest people read the summary of climate science and current measurements, in the first part of my Deep Adaptation paper.

The “Objectifying” Response

The second response that is a barrier to generative dialogue on this topic is to label the analysis of collapse as just one type of analysis amongst many. This approach sometimes includes expressing how apocalyptic thinking is a cultural trope throughout human history. This means that one can feel one has a broader perspective of a range of different views held by different people and organisations. Therefore, the emotional charge of the analysis of near-term collapse is reduced. One’s worldview is maintained including the view that one is a reasonable balanced person operating sensibly within a reasonable balanced society. The problem with this perspective is you are choosing to “sit on the fence” on the most important matter in your lifetime.

The “Polite Avoidance” Response

The third response that is a barrier to generative dialogue is to renegotiate for yourself what I am saying. It’s a polite conflict-avoiding form of response. It is where you might choose to focus on what you think is the useable bit of what I’m saying, where you conclude that things are very bad and therefore we need to increase our efforts to stave off collapse. But that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying societal collapse is now inevitable within, probably, the next ten years. And I’m using the concept of “inevitable” because even if there is a eureka technology right now that is deployed at scale to take carbon out of the atmosphere, the heating that’s pre-determined from existing atmospheric CO2 plus the escalating feedback loops means societies will collapse anyway.

The “Moral Superiority” Response

The fourth response that is a barrier to generative dialogue on this topic is what I will call the “moral superiority” response. It is when people ask “is he being irresponsible for expressing this view?” The supposition made, most often without evidence, is that it will make people panic or become apathetic, and therefore we shouldn’t even be discussing it. Yet silencing our own thinking and discussion because of speculation on what this might do in the wider world is an illogical way of thinking. It is a response that I examine in my Deep Adaptation paper and contrast with the evidence from worldwide opinion surveys that suggests more people are becoming doubtful about the future. This objection often comes with accusations that people like me are “giving up” and irresponsibly implying everyone should “give up.” That is often said rhetorically without specificity of what exactly we are giving up on. Therefore, such statements reflect an annoyance a person is experiencing when hearing the idea of collapse. I am suggesting people give up efforts at the incremental reform of existing systems. I am suggesting people give up on any dependence on the status and security associated with their current way of life. I am suggesting people give up on assuming their lives have meaning by contributing to progress. I am suggesting people give up in postponing their attention to their own mortality and the meaning of life. I am not suggesting we give up on carbon reductions or active engagement in society. Quite the opposite. Many things can be discussed, as a result of this switch in thinking.

The “Postpone Judgement” Response

The fifth response that is a barrier to generative dialogue on this topic involves thinking to oneself that it might be true, but to know for sure then I’d have to really study and think, and I am too busy right now so will aim to analyse this later. Being busy is comprised of so many things. We could be having so much fun, or having invested so much of our time, money and spirit into a project that hasn’t yet succeeded, or know we want to have the fun we haven’t had before looking at this topic more. Why? Because we sense that looking more closely at near term societal collapse risks disrupting everything think about ourselves, the world and all that we have worked towards. The problem is that while one postpones, a subconscious panic can set in as more information about our current situation passes across our screens. Yes, I speak from experience on that one!

The “Fairy-tale” Response

A sixth response that is a barrier to generative dialogue on deep adaptation arises from a belief that we create the reality we experience, so we can help avoid a collapse by imagining something else. Within an individualistic framing, there is positive psychology, whether the moderate kind that involves believing ‘where the attention goes so energy flows’, or the extreme kind, where people want to believe in their own cosmic power to manifest anything they want by focusing their desire. Such a view ignores how we co-create our reality with other people and the more-than-human world. It stores up greater pain for when things don’t work out according to ones hopes and dreams. It might also restrict people from applying their minds to the world as it is now. A different version of this “fairy-tale” response to the latest climate science is the idea that so long as we identify with a new story of reality, beyond separation, we will be able to overcome a climate catastrophe. Although our current climate predicament is the result of a warped story of reality and place within it, the idea that by identifying with a new story of interbeing that we can reshape the world around us to avoid a collapse seems like wishful thinking. It may also be seeking to justify a view on reality and metaphysics by arguing for the utility of that view to an individual self – a highly seductive trap for spiritual teachers and their followers.

