SNOWFLAKE: A term used to describe extremist liberals that get offended by every statement and/or belief that doesn’t exactly match their own. These individuals think they are just as “unique” as snowflakes, when really their feelings are just as fragile.
Source: Urban Dictionary
Snowflakes are usually defined as people who are too sensitive to hearing other points of view. The reason for this is their acolyte status within the confines of political correctness. They don’t need to be liberal. They just need to be hardheaded and mentally enslaved.
While one or just a few snowflakes can become recluses and not be a burden on society, millions of them tend to be very problematic. Their weak state, caused by a lack of openmindedness, is easy to take advantage of. As a popular modern example, lets take the Clinton Acolyte Movement (CAM). These people were turned into walking catch phrases. Ironically, one of the biggest brainwashed member was Hillary Clinton herself. She was the one brainwashed and one of the ones doing the brainwashing. During the 2016 presidential campaign, most people found her less than knowledgeable, although acolyte pundits and simple folks alike saw her as a progressive feminist. And this, again, ironically, was her downfall, seeing as it was the main contributor to her not being able to have an original thought throughout the campaign. Indeed, she was the stereotypical and prototypical puppet, strings being pulled by Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Wall Street bankers, etc. While Trump was able to change strategies, she was just stuck in the cacophony of mental nothingness, not able to rebut the future President. She lost the last two debates, falling victim to Trump’s one-liners. Trump told the people what they wanted answers for. That’s why he won.
Trump won the presidency, but he failed to make any gains in the regressivism brought about by snowflake acolytes of the CAM. In fact, all the liberal media was doing was trying to discredit the President. To this day, tehy dig and dig and can find nothing of impeachable substance. And the CAM has acolyte-friendly rebuttals. The one that really digs deep into me is how Bill Clinton cannot be compared to Trump because he’s not the President. But Trump never received a blow job from a woman under his desk at the oval office. That’s more disgusting than anything the President has been accused of. But there’s the CAM, hanging on and repeating the aforementioned rebuttal. There are the same machines who scorn Trump for keeping his election promises on the one hand while scorning him for not keeping his election promises on the other. Make up your minds, snowflakes. It’s fucking irritating.
I was compelled to write this after the CAM hypocrisy of the last couple of days. Yes, the CAM encircles and controls the Democrats opinions in the USA. This week, there was the possible unification of the Koreas happening after a US government representative visited North Korea and just before President Donald Trump is set to visit Kim Jong-Un personally. A path was set and perhaps it will be agreed upon when the American President visits. But does Trump get any credit from the mainstream media? Would Obama have gotten credit under the same circumstances? The answers are clear, yet the zombies of the CAM are incapable of understanding this or even listening at any comments towards it.
When I was in university, as a leftist, I was always fighting for free speech. I was an advocate of differing views. But taht no longer exists. It seems as if there is a list of issues or topics that are brought up and categorized as either being appropriate or inappropriate to talk about. Thus speakers are chosen as per these guidelines. Anything beyong the “appropriate” column is deemed politically incorrect, evil, or, worst of all, otherworldly. It is condemned as as sort of -ist , usually racist. Ergo,free speech is curbed, if not halted, at the university level. These are people in their late-teens and early-twenties who have learned how to be judgemental.
Before continuing, I need to clarify that I have no political affiliation at this time and I have never been a supporter of the Republican party or any other right-wing party. But I am a democratist, not to be confused with a Democrat. I believe in equality, freedom, and justice. This is to say that I judge people according to how they go about administering policy, how they live their daily lives, how they act in the public realm in accordance to the law, and how they provide for the general citizenry.
Let’s tackle the issue of illegal immigration. President Trump is following the law 100% by planning to deport illegal immigrants. Why is CAM up in arms against this? He is following the law. Let me repeat in caps, lest you wake up: PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP IS FOLLOWING THE LAW BY PLANNING TO DEPORT “ILLEGAL” IMMIGRANTS. Wake up snowflakes. What’s so hard to understand? But don’t take my word for it.
Illegal immigration is the illegal entry of a person or a group of persons across a country’s border, in a way that violates the immigration laws of the destination country, with the intention to remain in the country.
There. There’s no room for arguing. Although well-intentioned, the mayors allowing sanctuary cities arr breaking the law.
Then there’s the apparent feminist movement.
Feminism: The advocacy of women’s rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes.
Source: Google Dictionary
Democratism is 100% behind the feminist movement as defined above. I have been a feminist my whole life and have supported real feminist movements. What we have now is rampant support for female supremacy. Tough words, but true. In the least, it’s the ability to belitgle, bully, and insult males, especially white middle-aged ones, without any admonishment or repercussions. It’s a free-for-all oon these “evil oppressors”. Snowflakes, most of these “oppressors” are normal people who arevtrying to live a happy life by earning it and by abiding the law and being respectful.
I watch panels on TV newscasts and women can freely insult a man and the man has to hold back. Meanwhile, the woman can interrupt and yell at and falselyndiscreditbthe man while everyone accepts the discrediting as fact.
Then there’s the sensitive subject of sexual abuse. The leader of Canada’s New Democratic Party said that a man accused of sexual harassment should be considered guilty until proven innocent. He sort of withdrew a bit from his original comments, but only to the extent he had to to keep his male votes. The Prime Minister didn’t say as much, but he has forcefully made sure thatbhalf his cabinet ministers are women. With most of his cabinet being make, it would go against the democratic feminist dogma of equality. But the men need to shut up. Their opinion would be construed as misogynistic.
So let’s see. My neighbour doesn’t like me. She accuses me of sexual harassment. My career is ruined. I get shunned. I’m later found not guilty. That’s real fair.
Let’s conclude by hoping some CAM members have actually read this through. Let’s hope that people start seeing the truth.
BREAK OUT OF YOUR POLITICALLY CORRECT BUBBLE AND SMELL THE SHRILL SHOCK OF CONFORMITY IN THE AIR. UGH!!!