llllIllIllIIIIllI
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2022
The India Menace - Street shitting, unsanitary practices, scams, Hindu extremism & other things
- Thread starter The Noise
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2023
Kek, youre right. As if Seras Victoria would want a nasty poojeet. You will NEVER have a white woman staticness.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2022
That was in response to what I said to him, but it's obvious he's one more seething, pathetic Jeet who knows he isn't ever going to actually have it half as good as us.
llllIllIllIIIIllI
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2022
Here's a teaser from my giant eventual post about all the ways to detect jeets
>You ask them where they live and they mention it's a 4 bed.
Can anyone detect what's wrong with the above statement?
>You ask them where they live and they mention it's a 4 bed.
Can anyone detect what's wrong with the above statement?
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2023
It's realtor-speak; disconnected from the human experience of living in the house except as a theory on what kind of family it best fits.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2022
I can't tell.
4 bedroom as in they're in the burbs or 4 bed as in there's 4 jeets to 1 bed?
My tell for jeets is how they insult you.
They like calling White people Timothy. "what Timmy gon do?" I see this one a lot on 4chan.
Or they just call you Pakistani out of the blue.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2023
A 4 bedroom apartment is expensive as fuck so he is living multigenerationally which only poos do or splitting the rent with a bunch of other jeets
llllIllIllIIIIllI
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2022
They say 4 bed and make no mention of the amount of baths because they don't use them as they shit in the street
tee hee
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2023
I wonder how much the sheer volume of pajeet requests has altered google search. I desperately want to know how an AI trained on Indian data would behave, and I’m sure it can be done given how they have infested the internet.
Wow, I found this odd article by a jeet about the uses of cow urine, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4566776/ don’t bother reading it, I certainly didn’t. But you can scroll through the references there are so many papers written by them about the benefits of cow shit and piss.
Last edited:
llllIllIllIIIIllI
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2022
We talked about this 10 pages back or so. PC companies aren't allowed to be racist, and jeets defeat any and all algorithms by raw numbers.
It's kind of a fun but also sad game, to try to look up the most retarded shit possible, and see if google autocompletes it with
" in hindi"
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2023
Search gamutra, its jeetspeak for cow piss
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
The problem with the Indian nationalists, as with many other peoples, is partly laid down in their history of being conquered by an outsider nation. By nation and nationalist, I am specifically concerned with an overall group of people. heir beliefs, culture, norms etc. How they came to be, and what they are comprised of. A nation's legacy is paramount to the national ideas of the present. Take the Germans or the Italians, one of the main driving forces for nationalist movements in both countries during the 1800s was the response to Napoleon and his conquests. Israel, and the Jewish population, have long been targeted by other groups within the lands that they lived in and with Israel they have become paramount to defend the state they live in. Defeat breads ferocity, a desire to prove oneself. The fervour that remains as such, becomes about preventing another national catastrophe and ensuring a new golden age. India sees this in the loss of prestige associated with the world before the 1700s.
The historical legacy of India in the lingua-franca of terminology, and that of the historical associations within what is in effect, the "construct of India" is refined in the historical image. India, like China, has a legacy of being associated with great wealth. Historically India has played a large and influential wealth thanks to trade. In Asia for example, there is the region of "Indochina", and there too is Indonesia. The historical emphasis on the role of India as being a lavish place, glorified with great discoveries forms part of the bedrock of its national identity. Then there is the Americas. A land that was accidentally stumbled upon on the way to India. America became thought of as India. We have the West Indies, we have the American Indians. Nationalism typically romanticizes the past, and when combined with a great defeat as a driving force helps bring about a storm-like fervour, a sense of desperation to be something that they were not. America, once confused to be India, was in many ways nothing. For what existed, it was secured by the Spanish. The infrastructure that exists in the US was practically non-existent and would be built up by settlers.
Now, with India, things are a bit more extreme. They look at others, they seek what they have and what India does not have. The prestige of the Indian people was constructed firstly by Britain and then later by the Indian "Nationalists".
