humor and being ''WOKE''

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I don't mind being 'personal'.

You surely don't.

In fact, rather than spend time finding out about the one area where we might actually agree, you pick a completely off-topic point and pick a fight with it. I'm terribly amused. It just shows where your head's at. You just want to fight; you don't actually care about any principle at all, far less about the topic the thread is about.

Best wishes to you.

Everything about you is disingenuous. You know it. I know it. Why do you bother?

[Immanuel Can]

I don't mind being 'personal'.

You surely don't.

In fact, rather than spend time finding out about the one area where we might actually agree, you pick a completely off-topic point and pick a fight with it. I'm terribly amused. It just shows where your head's at. You just want to fight; you don't actually care about any principle at all, far less about the topic the thread is about.

Best wishes to you.

Everything about you is disingenuous. You know it. I know it. Why do you bother?

Still trying. Still ad hominem.

Not bothering.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

You surely don't.

In fact, rather than spend time finding out about the one area where we might actually agree, you pick a completely off-topic point and pick a fight with it. I'm terribly amused. It just shows where your head's at. You just want to fight; you don't actually care about any principle at all, far less about the topic the thread is about.

Best wishes to you.

Everything about you is disingenuous. You know it. I know it. Why do you bother?

Not bothering.

You never did

[Gary Childress]

You surely don't.

In fact, rather than spend time finding out about the one area where we might actually agree, you pick a completely off-topic point and pick a fight with it. I'm terribly amused. It just shows where your head's at. You just want to fight; you don't actually care about any principle at all, far less about the topic the thread is about.

Best wishes to you.

Everything about you is disingenuous. You know it. I know it. Why do you bother?

Still trying. Still ad hominem.

Not bothering.

An ad hominem is not just calling someone a name. It basically also must rest on the premise that the accuser is saying that your argument is false BECAUSE you are that kind of person. For example, if someone says "You stand to gain money from buying stock in company XYZ, therefore, it is false that your statement that the stock is a good investment is true." then that could arguably be construed as an attempt at an ad hominem. Of course, that doesn't mean that you AREN'T trying to sell them the stock for little other reason than you would gain money from it. It just means they haven't established a sound argument against you using that approach.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Immanuel Can]

Everything about you is disingenuous. You know it. I know it. Why do you bother?

Still trying. Still ad hominem.

Not bothering.

An ad hominem is not just calling someone a name. It basically also must rest on the premise that the accuser is saying that your argument is false BECAUSE you are that kind of person.

Well, one can take no other implication from the fact that Veggie has no arguments, just insults. Veggie must expect the insults to stand for something. If not, then all Veggie is saying is that I'm a "bad person" AND I'm also "right."

Shall we assume that, instead?

[Gary Childress]

Still trying. Still ad hominem.

Not bothering.

An ad hominem is not just calling someone a name. It basically also must rest on the premise that the accuser is saying that your argument is false BECAUSE you are that kind of person.

Well, one can take no other implication from the fact that Veggie has no arguments, just insults. Veggie must expect the insults to stand for something. If not, then all Veggie is saying is that I'm a "bad person" AND I'm also "right."

Shall we assume that, instead?

I take her as saying you're a 'bad' person (or whatever) because many of us are painfully aware that you tend to dodge questions when they are convenient for you to dodge and play games when we try to demonstrate it to you or bring it to attention.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Immanuel Can]

I take her as saying you're a 'bad' person (or whatever) because many of us are painfully aware that you tend to dodge questions when they are convenient for you to dodge and play games when we try to demonstrate it to you or bring it to attention.

I don't agree. I think I address every question that is intellectually competent. If there are a few that are not (and there certainly are, as we would both recognize) I ignore them...as any rational person would. When somebody says something silly or obviously wrong, there's no reason to humilate them, and no reason to dignify a silly statement with a response.

But if you see it differently, what's that to me?

[Gary Childress]

I take her as saying you're a 'bad' person (or whatever) because many of us are painfully aware that you tend to dodge questions when they are convenient for you to dodge and play games when we try to demonstrate it to you or bring it to attention.