The “Not Bothered” Response

The seventh response that is a barrier to generative dialogue, is to think that because this analysis means it’s too late to fix things and maintain society as we know it, therefore we “may as well” just forget about climate change and do something else. In my experience, this view is shared by people who were not actively participating in society beyond their own self-interest. They may have accepted socially-defined notions of success and seek to avoid pain and maximise superficial pleasures. Therefore, they were not likely to contribute much to dialogues on social change in any case. So, we could let them go on their way. But sometimes I hear people express this view because they are angry at the injustice and inequality in our societies and could welcome how collapse will punish elites. When I hear that, then there is an opportunity to channel that anger at injustice into something more useful, given that it is the poor and marginalised who may suffer the worst in early stage of collapse.

The “Distract-Me Please” Response

An eighth response is to take on board the view that we face inevitable near-term collapse and decide one can’t live with the emotions this causes, so set it aside and work on something else, as if it didn’t exist. That is understandable, but impossible. I know, as this is how I responded for a few years. As more and more information is shared about the state of our climate and impacts on our agriculture and societies, the unresolved emotions lurk ready to interrupt your work and life.

The “God’s Will” Response

A ninth response that is a barrier to generative dialogue is to say yeah, I know we screwed, and that’s OK as our true nature is eternal spirit and therefore the end of society, civilisation, even our species, is just the normal passing of things. Such a perspective means you might say let’s take a deep breath in together and chant Om, then go get a green juice or glass of red wine. Another form of this response that is more likely in cultures shaped by Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Bahai) is that whatever is going to happen to our species is God’s will, and therefore we don’t need to discuss what to do about it.

The “Personal Survival” Response

The tenth response I have experienced over the years is to take the analysis of collapse on board and then let the fear-response shape one’s priorities and decisions, so begin to look for means of self-preservation. Many people with that kind of response think they are fully accepting the situation and integrating it into their lives. But being a “prepper” in the complex system of human society within the wider complex system of nature means that this kind of “bunker mentality” is unlikely to work. Not that we shouldn’t look to create arks.

The “Extinction Wins” Response

An eleventh response to generative dialogue on deep adaptation is the view that near term human extinction is inevitable or very likely. Some people with such a view consider any discussion about what to do to reduce the impact of collapse, save the species, or support what might come after this civilisation is gone, are all forms of deluded hope. That one thinks human extinction is inevitable would not necessarily preclude working on the things I just mentioned, as one can act as if it might still be possible to achieve such things, just in case that it is. Or, it might even be possible to accept human extinction and seek to reduce the radioactive legacy we would leave the rest of planet Earth. Those who dismiss any such dialogue are therefore likely trying to find solace in certainty, rather than reconsider everything and consider being active in society.

The “Nit Picking” Response

Rather than deal with the gravity of the analysis, the twelfth barrier is to focus on a detail of communication. For instance, a mistake in a piece of data, or a reference, or annoyance at the tone or content of once utterance. Or perhaps focusing on the lack of depth of discussion in one paper on one set of ideas – from permaculture to geoengineering – which are seen as the be all and end of what should be discussed. This is milder than an ad hominin attack, but helps someone engage with the material without engaging with the significance of the material and thus avoiding meaningful dialogue on deep adaptation.  I left it to last in my list as this response is such a boring one, I find it draining to even mention.

Beyond Those Barriers: The Power of “What If?”

These twelve types of response all share the implication that we don’t have to sit with the analysis of near term collapse and explore openly with others all the possible implications. I think these forms of response may therefore all respond to the subconscious desire to close-down this awkward topic as quickly as possible. But I’m not a psychologist. So, to any psychologists reading this, if you can add any context to the ideas I have outlined that could help me (and others). Then any advice for how to help people awaken to such patterns and move beyond them would be great. Also, if I’m exhibiting a pattern as well, then go let me know 😊

If people avoid or overcome the twelve barriers I have described, to then discuss the components and implications of a deep adaptation agenda, or similar, then this doesn’t mean people will agree with each other. Not at all. Someone may turn to religion. Some to nationalism. Some to principles of universal love and compassion. Some may focus on geoengineering. Others on humanitarian action. Some on moving beyond capitalism. And so on. But that’s where our dialogues should be focused on now. Sadly, our dumbed-down establishment-aligned media still think it is best to debate whether climate change is real or associated with extreme weather events that, by repeating regularly, show how climate has changed.