This does help partly explain why there is significant Indian animosity towards China. China is in a way everything that India was historically, and yet managed to come out on top and remain intact, There had been great land empires in India for much of its history. Sometimes by "Indians", sometimes by outsiders. Take the Maurya, the Mauryan Empire is probably the largest historical empire within the subcontinent that came the closest to unifying what we consider to be modern-day India. It had failed at the conquest of the South. It is the failure of the Maurya which is why there is perhaps animosity to the south. They were not brought into the loop, and the Indian nationalists remained unable to claim that India had been fully unified by the British in the days of the Romans. There were then other Indian states such as the Delhi or Mughals which had vast portions of India under their rule. All of these states were massive but were centred primarily in the north. The triumph of the Mauryan conquests was never rekindled, and instead, the Indian empires would all enter the dustbin of history never reaching the heights that it did. China, however, began to build upon the territorial expansion of its dynasties. Of course, not every dynasty would outgrow the last (take the Ming being smaller than the Yuan dynasty) but the gradual trend came to be then expanding. The Han dynasty was not the largest territorially.
China though, managed to hold out against outside invaders. Yes, they lost treaty ports to the Western powers, but they were not conquered peoples. They were a defeated people, yes. There is a reason why the century of humiliation exists. Yet, when it came to China's invasion by an island nation, in this case, japan, China resisted. It held out, and it triumphed. India did not have this. India was conquered, and subjugated by a company of an even further out island nation. Indians blame this as to why India is poor. I have not read the book of that Indian politician who cried out that Britain owes India trillions, but
Of course, the rhetoric around British looting being the sole reason as to why India is poor does not hold up. Could the impact of colonization on India have hurt the Indian state? Perhaps. This is a historical counterfactual grounded upon a deep-seated belief that India would have unified. India in many ways became lucky that the subcontinent was saved from the dire consequences of war. War could have entirely been more bloody there, with the risks of far larger famines brought upon by ever greater industrial warfare. India was saved from an affair on the scale of the Taiping Rebellion. The worst that India had to go through was famine and taxation. This is to not say that either thing are bad, but having your entire industry bombed, and your economy put into ruin through total, industrial warfare leaves a country in ruins. Europe managed to recover. At the time of independence, India was in not the worst position in terms of the potential for development. India gained independence in 1947. It could control its monetary policy, it could do as it pleased. It had an economy with great potential. They though, squirmed the opportunity. They didn't embrace the potential.
India was lucky to not be in a state of civil war, it was lucky to not have been a major battlefront of WW2 where the closest fighting was instead in Burma. The first half of the 20th century was a horrific period that came as a result of institutional and political developments that were energized by the technological revolutions of its day.
Yet, it has to be the fault of the British because that means India is not at fault. For India, nothing is their failure, as is the trope amongst many nationalists. Britain only had direct control over about 2/3rds of the country. It brought in democratic reforms, the princely states retained autonomy within the subcontinent. Indian nationalists claim that the idea, the construct of the Indian national identity is grounded in the Indian state established by the British.
It was not India that made the Britain of today rich. It was the role of financialization within the neo-liberal experiment which became a one-trick pony and stunted future British growth.
If India had not been taken over by the British it is not certain that it would not have united, nor is it certain that it would have industrialized. Yet, it is paramount within the thought of the nationalist sphere for it to have done so. This had been the life hack that made Britain rich, and India poor amongst the nationalist sphere. The truism that India WOULD have united is essential as it assumes that everything Britain did was bad and that there would be a strong industrial India.
Others have mentioned the emphasis on lifehacks within the concurrent Indian way of life, to garner a competitive advantage against others. The role of the truism is paramount in this regard. Colonization is interpreted to have been a life hack. It made India lose out for the benefit of the British. Lifehacks are something that will hold the Indian nation back, which will impact other nation-states on the world stage. Lifehacks do not breed success. Look at the Indian education apparatus for example. Indians reiterate that they have one of the most intensive education systems in the world that require them to learn so much and to put it to memory so they can write it down in an exam. There is not an emphasis on practical, transferable skills but rather on retaining as many key pieces of information as possible and writing them down through cramming techniques.
It is both the combination of lifehacks and nationalism that helped bring about the India of today. Indian resistance was not a novel concept envisioned by Gandhi when he chose to do something other than sleep around. No, it had existed long before Gandhi through the Swadeshi movement and the Sepoy mutiny When one thinks of the US, it is everything that the Indian nationalist hopes to be. In the history of the British Empire, there are two significant periods which are evident within the terminology given to it by historians. There is the "First British Empire". This being the period from the start of English expansion into really Ireland, and the initial colonial efforts of England and Scotland, past the point of the act of union and into the loss of the 13 colonies. It was the loss of America that signalled the end of what is considered the "First British Empire". The Second British Empire was brought upon by "the swing to the east". The prioritization of the role of Asia within British internal affairs. Britain did by this point have significant territories.
