I don’t think showing me a few examples of internet randos saying something would be a good use of either of our times. I’d have to look into who’s posting it and where to judge how much weight I put into each example.
I know that in any ML space I’d have any respect for such ideas wouldn’t fly. Actions explained by material conditions aren’t a indicator of “goodness” nor is the USSR infallible by any stretch of the imagination.
I don’t think showing me a few examples of internet randos saying something would be a good use of either of our times.
Yeah, what I fucking thought. “It’s a strawman!” becomes “Well, yes, people say it, but it’s not IMPORTANT!” Keep bootlicking for your genocidal buddies, I’m sure they’ll give you the bullet last. And you’ll get to watch all the minorities they slaughter before they murder you. A bonus I’m sure you’re thrilled about.
Would sinding you 100 examples of self proclaimed anarchists saying ridiculous shit be useful to you?
Maybe it’ll turn out that 40 are “Anarcho-Capitalist” losers, 30 are outright trolls, and 10 are just weirdos. It’s just not useful to anyone to attempt to debate in this way.
I know what I believe, and what I think those I respect believe. Showing me a bunch of examples of randos saying something else just isn’t doing much.
Would sinding you 100 examples of self proclaimed anarchists saying ridiculous shit be useful to you?
It would call into question me claiming something was a ‘strawman’ if you demonstrated that it was a legitimately held position from members of a group, yes. Sorry that you’re incapable of parsing that.
Maybe it’ll turn out that 40 are “Anarcho-Capitalist” losers, 30 are outright trolls, and 10 are just weirdos. It’s just not useful to anyone to attempt to debate in this way.
I can quote some big names if you prefer. But of course, you’d find any reason to continue your bootlicking for genocide than acknowledge that, either.
How many MLs do I have to quote saying shit like that before you’ll stop bootlicking for them? Give me a firm number.
I don’t think showing me a few examples of internet randos saying something would be a good use of either of our times. I’d have to look into who’s posting it and where to judge how much weight I put into each example.
I know that in any ML space I’d have any respect for such ideas wouldn’t fly. Actions explained by material conditions aren’t a indicator of “goodness” nor is the USSR infallible by any stretch of the imagination.
Yeah, what I fucking thought. “It’s a strawman!” becomes “Well, yes, people say it, but it’s not IMPORTANT!” Keep bootlicking for your genocidal buddies, I’m sure they’ll give you the bullet last. And you’ll get to watch all the minorities they slaughter before they murder you. A bonus I’m sure you’re thrilled about.
Would sinding you 100 examples of self proclaimed anarchists saying ridiculous shit be useful to you?
Maybe it’ll turn out that 40 are “Anarcho-Capitalist” losers, 30 are outright trolls, and 10 are just weirdos. It’s just not useful to anyone to attempt to debate in this way.
I know what I believe, and what I think those I respect believe. Showing me a bunch of examples of randos saying something else just isn’t doing much.
It would call into question me claiming something was a ‘strawman’ if you demonstrated that it was a legitimately held position from members of a group, yes. Sorry that you’re incapable of parsing that.
I can quote some big names if you prefer. But of course, you’d find any reason to continue your bootlicking for genocide than acknowledge that, either.
Yeah, in camps. Death camps, work camps, and international camps.