I don't agree. I think I address every question that is intellectually competent. If there are a few that are not (and there certainly are, as we would both recognize) I ignore them...as any rational person would. When somebody says something silly or obviously wrong, there's no reason to humilate them, and no reason to dignify a silly statement with a response.

But if you see it differently, what's that to me?

It doesn't need to be anything to you. If you want to behave the way you do, then by all means, do so. I might comment on what I witness but you don't have to change the way you act through any decree from me.

[Immanuel Can]

I take her as saying you're a 'bad' person (or whatever) because many of us are painfully aware that you tend to dodge questions when they are convenient for you to dodge and play games when we try to demonstrate it to you or bring it to attention.

I don't agree. I think I address every question that is intellectually competent. If there are a few that are not (and there certainly are, as we would both recognize) I ignore them...as any rational person would. When somebody says something silly or obviously wrong, there's no reason to humilate them, and no reason to dignify a silly statement with a response.

But if you see it differently, what's that to me?

It doesn't need to be anything to you. If you want to behave the way you do, then by all means, do so. I might comment on what I witness but you don't have to change the way you act through any decree from me.

I guess I should add...I don't believe you. I think you're making stuff up. But that, you can do. Nobody can stop you.

[Gary Childress]

I don't agree. I think I address every question that is intellectually competent. If there are a few that are not (and there certainly are, as we would both recognize) I ignore them...as any rational person would. When somebody says something silly or obviously wrong, there's no reason to humilate them, and no reason to dignify a silly statement with a response.

But if you see it differently, what's that to me?

It doesn't need to be anything to you. If you want to behave the way you do, then by all means, do so. I might comment on what I witness but you don't have to change the way you act through any decree from me.

I guess I should add...I don't believe you. I think you're making stuff up. But that, you can do. Nobody can stop you.

What am I "making up", that you don't answer direct inquiries into why YOU believe Christianity is the one true religion? I've never heard you share your own personal interpretation of why you believe that. Instead of putting it into your own words you usually refer people to literature or reading that you've done. We can all do that to each other until we pass out of exhaustion from clicking and squinting at the screen. However, I'm not trying to prove anything to you other than that I don't see any reason for me to adopt Christianity as the one true religion or whatever. I don't see that being the case and I have yet to see evidence from you to support the case that I ought to adopt Christianity if I don't wish to go to hell or whatever penalty one gets in an afterlife.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

vegetariantaxidermy :
Anyone who advocates for 'anarchism' doesn't have a clue about human nature. It's the most preposterous idea that is nothing more than the 'law of the jungle'. I doubt if there has ever been 'anarchism' in the entire history of human society. There are always going to be people who are natural leaders and bullies, and there are always going to be people who want to follow. There are always going to be those who behave like shit-heads when there are no rules. I've noticed in the last couple of years though that something resembling 'anarchy' is emerging and it's not pretty. The police seem to have given up policing. People are pretty much doing as they please and making life difficult and unpleasant for others. The more people get away with the worse they are going to get. They've cottoned onto the knowledge that they don't HAVE to follow rules, and that it's most likely that no one is going to do anything about it if they break them. Rules are based on the assumption that people are naturally going to do the right thing. It worked for a long time. 'Anarchy' is something that happens when society breaks down and is no longer functioning adequately. It's not something that any sane person would aspire to have.

K: not a whole lot of flexibility in you, is there?
everything is black and white... and I have bad news,
life and everything in it, is shades of gray....a long time
ago, in my thirties, decades ago, I too thought in terms
of black and white... for everything had its place and was
either right or wrong.... not so much anymore....

anarchism is just as valid a political/economic system as
capitalism or communism... and I would even go so far
as to suggest, it is in many ways, a culmination of what
it means to be human... to freely choose who you
are and what it means to be human is what we are,
or we ought to be aiming for...

anarchism is simply a means of making choices...
capitalism, communism, Catholicism, Buddhism
are means by which others/society makes our choices
for us... I believe in us, human beings making our own
choices... if you believe in democracy, you should
really believe in anarchism...for anarchism is just
democracy taken to the next logical step...

and as I said, I do believe that the future will be an
anarchistic one, just not today... that anarchism will
not only be possible, but it will be inevitable....