India's first significant independence attempt would come about in 1857 with the Sepoy mutiny. Not all Indians supported this, but it had been a significant point of active resistance that saw the end of the East Indian Company and the formalization of direct imperial rule. America got independence, and India was stamped down by the Imperial boot. No life hacks there. India would then remain under Britain's control for 90 years after the start of the mutiny.
And it is this that helps play America is everything that India wants to be. America got away from its colonial overlords, and America would grow into a world domineering super power, free from the rule of Britain.
Indian nationalists desire to prove themselves on the world stage. Indians desire an Indian superpower. Concurrently, they seek to prove themselves against their more recent, colonial overlords. India's space program provides one of these areas. Britain, like many other countries also, realized that rockets were an expensive waste of time instead of viewing satellites to be more important. Launch vehicles are costly to develop and you could just pay for others to launch your satellites. This is one of the reasons why Britain chose to abandon their independent space program because the Black Arrow launch system was not worth it, and then with the Europa rocket program fiasco, Britain chose to give up on space, given that Britain was rather poor in the 70s. Europa has been a European project in the 70s to develop a launch vehicle. Though, for most states, there is little actual reason for them to invest in launch vehicles India has done so purely for prestigious reasons. The commercial space flight market is growing but hasn't been fully vindicated yet. This is for the same reason they are choosing to develop a space station. They did achieve this on the cheap, which is to be congratulated on.
Though there are many other areas where Indians still want to push themselves as being "great" and a world power. Some of you may remember how India was meant to be a superpower in 2020 and look at how that turned out with Covid. - I suppose there is an irony in this.
If you look at anything of the "British Empire" reunifying or anything akin to that, there will always be the Indians who seek to state "Well actually it would be an Indian Empire". India, like many other countries, cries about the history of colonialism and yet would have done the same if they could. There is a legacy of Indian settlers all over the world. Some, thanks to the British Empire in places like Kenya, others exist out of a hope for money in say the UAE and others are in a desire to go to the West. This is naturally under a different name, but the main principle of migrating and settling remains. Indians have been able to acquire significant influence internationally. In my own country, Britain, there is a significant and influential Indian population. One of those who lived on my dorm corridors at University had been a second-generation Indian who, like many others, followed the trend of being privately educated at a prestigious private school and over the summer worked for Buckingham Palace and is someone who aspires to work in investment banking (because le epic life hack). - This one time he got pissy when I made a joke to someone who had white ancestry to Rhodesia in which I jokingly said "Oh you should go to your home country" saying "You shouldn't joke about those things", not realizing the joke was that if someone was to get offended they would have been supporting the Smith regime.
They, the Indian nationalists like many others, wish to settle and have their way whilst decrying, and lamenting other powers and demanding reparations for the crimes of the past.
This is the same thing that occurs with states like Turkey, and how their nation seeks to bring about a new golden age. Within Turkey, there were cries for a new Ottoman Empire, an Empire that was the bane of Europe. Erdogan is attempting to expand his sphere of influence, not necessarily territorially but in terms of influence. He has been growing his military. The dilemma of the liberal version of nationalism and internationalism is that it asserts the value of all people so long as they follow a series of rules and values. From the education of the Indians to their history, they learn that the best way to compete is to find the most practical solutions to tick the boxes. Moral relativists ma
The historical legacy of India in the lingua-franca of terminology, and that of the historical associations within what is in effect, the "construct of India" is refined in the historical image. India, like China, has a legacy of being associated with great wealth. Historically India has played a large and influential wealth thanks to trade. In Asia for example, there is the region of "Indochina", and there too is Indonesia. The historical emphasis on the role of India as being a lavish place, glorified with great discoveries forms part of the bedrock of its national identity. Then there is the Americas. A land that was accidentally stumbled upon on the way to India. America became thought of as India. We have the West Indies, we have the American Indians. Nationalism typically romanticizes the past, and when combined with a great defeat as a driving force helps bring about a storm-like fervour, a sense of desperation to be something that they were not. America, once confused to be India, was in many ways nothing. For what existed, it was secured by the Spanish. The infrastructure that exists in the US was practically non-existent and would be built up by settlers.
Now, with India, things are a bit more extreme. They look at others, they seek what they have and what India does not have. The prestige of the Indian people was constructed firstly by Britain and then later by the Indian "Nationalists".