In future I will write more about some avenues for discussion, for those who want to seek meaning, potency and urgency within a context of impending collapse. But my conviction is that once people overcome the twelve barriers I have just described, then hopefully many better views on what to do than my own will begin to emerge.


87 Comments on "12 Reasons Why People Refuse To Address The Idea That We’re Headed For Near-Term Societal Collapse"

  1. Cloggie on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 8:21 am 

    Buy glasses, the Bloomberg link is in my post above.

  2. Davy on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 8:24 am 

    The Italians can of course reintroduce their shabby Lira and “solve problems” by printing deficits and reintroduce 10% inflation, which is an indirect tax on savings accounts, but they will soon find out that in international business they are stuck with the euro as nobody will accept Lira. Even Switzerland was forced to accept the euro as second currency.”

    Lol, listen to the neder talk his binary financial double speak. Lol. When rates go up because of inlation savers will get a higher return from higher interest income. There are always trade offs. They will get more international business because the lower lira will mean attractive exports but you are too stupid financially to understand that.

  3. Davy on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 8:33 am 

    “Merkel’s End Could Spark EU Breakdown”

    “The pieces have been moving into place for months now.  German Chancellor Angela Merkel has seen her power within German political circles wane for more than a year.  Italy’s opposition to the European Union’s budget rules is stiffening. Bond yields are beginning to not just rise, but blow out uncontrollably. The Fed keeps raising rates to arrest inflation not supported by increased wages. Brexit talks are at a standstill.”

    “It’s the Debt, Stupid. The only thing keeping the European Union together in its current form is Germany’s strong-arming everyone into line along with the IMF and the ECB.  But, any replacement for Merkel will be far more nationalistic, even if it is a member of the CDU, than Merkel. And that means being far more willing to let Italy walk out of the Union if it doesn’t do what’s in Germany’s best interest.  And to German nationalists, right or wrong, bailing out lazy Italians is not on the agenda.  Part of what fueled AfD’s initial success was the endless bailouts of Southern European countries like Greece and Italy previously.”

  4. JuanP on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 9:20 am 

    “China’s yuan strengthens its position as reserve currency as US dollar weakens.”

  5. rockman on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 9:28 am 

    #13: For at least the last 40+ years they have heard “experts” predict total societal collapse was only a short time and it hasn’t happened.

  6. Antius on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 9:48 am 

    “Oh and failing to pay 39 billion means a blockade until you have paid, which you will. We simply have the better cards.”

    Oh really? Who do you think a blockade is going to hurt the most? If Britons don’t go on holiday in EU countries, then we simply go on holiday somewhere else. An inconvenience, nothing more. If the domestic tourism market picks up, we may even come out ahead. But for the economies of southern Europe, the resulting loss of income would be disastrous. Likewise if we stop importing your goods. The flow of goods between Britain and continental Europe is overwhelmingly from Europe to the UK. We can buy cheese, red wine, consumer goods, etc. from other places relatively easily. Are you just as confident about finding a comparable replacement customer?

    The political unity of the EU is already fractured. How do you think your precious little alliance is going to do if certain countries start suffering a serious loss of income because of decisions made by Brussels to punish one of their biggest customers? I don’t think a blockade would have to be in place for very long before the economic losses to the EU will exceed 39billion Euros. An interruption of trade will be damaging to both for sure. There will be a painful period of adjustment for Britain. But in the long term, things will be upside.

  7. Cloggie on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 2:15 pm 

    “If Britons don’t go on holiday in EU countries, then we simply go on holiday somewhere else.”

    Iceland? Advantage: low sunburn risk!

    Or, edgy, skying in Greenland?
    Or ice bear hunting on Spitsbergen?

    “The flow of goods between Britain and continental Europe is overwhelmingly from Europe to the UK. ”

    Not “overwhelmingly”. Something like 50% imports from EU, 40% exports to EU.