Kropotkin
[/quote]

Seeing bollocks as bollocks is neither 'flexible' nor 'inflexible'. Facts are facts. People live in societies. That's how we function. Give and take. Co-operation. Following rules that make life pleasant for everyone. Your bat-shit vision only means dictatorship, which is why so-called 'communist' countries ALWAYS end up as dictatorships. Humans just can't help it. If you never paid taxes then I hope you never used a road. Or a hospital. Or are you very rich, and had your own roads and paid for everything privately?

[Gary Childress]

[Peter Kropotkin]

vegetariantaxidermy:
Seeing bollocks as bollocks is neither 'flexible' nor 'inflexible'. Facts are facts. People live in societies. That's how we function. Give and take. Co-operation. Following rules that make life pleasant for everyone. Your bat-shit vision only means dictatorship, which is why so-called 'communist' countries ALWAYS end up as dictatorships. Humans just can't help it. If you never paid taxes then I hope you never used a road. Or a hospital. Or are you very rich, and had your own roads and paid for everything privately?

K: you seem to be under the delusion that I am currently
advocating for anarchism... I am not.. I am saying that, in the past,
IN THE PAST, I was an anarchist.. and some day, I will be vindicated,
just not today...and I have advocated, quite loudly, that
we need taxes to survive as a society and as a state...
you seem to be subscribing that I hold beliefs that I don't hold..

now you can keep making shit up or you can listen to what I
actually hold to be true... and I have quite clear as to what
that is.... so, the choice is yours, keep making shit up,
which seems to be your MO or you can understand what
I believe in... I believe in workers rights, I believe in democracy,
I believe that capitalism is an ism that is threating the world
with war, civil war and yes, possible extinction...

is communism the answer? perhaps but that takes an
a village to work out and too many, gullible people like
yourself can't work past your childhood indoctrinations
against communism... you have yet to overcome your
education, your socioeconomic place, your childhood
indoctrinations, your family beliefs... you still believe
what you were told at age three... and you are not age
three anymore.. and your beliefs have to match your current
age and situation.... your beliefs have to match the
environment you live in.... capitalism no longer
matches the environment we live in...

it needs to be replaced by something that will meet our current
and future needs... and that ain't capitalism...

Kropotkin

[Immanuel Can]

What am I "making up", that you don't answer direct inquiries into why YOU believe Christianity is the one true religion?

Yep. I've been very forthright about that. That you haven't been paying attention...well, I can do nothing about that. Go back to sleep, I guess.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

vegetariantaxidermy:
Seeing bollocks as bollocks is neither 'flexible' nor 'inflexible'. Facts are facts. People live in societies. That's how we function. Give and take. Co-operation. Following rules that make life pleasant for everyone. Your bat-shit vision only means dictatorship, which is why so-called 'communist' countries ALWAYS end up as dictatorships. Humans just can't help it. If you never paid taxes then I hope you never used a road. Or a hospital. Or are you very rich, and had your own roads and paid for everything privately?

K: you seem to be under the delusion that I am currently
advocating for anarchism... I am not.. I am saying that, in the past,
IN THE PAST, I was an anarchist.. and some day, I will be vindicated,
just not today...and I have advocated, quite loudly, that
we need taxes to survive as a society and as a state...
you seem to be subscribing that I hold beliefs that I don't hold..

now you can keep making shit up or you can listen to what I
actually hold to be true... and I have quite clear as to what
that is.... so, the choice is yours, keep making shit up,
which seems to be your MO or you can understand what
I believe in... I believe in workers rights, I believe in democracy,
I believe that capitalism is an ism that is threating the world
with war, civil war and yes, possible extinction...

is communism the answer? perhaps but that takes an
a village to work out and too many, gullible people like
yourself can't work past your childhood indoctrinations
against communism... you have yet to overcome your
education, your socioeconomic place, your childhood
indoctrinations, your family beliefs... you still believe
what you were told at age three... and you are not age
three anymore.. and your beliefs have to match your current
age and situation.... your beliefs have to match the
environment you live in.... capitalism no longer
matches the environment we live in...

it needs to be replaced by something that will meet our current
and future needs... and that ain't capitalism...

Kropotkin

For fuck sake learn how to use the 'quote' button.