This does help partly explain why there is significant Indian animosity towards China. China is in a way everything that India was historically, and yet managed to come out on top and remain intact, There had been great land empires in India for much of its history. Sometimes by "Indians", sometimes by outsiders. Take the Maurya, the Mauryan Empire is probably the largest historical empire within the subcontinent that came the closest to unifying what we consider to be modern-day India. It had failed at the conquest of the South. It is the failure of the Maurya which is why there is perhaps animosity to the south. They were not brought into the loop, and the Indian nationalists remained unable to claim that India had been fully unified by the British in the days of the Romans. There were then other Indian states such as the Delhi or Mughals which had vast portions of India under their rule. All of these states were massive but were centred primarily in the north. The triumph of the Mauryan conquests was never rekindled, and instead, the Indian empires would all enter the dustbin of history never reaching the heights that it did. China, however, began to build upon the territorial expansion of its dynasties. Of course, not every dynasty would outgrow the last (take the Ming being smaller than the Yuan dynasty) but the gradual trend came to be then expanding. The Han dynasty was not the largest territorially.
China though, managed to hold out against outside invaders. Yes, they lost treaty ports to the Western powers, but they were not conquered peoples. They were a defeated people, yes. There is a reason why the century of humiliation exists. Yet, when it came to China's invasion by an island nation, in this case, japan, China resisted. It held out, and it triumphed. India did not have this. India was conquered, and subjugated by a company of an even further out island nation. Indians blame this as to why India is poor. I have not read the book of that Indian politician who cried out that Britain owes India trillions, but
Of course, the rhetoric around British looting being the sole reason as to why India is poor does not hold up. Could the impact of colonization on India have hurt the Indian state? Perhaps. This is a historical counterfactual grounded upon a deep-seated belief that India would have unified. India in many ways became lucky that the subcontinent was saved from the dire consequences of war. War could have entirely been more bloody there, with the risks of far larger famines brought upon by ever greater industrial warfare. India was saved from an affair on the scale of the Taiping Rebellion. The worst that India had to go through was famine and taxation. This is to not say that either thing are bad, but having your entire industry bombed, and your economy put into ruin through total, industrial warfare leaves a country in ruins. Europe managed to recover. At the time of independence, India was in not the worst position in terms of the potential for development. India gained independence in 1947. It could control its monetary policy, it could do as it pleased. It had an economy with great potential. They though, squirmed the opportunity. They didn't embrace the potential.
India was lucky to not be in a state of civil war, it was lucky to not have been a major battlefront of WW2 where the closest fighting was instead in Burma. The first half of the 20th century was a horrific period that came as a result of institutional and political developments that were energized by the technological revolutions of its day.
Yet, it has to be the fault of the British because that means India is not at fault. For India, nothing is their failure, as is the trope amongst many nationalists. Britain only had direct control over about 2/3rds of the country. It brought in democratic reforms, the princely states retained autonomy within the subcontinent. Indian nationalists claim that the idea, the construct of the Indian national identity is grounded in the Indian state established by the British.
It was not India that made the Britain of today rich. It was the role of financialization within the neo-liberal experiment which became a one-trick pony and stunted future British growth.
If India had not been taken over by the British it is not certain that it would not have united, nor is it certain that it would have industrialized. Yet, it is paramount within the thought of the nationalist sphere for it to have done so. This had been the life hack that made Britain rich, and India poor amongst the nationalist sphere. The truism that India WOULD have united is essential as it assumes that everything Britain did was bad and that there would be a strong industrial India.
Others have mentioned the emphasis on lifehacks within the concurrent Indian way of life, to garner a competitive advantage against others. The role of the truism is paramount in this regard. Colonization is interpreted to have been a life hack. It made India lose out for the benefit of the British. Lifehacks are something that will hold the Indian nation back, which will impact other nation-states on the world stage. Lifehacks do not breed success. Look at the Indian education apparatus for example. Indians reiterate that they have one of the most intensive education systems in the world that require them to learn so much and to put it to memory so they can write it down in an exam. There is not an emphasis on practical, transferable skills but rather on retaining as many key pieces of information as possible and writing them down through cramming techniques.