    Very possible scenario:

    – no deal
    – UK does not pay agreed upon divorce bill of 39B
    – EU imposses blockade, to begin with plane traffic
    – Shell and other HQ’s decide to move to the continent
    – Populists enforce lifting sanctions against Russia, which is good for trade
    – Scotland: “if England leaves EU without a deal, we Scots can do the same and leave UK unilaterally and join the EU

  8. Cloggie on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 3:07 pm 

    “Shell country head warns UK against no-deal Brexit”

    “London — Shell on Tuesday joined calls by the oil and natural gas industry for the UK to avoid a “no-deal” Brexit, with Shell country head Sinead Lynch warning that added costs in the form of barriers to trade and movement of talent would be “completely the wrong direction” to go in.”

  9. I AM THE MOB on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 3:41 pm 

    The Oil Industry Needs Large New Discoveries, Very Soon

    Market participants and analysts are all focused on the imminent oil supply gap that is opening with the U.S. sanctions on Iran just five weeks away.

    But beyond the shortest term, a larger and more alarming gap in global oil supply is looming—experts forecast that unless large oil discoveries are made soon, the world could be short of oil as early as in the mid-2020s.

    The latest such prediction comes from energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie, which sees a supply gap opening up in the middle of the next decade. At the current level of low oil discoveries and barring technology breakthrough beyond WoodMac’s assumptions, that supply gap could soar to 3 million bpd by 2030, to 7 million bpd by 2035, and to as much as 12 million bpd by 2040.

  10. Anontarded1 on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 4:06 pm 

    hey guys,

    peaking out of temporary retirement temporarily. please support supertard cody wilson (pbuh, swt). He’s a valiant defender of the constitution (pbui, swt). Send shekles, buy something.

  11. makati1 on Tue, 2nd Oct 2018 7:11 pm 

    The whole neocon/elitist plan is to take down the USD, cause a crash that gives the IMF the excuse to make their SDRs the new global trading currency and move the world one step closer to their ‘One World’ government.

    The US Federal Reserve seems to be leading the demo team but Americans like to point fingers and shift the blame to other countries. We shall see who goes down first and worst. My bet is on the Us and in the next two years.

  12. Theedrich on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 3:35 am 

    Antius, England is lang syne.  Whatever it did half a century ago is no longer possible, even though its “subjects” still like to fantasize about their global dominance through hypocrisy in days of yore.  Hwæt we gar-dena, Henry VIII, Lord Nelson, and all that.  Downing Street dare not even forbid the corrupt Russian kleptocrats from hiding their ill-gotten gains in the British financial system, lest the whole now-negrified house of Windsor cards collapse.  The sooner the UK disappears from the world stage, the better.

  13. Cloggie on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 4:51 am 

    Officially, Britain was still the most powerful country as late as 1939. Good old Chamberlain knew he had nothing to fear from the Austrian, but everything from the Americans, who were lusting after the British empire and all they needed to do was pushing Britain into war with Germany and with the corrupt half-American Churchill, enabled by kosher money, the Roosevelt gov had the tool in place go get the job done. As of 1934 Churchill was already in bed with Stalin…

    …so everything was setup to destroy Europe, all by intent of Roosevelt, Stalin and “the greatest Briton of all time” Churchill.

    They were the real villains, not Hitler, who merely wanted his stupid Danzig back, when the Poles, secretly encouraged by the US ambassador Drexel, began to ethnically cleanse Versailles Poland from Germans, forcing Hitler’s hand, “starting WW2” as the official lie goes.

  14. Davy on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 4:59 am 

    “They were the real villains, not Hitler”

    ROFLOL, WOW listen to the “Nazi were victims” sniveling out of the board revisionist. You lost Nazi get over it!

  15. Cloggie on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 5:52 am 

    “ROFLOL, WOW listen to the “Nazi were victims” sniveling out of the board revisionist. You lost Nazi get over it!”

