Well first off: Steemit is very close to the real world oligarchy. We got a voting system that is tailored similar to the real world democracy (voting for representatives [witnesses]). Hell a real life oligarch could even just buy a majority stake in Steemit for one billion.

I think a power based oligarchy is the necesary result of an anarchy. That is why I am no anarchist. However, just because someone has power that does not make them evil.

On the topic of premining: You have an advantage on me by starting a year earlier with Steemit and being able to write faster. I have an advantage to people who start right now or in a year from now. Even if something is public, that does not mean everybody starts mining at the same time.

On the topic of debate: You can course at someone and still make a point, you can also not curse and still be insulting.

I had to smile when I read the comment Bernie mad about you on steem.chat. It is the criticism I had that you are "not focusing enough on solutions and too much on problems" but said in a very insulting way.

I also remember when people tried to argue in my post about the climate change hoax that I need to read more about the basics of climate change. Insulting my intelligence is really a bad idea and if I had known @liberosist is such a big shot, I might have been more respectful.
In my opinion I clearly won the argument. The last thing I heard from the 'climate change supporters' was "There is never real consens" after they tried to convince me that it had to be true cause consens.

If you insult my intelligence, I will show the world how dumb you are and the best way to do it by exposing their weak arguments and not by catchy name calling.

I like to argue competetivly and even if someone 'wins' the argument that does not mean that the winner did not learn anything from the debate or even convinced the "loser". Some people are just better at debating than others.