It is both the combination of lifehacks and nationalism that helped bring about the India of today. Indian resistance was not a novel concept envisioned by Gandhi when he chose to do something other than sleep around. No, it had existed long before Gandhi through the Swadeshi movement and the Sepoy mutiny When one thinks of the US, it is everything that the Indian nationalist hopes to be. In the history of the British Empire, there are two significant periods which are evident within the terminology given to it by historians. There is the "First British Empire". This being the period from the start of English expansion into really Ireland, and the initial colonial efforts of England and Scotland, past the point of the act of union and into the loss of the 13 colonies. It was the loss of America that signalled the end of what is considered the "First British Empire". The Second British Empire was brought upon by "the swing to the east". The prioritization of the role of Asia within British internal affairs. Britain did by this point have significant territories.
India's first significant independence attempt would come about in 1857 with the Sepoy mutiny. Not all Indians supported this, but it had been a significant point of active resistance that saw the end of the East Indian Company and the formalization of direct imperial rule. America got independence, and India was stamped down by the Imperial boot. No life hacks there. India would then remain under Britain's control for 90 years after the start of the mutiny.
And it is this that helps play America is everything that India wants to be. America got away from its colonial overlords, and America would grow into a world domineering super power, free from the rule of Britain.
Indian nationalists desire to prove themselves on the world stage. Indians desire an Indian superpower. Concurrently, they seek to prove themselves against their more recent, colonial overlords. India's space program provides one of these areas. Britain, like many other countries also, realized that rockets were an expensive waste of time instead of viewing satellites to be more important. Launch vehicles are costly to develop and you could just pay for others to launch your satellites. This is one of the reasons why Britain chose to abandon their independent space program because the Black Arrow launch system was not worth it, and then with the Europa rocket program fiasco, Britain chose to give up on space, given that Britain was rather poor in the 70s. Europa has been a European project in the 70s to develop a launch vehicle. Though, for most states, there is little actual reason for them to invest in launch vehicles India has done so purely for prestigious reasons. The commercial space flight market is growing but hasn't been fully vindicated yet. This is for the same reason they are choosing to develop a space station. They did achieve this on the cheap, which is to be congratulated on.
Though there are many other areas where Indians still want to push themselves as being "great" and a world power. Some of you may remember how India was meant to be a superpower in 2020 and look at how that turned out with Covid. - I suppose there is an irony in this.
If you look at anything of the "British Empire" reunifying or anything akin to that, there will always be the Indians who seek to state "Well actually it would be an Indian Empire". India, like many other countries, cries about the history of colonialism and yet would have done the same if they could. There is a legacy of Indian settlers all over the world. Some, thanks to the British Empire in places like Kenya, others exist out of a hope for money in say the UAE and others are in a desire to go to the West. This is naturally under a different name, but the main principle of migrating and settling remains. Indians have been able to acquire significant influence internationally. In my own country, Britain, there is a significant and influential Indian population. One of those who lived on my dorm corridors at University had been a second-generation Indian who, like many others, followed the trend of being privately educated at a prestigious private school and over the summer worked for Buckingham Palace and is someone who aspires to work in investment banking (because le epic life hack). - This one time he got pissy when I made a joke to someone who had white ancestry to Rhodesia in which I jokingly said "Oh you should go to your home country" saying "You shouldn't joke about those things", not realizing the joke was that if someone was to get offended they would have been supporting the Smith regime.
They, the Indian nationalists like many others, wish to settle and have their way whilst decrying, and lamenting other powers and demanding reparations for the crimes of the past.
This is the same thing that occurs with states like Turkey, and how their nation seeks to bring about a new golden age. Within Turkey, there were cries for a new Ottoman Empire, an Empire that was the bane of Europe. Erdogan is attempting to expand his sphere of influence, not necessarily territorially but in terms of influence. He has been growing his military. The dilemma of the liberal version of nationalism and internationalism is that it asserts the value of all people so long as they follow a series of rules and values. From the education of the Indians to their history, they learn that the best way to compete is to find the most practical solutions to tick the boxes. Moral relativists ma
llllIllIllIIIIllI
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2022
Beat it
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2019
llllIllIllIIIIllI
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2022
Staticness is currently having a meltdown on DSHK's profile as @The Foxtrot lays down the law
https://kiwifarms.st/members/dshk.160383/
Yes, you are untouchable, you are a dalit.
You can tell his character is broken and he's actually saying what is in his mind now.
Vote red, be racist as fuck, don't let them in.
https://kiwifarms.st/members/dshk.160383/
Yes, you are untouchable, you are a dalit.