    Note that the lying piece of shit and intellectual pygmee from the Ozarks does not even make an attempt to make a case and refute my argument. He can’t. Europeans have only one enemy on this planet and it aint Russians, Chinese, Africans, Muslims (provided you keep them out), but treasonous communist trash like davy and his owners like millimind.

    But their days are numbered. We only have to wait until the left and right in the US go at each others throat.

  16. Antius on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 5:52 am 

    “ROFLOL, WOW listen to the “Nazi were victims” sniveling out of the board revisionist. You lost Nazi get over it!”

    They were both victims and villains. As was everyone else involved. In real life, there is never any neat ethical division between good guys that do only good, and bad guys that do only bad. Real life doesn’t work like that and that sort of thinking is useful for propaganda purposes but has no real basis in reality.

    Everyone involved believed that they were doing the right thing from their own point of view. In the real world, any attempt to change the international order will involve huge casualties.

    Britain’s attempt to contain Germany resulted in death and misery for large numbers of people. They would have claimed to be acting to maintain the freedom and integrity of European nations.

    German attempts to build a Third Reich resulted in huge amounts of death and suffering. Yet, they were only trying to restore the territorial integrity of the German-Prussian empire. Given the oppression and murder inflicted by Yid communism, one could even argue that from the German point of view the Holocaust was an altruistic act – a gift to rest of Europe.

    The Soviet expansion resulted in murder of millions of east Europeans. The orgy of rape and murder inflicted on German people after the war, should rightfully be called the second Holocaust. Yet the Soviets themselves thought they were building a better, more ordered world.

    Take a good look at history and tell me honestly, which group was good and which group was evil. They all end up looking pretty bad.

  17. Davy on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 6:10 am 

    “Note that the lying piece of shit and intellectual pygmee from the Ozarks does not even make an attempt to make a case and refute my argument.”

    Nedernazi, there is something called established science and by extension history. I don’t need to regurgitate established science and history your lying ass can do that. You are a revisionist and a liar plain and simple. While I do not believe the mainstream version of the 20th century I sure and the hell don’t buy into your self-serving lying Nazi revisionism. You are a fake and a fraud puking self-serving binary facts cherry picked per your lie de jure.

  18. Cloggie on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 7:07 am 

    “Clogmeister, sir, there is something called established science and by extension history.”

    “While I do not believe the mainstream version of the 20th century”


    The intellectual lightweight manages to contradict himself in a single paragraph without noticing it. And you want to be taken seriously?

  19. I AM THE MOB on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 7:11 am 


    There is something also called “amateur youtube videos”..Duh

    Get a brain Moran!

  20. I AM THE MOB on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 7:14 am 


    I have challenged you numerous times to get your alternative theories verified on reddits ask a historian page..That is the only fair way to verify your arguments since they are an independent third party, that neither of us have any connection to..

    And you have refused and backed down every time..

  21. Davy on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 7:24 am 

    “There is something also called “amateur youtube videos”..Duh“

    Ah, dumbass, I don’t see any in my comment. As far as amateur shit that pretty well explains ”Iam” the board idiot.

  22. Davy on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 7:33 am 

    “The intellectual lightweight manages to contradict himself in a single paragraph without noticing it. And you want to be taken seriously?“

    Nazi, what contradictions? It is reasonable and moderate to dismiss self-serving extremist versions on both sides. Unfortunately for you this neuters your Nazi drivel. I am willing to achnowledge the sins on both sides you can’t because then your whole doctrine falls apart. This is the problem with extremist. They have set such a high bar through lies, embellishments, and revisions that any weak card will drop the house of cards. You try to make up for this by persistent, obsessive, and repetitive comments like this is going to make it more true. You are a fraud nedernazi.

  23. Cloggie on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 7:40 am 

    “I have challenged you numerous times to get your alternative theories verified on reddits ask a historian page.”

    You are too stupid to challenge me. I tell you what happened and you have nothing to say against it. I just verbally stomp you in your face 24/7 and our selfstyled “mastermind” is standing there with a mouth filled with teeth but no words. You lost the debate, you idiot. What are you going to do about, you intellectual slow lane dweller, now that you have been beaten by a “goy”?

