RE: #punchanazi - Antifa - BAMN
Name calling, threats, and false accusations is all you've got. I never voted for Gary 'Aleppo' Johnson. The more false accusations you level, the more that people will see what you are.
I was where you are over fifteen years ago, and was able to reason my way out. It's clear that you won't. I've had this conversation thousands of times, and defended many different positions. You have presented me with nothing close to new.
I expect idiots to laugh at me. Their inability to comprehend simple things leaves only the option to ridicule or fear what they don't understand. Also, yes, the majority of the human population are somewhat less than what could be called intelligent. I know my IQ. I am not worried if 999,999 out of every million laughs at me. The rest and I can be friends.
At least come up with some original insults, if that's all you can present as reasoned argument. I've heard all of these many many times before, they're boring, and inaccurate. From what I've seen of you, so far, I don't think you could generate original content if you tried. Go ahead, I dare you to try to be original. Nothing in any of you comments has surprised me so far, except maybe your profound lack of knowledge and insight. If you had actually come to enlightenment, been red pilled, and had the benefit of the Trivium as intellectual self defense, you might have found the truth, but instead you thought that because David Icke is crazy or lying, that everything is BS. I assure you the truth exists, it's somewhere in this world, and right now you are very cold, and not getting any warmer, boring.
You and your fucking Trivium. You sound like a Bible thumper or a Scientologist. They often talk about turning to their faith in a specific system as "intellectual self defense."
Did the nice people that gave you the book tell you how smart and special you are? Man, there's a sucker born every minute. Fortunately for civilization, only one in a million are naive enough to buy into such nonsense.
Grammar, logic, and classical rhetoric has nothing to do with faith and everything to do with having a method of understanding the natural world and the parameters that we all must function within. Civilization exists because of the ability to use grammar, logic, and classical rhetoric to understand what can and cannot be accomplished.
Are you seriously suggesting that the thought tools which brought humanity such things as physics is a religion? I wouldn't continue that line of argument in public, it doesn't cast you in an intelligent light.
More name calling and false accusations do not make a reasoned argument.
Boring.
I am suggesting that your interpretation of the world around you has been limited by some very regimented thinking. You make that obvious with your cut-and-paste looking regurgitated dogma.
My reasoned argument is that you have locked your mind into such a tight little box that you can't even tell the difference between a communist and an anarcho-syndicalist.
Exactly what I would expect from someone with such a high opinion of their intellect with absolutely nothing to back it up.
If you think it's all copy pasta then do your search and prove it, or just admit you've been bested, or are you a sore loser? Loser.
Calling people losers is what all the cultured intellectuals are doing these days, right?
In a debate there is a winner and a loser. An observation of the fact is different than the ad hominem packed drivel you've been spewing with no reason or logic in sight. I've made genuine offers of helpful information to aid in understanding, which have been roundly rejected with more ad hominems and more straw men. If you had this knowledge it could be useful in actually having a convincing argument.
If, though, you want to continue embarrassing yourself in public, there are many other logical fallacies which you might employ. There is the appeal from authority, appeal to popularity, the genetic fallacy, and even appeal to the stone, or argumentum ad lapidem among many others. These might at least liven up the debate. Cultured intellectualism is not the goal. A reasoned exploration of the subject at hand is the desired goal. Ad hominems and straw men arguments ad nauseam gets a bit tedious.
If this is so tedious, why do you continue to engage? Why is it so important for you to declare yourself the "winner"? Like, 2 or 3 people might be reading this. LMAO
You must be covering for some serious inadequacies and suffering from some kind of personal insecurity. I understand, man. The universe is a terryifying place, isn't it? You win. I hope that helps you feel less afraid for a moment. You obviously need it more than I do.
Here we go again with baseless assertions and accusations. The more you go on, the more you embarrass yourself.
I engage with those like you so a full demonstration of what ignorance yields can be used to understand the truth. If I were doing this for personal insecurity reasons, I wouldn't be anonymous, and I wouldn't be engaging in conversation those who obviously despise me, talk about armchair psychology. I don't actually care if I win. It's the truth I'm after. This conversation will become a series of posts to demonstrate how to use logic and reason to defend against the perversions of moral relativism, and abrogation of the responsibilities that are indelibly interwoven with our rights, but socialists understand none of this.
I get no glory from any of this. Using the tools of thought that built civilization, to build a better future than getting paid a pittance to get drunk, stoned, and play video games, is my aim.