Fediverse User SLAMS Concept of ““X Destroys/Humiliates Y” Genre of Debate Videos”

give that attitude to the employer, dick

its really simple, youre missing the obvious: the outgroup isnt human

repairing a blown head gasket in a car is often a repair that costs more than the car would be worth. maybe that’s what they meant?

looks like I hit the nail on his character

if thats really what you think this looks like then your discernment is… unreliable

promise?

very much a product of their time

The damned thing is I really like history, I thought I hated it for the longest time but it turns out I was just badly taught. I just feel like… i’m not trying to join a book club.

https://youtu.be/aKnX5wci404?t=33

my experience with the local com.par. was that they were mostly interested in re-hashing the history of russia and selling books and t-shirts… i’ll check out dsa i suppose.

Don’t judges issue legal opinions? Don’t legal opinions constitute what makes up legal facts (ie not facts about a case, or facts about a person, but facts about what constitutes law)? Did not opinions about what ought to be the law determine what was actually written in the constitution? Hasn’t changing public opinion provoked changes in the constitution with time?

I agree, the popular appeal of a belief is not relevant to whether that belief is well-founded.

I don’t think I can seriously disagree with any of this.

Individuals have to act in concert. They need to collaborate, coordinate their actions, and provide support to one another. It isn’t enough for a million people to wake up one morning and say “We’re not going to take it anymore” without any understanding of who their peers are or what they’re doing.

okay, fine, but i- we- need a nexus of nucleation. i’m not seeing any evidence of such.

I agree, your opinion is very popular.

edit: especially among professional lawyers…

I strongly disagree.

“Oh, you should have just fought harder” is more a cavalier one-liner than a political perspective.

that’s a hard point i’ll give you that one, that’s a stumper. it’s a bit of a caricature, but it’s also a reasonable reflection of my position. i really do think people need to stand up and fight but i’ll be goddamned if I know what that even begins to look like here, let alone how to tell people to start laying down their lives for a cause.

yeah, well, the problem is I think that not forming some sort of effective resistance constitutes complicity. i’d rather be damned for what I do than what I didn’t do, personally.

i dont think hobbes was all that hot shit tbh. don’t i remember his conclusion was effectively, '…and that’s why monarchy is the best form of government?" maybe some of the steps in his reasoning were flawed. for instance, the People With The Big Army changes pretty much every 4 years, or did do until relatively recently, and that peacefully. so maybe the People With The Big Army could be us, if we could only figure out how to reach into the minds of all those soldiers, and an effective message to plant. while it might seem farfetch’d, isn’t that exactly what social media is and does, just for the People-Who-Currently-Have-The-Big-Army?

i only read locke’s essay concerning, but my opinion is that individuals comprise any hypothetical organized countervailing force. what people need to join such movements- what I would like to see, perhaps I should just speak for myself- is other people taking the brave public first steps of actual resistance, and not merely voterocking and sloganeering.

i think we agree very much here.

One way to think of punishments for crimes is as a deterrent. Another is to think of them as prices to pay for the right to break the law. You’ll be tempted to interpret this as non-sequitur.

It’s the kind of thing that’s worth doing regardless of the probability of success. I also don’t think much of the comparison between palestine and america.

the constitution is a piece of paper that endorses slavery. it’s not sacred. we’re not beholden to it.