  24. Anontarded1 on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 7:54 am 

    guys please support supertard cody wilson. he’s out on bail. give him shekles and buy merch of his former company. if you’re a hot fem and legal you can help in other ways. let him know i sent you.

    today is dc sniper anniversary and there’s a very good interview of supertard robert spencer and glenn beck. please find that uncle H was just a jihadist and hope for a day when SENTAPBVs are declared combatants.

  25. Antius on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 9:00 am 

    Davy / Millimind: For a comprehensive introduction into the events that led to WW2, try David Hoggan’s ‘The Forced War’. Last I checked it was available online as a pdf. You can download it, read it and reach your own respective judgements.

    Truth be said, both Britain and USA did everything they could to start war with Germany. The northern half of Poland for example, was German territory under the Prussian empire and at the time of WW2 had a substantial German population that was gradually being ethnically cleansed by the Polish authorities. The situation imposed on Germany by Versailles would be rather like a victorious enemy deciding to apportion Texas or California to Mexico, and have the Mexicans violently oppress any remaining US people still living there. If the US were to retake the territory, it would be doing exactly what Germany did when it invaded Poland.

    That isn’t to say that the Nazi party and German public at that time were all nice people. They were aggressive, ruthless conquerors, believing they were the natural successors of the Roman Empire, with a moral superiority that was justified by historic claim and racial superiority. Certainly they did commit atrocities, just as atrocities were committed against them by the Russians, Americans and British. The bombing of Dresden was an atrocity on the same scale of cruelty as Auschwitz. It was the needless slaughter of civilians. So was Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Americans are every bit as guilty of mass murder as the Germans.

    Like I said, no good guys. Only the victor and the vanquished.

  26. I AM THE MOB on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 9:29 am 


    I was being sarcastic and mocking clogg..Sorry I forgot the /sar

  27. I AM THE MOB on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 9:31 am 


    My grandfather fought the Nazi’s..

    Now its my turn..

  28. I AM THE MOB on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 9:57 am 


    Trump is now being investigated for tax fraud..


  29. Antius on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 10:14 am 

    “My grandfather fought the Nazi’s..

    Now its my turn..”

    Did he hold his breath?

  30. Cloggie on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 10:49 am 

    My grandfather fought the Nazi’s..
    Now its my turn..

    Oh that was him!

    “Their Wehrmacht Was Better Than Our Army”

    Let me guess, a neckbeard with a BMI of 40.

    Did you visit his grave in Normandy?

  31. I AM THE MOB on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 11:02 am 

    The Davos crowd wants Russia destroyed..

    And they get what they want..Look what they did to Hitler


  32. Cloggie on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 12:50 pm 

    The Davos crowd wants Russia destroyed..

    And they get what they want..Look what they did to Hitler

    In those days it was Germany vs Poland, UK, France, USSR, USA, Canada, Australia, Holland, Belgium, Norway, Yugoslavia, Greece.

    This time it is the US vs the rest.

    Remember North-Vietnam? ROFL

  33. boney joe on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 2:44 pm 

    Anus –

    Anonymouse1 said it best: “If the shoe fits….”

    DavyDonaldTurd (DDT)

    Have you ever been absent from this site for more than a 24 hour period? Never. You’re like a malignant cancer that has spread to every portion of the body.

  34. Anonymouse1 on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 4:12 pm 

    The exceptionalturd is seldom absent for more than an HOUR, let alone 24 of them. Its either him, or one of his socks constantly spamming his extremist, exceptionlturdist agenda (and his cut and pastes w/o attribution). Aka plagermism.

  35. makati1 on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 8:25 pm 

    Davy never posts a reliable reference to support his insane delusions. Never. Why? Because there are none.

  36. makati1 on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 8:34 pm 

    In support of my Great Leveling comment above from one of many sources:

    The Great Leveling gains speed. Its goal is taking down the dollar as the reserve currency. The IMF is planning and prepared for that event. Do you have any idea of what that will do to America? I do and it ain’t pretty. Can you say “Third World”?

  37. Davy on Wed, 3rd Oct 2018 10:15 pm 

    “Davy never posts a reliable reference to support his insane delusions.”

    LOL, you have an example to discuss?

    “Why? Because there are none.”

    Right you don’t have any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *