This n that

[Herman]

Education without critical thinking can be dangerous. Degrees can create confidence without understanding, and ignorance dressed as expertise becomes more harmful than simple lack of knowledge. True education sharpens judgment, not just credentials, and modern society often confuses the two.

[Shen Li]

I agree with this white chick. I am not raising my 2 sons to be bullies. However, they know we expect them to fight when they have to.

[Herman]

I don't know if this was real or not.

[Lokmar]

I don't know if this was real or not.

Its better if she hold you face up! FACT!

[Shen Li]

I don't know if this was real or not.

It's not. It's some femdom drawing.

[DKG]

Department of Justice Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon criticized Minnesota's Democrat leadership for failing to enforce state law and arrest protesters who stormed into a local church over the weekend.

"We don't want to prejudge, but I think it is fair to say that I saw multiple federal criminal incidents yesterday, and there will be charges," she said.

Dhillon explained that as soon as she learned about the situation at Cities Church, she immediately activated prosecutors and sent FBI agents to investigate to determine whether the left-wing radicals had violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act or committed any related criminal offenses, including potential conspiracy charges and material support.

[DKG]

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said in multiple notices that numerous over-the-counter medications, including Bayer aspirin, Tylenol, Advil, Alka Seltzer, and more, are under recall by the agency due to conditions in a Minnesota distribution center.

Minneapolis-based Gold Star Distribution Inc. issued recalls for certain lots of Advil, Bayer aspirin, Claritin antihistamine, DayQuil Cold & Flu, Liquid DayQuil, Liquid NyQuil, NyQuil Cold & Flu, Children's NyQuil Cold & Flu, Pepto Bismol, Pepcid Complete, Tylenol, Halls Cough Drops, and Tums.

A full list of the more than 800 items, including human food products, pet food, and cosmetics under recall by Gold Star can be found on a document posted on the FDA's website.

[DKG]

The Australian government's latest assault on free speech is barreling toward reality faster than a kangaroo on a caffeine high. Just this week, reports emerged of an exposure draft for sweeping new legislation that would empower the government to cancel visas, seize materials, and crack down on anything they deem "hate speech" or "extremist ideology." While Parliament is set to return on January 30 to debate and likely ram this through, the writing is on the wall: it's the most damaging threat to online free speech we've seen in a decade.

The Albanese Government's bill, unveiled in the wake of last year's Bondi terror attack, targets non-citizens (and potentially anyone on a visa) suspected of advocating hate against a "protected group," displaying "prohibited hate symbols," or associating with "listed extremist organizations." No conviction needed—just "reasonable suspicion." Border Force officers could seize your gear at the airport without a warrant if it smells like Nazi insignia or ISIS swag to them. And get this: it applies to conduct overseas too. Your old tweet? Your social media history? All fair game for visa cancellation or refusal.

This builds on announcements from December 2025, where Prime Minister Albanese promised "aggravated hate speech offences" for preachers and leaders, harsher penalties for online posts, and even listing organizations for promoting "racial hatred" or "advocacy for racial supremacy." Critics like Liberty Victoria are already sounding the alarm: this undermines due process, chills dissent, and could be weaponized against whistleblowers, activists, or anyone who doesn't toe the progressive line on issues like immigration or cultural debates. Universities are sweating over their 600,000 international students— one "outspoken" post, and poof, visa gone. Businesses? They're scrambling to vet employees' social media before sending them Down Under. As one law firm put it, "Your employee's tweet could now become a visa liability."

Why is this the biggest free speech killer in a decade? Think back: We've seen the EU's Digital Services Act, and the U.S.'s endless Section 230 fights. But Australia's move is uniquely insidious because it weaponizes free expression. It's not just fining platforms or forcing content removal—it's exiling people for words. Online, this means tech companies face a tsunami of government takedown requests tied to visa cases. Platforms like ours at Gab, which exist to protect uncensored speech, will be in the crosshairs.

We all know "hate speech" is a slippery slope. Today it's "antisemitism," tomorrow it's criticizing government policy on borders or climate. We've seen it play out in the UK with their Online Safety Act last year, where the government leaned on platforms to hand over user data or face fines—leading to shadowbans and deplatforming sprees. Germany? They've been fining Gab for "hate" posts for years under the NetzDG law and turning X (formerly Twitter) and others into extensions of the state censor.

[Lokmar]

Australia is still a penal colony. What a shitheel country!

IDGAF about what they do to non-citizens, thats the governments prerogative, but the citizens right being trampled should result in the leaders getting butchered.

[Herman]

This image isn't an exaggeration or a meme about feelings. It's a recurring historical pattern that shows up wherever political power is centralized and insulated from consent and competition.

In the Soviet Union, party elites lived in closed cities with better housing, imported food, private medical care, and access to goods unavailable to ordinary citizens. While official doctrine promised equality, the nomenklatura system quietly created a ruling class with privileges enforced by law and police power. This wasn't a bug. It was how the system functioned.

In Maoist China, senior Communist Party members had access to special food supplies, better healthcare, and protected housing during periods when tens of millions of rural citizens faced famine. Political rank determined survival odds. Again, not an accident.

In Venezuela, government officials and connected insiders gained access to subsidized dollars, imported goods, and protected businesses while average citizens waited hours for food, medicine, or fuel.

Hyperinflation destroyed savings for the public, while those closest to power insulated themselves through control of distribution.

In Cuba, party officials and military leaders lived in restricted zones with better services, while ordinary Cubans survived on ration cards. Tourism areas operated under a different economic reality than the neighborhoods most citizens were not allowed to leave.

The common thread across these systems is not intentions. Many leaders claimed compassion and equality. The common thread is incentives. When a group gains monopoly control over law, resources, and enforcement, they face no competitive pressure to serve the public. Costs are socialized. Benefits are concentrated. Exit is restricted. Accountability becomes performative.

Markets and voluntary systems are not perfect, but they contain feedback. If a business exploits people, it loses customers. If it wastes resources, it goes bankrupt. Political monopolies lack those mechanisms. Failure is funded. Power compounds. Distance between rulers and ruled grows.

This is why you consistently see walls, guards, restricted zones, special stores, and separate living standards in centralized systems. The image captures something history keeps confirming. Equality of rhetoric paired with inequality of power produces inequality of outcomes.

The lesson isn't about labels. It's about structure. Systems built on voluntary cooperation constrain abuse through choice and competition. Systems built on coercion concentrate privilege behind authority. Every time.