You can tell his character is broken and he's actually saying what is in his mind now.
Vote red, be racist as fuck, don't let them in.
Shrek
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2021
I looked up "Indian in Romania" on YouTube out of curiosity because one of my friends sent a shitpost (lol) about it and I didn't realize it was a legit phenomenon. 10k views in 9 days? Dayum.
Edit to say I started watching it and I died of cringe within the first few seconds. Does anyone even think rajeet will learn Romanian or Bulgarian or will he coast off of the few A2 English level peoples very limited patience in understanding him?
Edit to say I started watching it and I died of cringe within the first few seconds. Does anyone even think rajeet will learn Romanian or Bulgarian or will he coast off of the few A2 English level peoples very limited patience in understanding him?
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2022
You could especially see this when he weakly tried to retort about my remarks on Katrina. No, jeet, the Feds really didn't give a fuck about a bunch of nigglets dying. It wasn't some conspiracy to make Dubya look bad, nor was it some herculean effort. The Feds just didn't give enough of a shit to try harder.
Hell, the Feds are already scaling back welfare payments across the board for everything from EBT/SNAP all the way to Social Security, and everything in between. If they have to pick between not pissing off the spics and niggers (who are violent) and not pissing off jeets (who are cowards), guess who will get the cut first? And voting blue no matter who doesn't make him untouchable, it makes him utterly expendable. When it comes down to it, why would TPTB give a fuck about letting him starve to death? They'll just import another desperate mudskin eager to be swallowed up by the machine.
The idea that the kikes view him not as some special, prized minority, but a literal flesh automaton that needs maintenance...it probably scares him that TPTB view him with just as much, perhaps more, disdain and scorn as they do normal white people like me. Hence his coping and desperate attempts at a retort...and he's so stupid he doesn't realize he's admitting I'm right!
His existence continues because right now, it's convenient for TPTB to keep him and his kind around. The moment TPTB no longer need him and his kind, they will be curtailed and purged through means both overt and subtle, and that goes for all the "minorities" on the government dole.
Your lives are created, lived, and ended at the whim of malicious politicians, and you have no means to resist. You're not in the position we are, us Proletarian Workers. You're given fake "jobs" to make the funny numbers go up, but the West will not stop if every single one of you decided to go on strike, all at once. If we decided to go on strike, all at once, you very quickly starve.
They only eke out their little existence in the bughive. They hate being out in the rural areas because the support networks that jeets need to keep leeching off Uncle Sam just don't exist.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2019
Every single time anyone manages to find an "attractive" pajeeta, it's just a latina.
"Here's Pritpriyarapriya Maharajaraharatrajara, she's so beautiful"
llllIllIllIIIIllI
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2022
>euro dreams
Again, you can't make this shit up. Dreaming about being in europe, ie not their shithole.
>Here's how to target the lowest paying countries (because everyone hates us lol and I couldn't get into real white country because they spotted what a shitter I was lol)
Incredibly self-aware
>$500 a month
Imagine breaking your ass to get a work visa and travelling thousands of miles to make 500 dollars a month
>talks in random english in certain parts so algorithms don't auto-block
Again, they know what they're doing.
This is what I always tell people on welfare. It's not guaranteed income. You are getting lucky and by chance, continuing to get it and it seems like it will last forever, because your entire life has only been 20 years so far so being on welfare for just 5 years seems like forever. Some retarded fake victim group will rise up and make it known how they are all {insert race here} in wheelchairs missing 3 limbs and also jewish. The government will give the welfare to them instead. People ignore this for years to the point where they start flaunting that they've gamed the system, the welfare gets yanked, and the apocalyptic nuclear class freakout they put on youtube about how they are working their first 9-5 at 30 at some cartoony abusive shithole job, and how their boss is like, UGH, SUCH AN ASSHOLE, actually asking them to do WORK and shit!, is always a good watch. They get feel-good fee fee vibes from the comments and that's literally all they have left. Three weeks later they make another video expecting attention, they don't get any views. They realize that nobody is coming to save them and that everyone was right about not relying on welfare, but they also know they are like a zoo animal now and can't go back to the wild. They kill themselves silently and nobody can use their death to learn the lesson about welfare.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2024
Haha, you need a statistic to tell you that? Are the photos and videos of them not only doing it in their native country but additionally shitting up the graph by ignoring toilets in Canada as well?