hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 835 of 969 FirstFirst ... 335735785825832833834835836837838845885935 ... LastLast
Results 16,681 to 16,700 of 19379

Thread: US Politics Thread, 2.0

  1. #16681
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    10,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    So who is the CIA Infiltrator here, the person critical of Bernie, or Bernie himself?
    Yeah you missed the point and are strawmanning now. Cheers

  2. #16682
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    So who is the CIA Infiltrator here, the person critical of Bernie, or Bernie himself?
    Yeah you missed the point and are strawmanning now. Cheers
    How so?

    Lets walk through this:

    1. A Lefty was critical of Bernie in an Op Ed.

    2. FHC talked about it, with a few pointing out how silly it is to make Bernie that bad guy here.

    3. I posted "the left eats itself" which IMO they do.

    4. Duck posted "But but but muh CIA Infiltrators!"

    5. So, presuming the CIA Infiltrator thing is legit and on-topic to my post, I 'm asking which is the CIA Infiltrator.

    Have the CIA fucked about? Sure have. No question.

    Is that germane to THIS discussion of a lefty Op Ed writer and Bernie Sanders, and how that shows lefties love to make other lefties of a slightly different flavor into their enemies? I'd say no.

    If anyone is straw manning here, it's people raising "CIA Infiltrators" where clearly none exist, i..e this situation between Bernie and the Op Ed writer.

    P.S. Are you a CIA Infiltrator?
    Last edited by Alistair; February 2 2021 at 05:39:36 PM.


  3. #16683
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    24,104
    Are you doubling down on deliberately missing the point or do you not see how you post was a nonsense question?

    edit
    Oh wait, you're getting close
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    If anyone is straw manning here, it's people raising "CIA Infiltrators" where clearly none exist, i..e this situation between Bernie and the Op Ed writer.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  4. #16684
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    10,005
    It's not """CIA infiltrators"""; it's decades of deft, subtle manipulation/suppression of dissent that produces individuals who unironically believe Bernie is a product of white privilege.

    Which if you would take even 5 or 10 minutes glancing over the mainstream, non conspiratorial articles I posted, you would be forced to acknowledge there is at least a grain of truth/possibility of.

    I mean, to the extent that Bernie wasn't literally assassinated for his views like MLK sure, you could say that he has white privilege.
    Last edited by Approaching Walrus; February 2 2021 at 05:55:36 PM.

  5. #16685
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Are you doubling down on deliberately missing the point or do you not see how you post was a nonsense question?

    edit
    Oh wait, you're getting close
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    If anyone is straw manning here, it's people raising "CIA Infiltrators" where clearly none exist, i..e this situation between Bernie and the Op Ed writer.
    I admittedly fail to see the point in the context of the issue I responded to.

    I'll ask again, is it your theory that this example of the left eating itself, Op Ed Writer vs. Bernie, is an example of a CIA Infiltrator or not?

    If it's not, then the supposed "point" sure seems like it's unrelated to either the issue, or my response to the issue.


  6. #16686
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    It's not """CIA infiltrators"""; it's decades of deft, subtle manipulation/suppression of dissent that produces individuals who unironically believe Bernie is a product of white privilege.

    Which if you would take even 5 or 10 minutes glancing over the mainstream, non conspiratorial articles I posted, you would be forced to acknowledge there is at least a grain of truth/possibility of.

    I mean, to the extent that Bernie wasn't literally assassinated for his views like MLK sure, you could say that he has white privilege.
    Oh, now I see......any lefty who attacks another lefty is clearly a product of what the CIA Infiltrators have done, and hence are not a "true lefty".

    Must be hard to know who the real lefties are these days, eh?


  7. #16687
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    10,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    It's not """CIA infiltrators"""; it's decades of deft, subtle manipulation/suppression of dissent that produces individuals who unironically believe Bernie is a product of white privilege.

    Which if you would take even 5 or 10 minutes glancing over the mainstream, non conspiratorial articles I posted, you would be forced to acknowledge there is at least a grain of truth/possibility of.

    I mean, to the extent that Bernie wasn't literally assassinated for his views like MLK sure, you could say that he has white privilege.
    Oh, now I see......any lefty who attacks another lefty is clearly a product of what the CIA Infiltrators have done, and hence are not a "true lefty".

    Must be hard to know who the real lefties are these days, eh?
    Yeah man idk I've given you some mainstream sources and if you're unwilling to consider the information then there's no point continuing this discussion further. Just a CRAZY conspiracy theory

  8. #16688
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    24,104
    There are aspects of leftist thought which are considered harmless to the current status quo and as a result get amplified by structures sympathetic to the status quo in order to drown out aspects of leftist thought which are potentially more harmful to the establishment.

    Hence Liare's link to bikeshedding.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  9. #16689
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    4,277
    When they mean "infiltration" they don't mean literally everyone lol. And let's be honest you know that, you're just fucking with us again

    These ideas can be filtered into the wider body of academia and accepted in mostly good faith. Okay, obviously people use them to advance careers because this is what's expected of you in academia or creatives these days.

    But... people aren't thinking about whats really under the hood when they do. Or any of the wider consequences when people with Individualism Brain start ranking every person's oppression on an individual, completely atomized basis

  10. #16690
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    15,325
    honestly folks, Alistair is beyond reach, he's too invested in the way things are to accept that they're breaking down around him, what you're seeing is just another branch of the learned ignorance he is so heavily dependent upon to justify his support for the system.

    it's the same thing you see with the idiotic assumptions that "class warfare" isn't real because there's this outlier dumbass over in the corner ignoring entirely that it was only ever a "in aggregate" argument, or that "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" means collectivized toothbrushes, or abolish private property means collectivized toothbrushes because he doesn't want to grasp that there is a fundamental distinction between personal and private property. or the incessant tendency to bring up "problems" that are either not relevant in the first place, or demolished by fifteen seconds of reasoning and a little theory reading.

    half the fucking time, his entire argument is demolished somewhere in Das Kapital volume 1.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  11. #16691
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    17,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    It's not """CIA infiltrators"""; it's decades of deft, subtle manipulation/suppression of dissent that produces individuals who unironically believe Bernie is a product of white privilege.

    Which if you would take even 5 or 10 minutes glancing over the mainstream, non conspiratorial articles I posted, you would be forced to acknowledge there is at least a grain of truth/possibility of.

    I mean, to the extent that Bernie wasn't literally assassinated for his views like MLK sure, you could say that he has white privilege.
    Oh, now I see......any lefty who attacks another lefty is clearly a product of what the CIA Infiltrators have done, and hence are not a "true lefty".

    Must be hard to know who the real lefties are these days, eh?
    Yeah man idk I've given you some mainstream sources and if you're unwilling to consider the information then there's no point continuing this discussion further. Just a CRAZY conspiracy theory
    post jacobin.

    "mainstream sources"
    meh

  12. #16692
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    17,157
    I mean, on the other hand, you're all just making the same excuses other failed leftists have in the past.


    "Communism would win except for the CIA!!!"
    meh

  13. #16693
    Shaikar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Kador
    Posts
    3,241
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    It's not """CIA infiltrators"""; it's decades of deft, subtle manipulation/suppression of dissent that produces individuals who unironically believe Bernie is a product of white privilege.

    Which if you would take even 5 or 10 minutes glancing over the mainstream, non conspiratorial articles I posted, you would be forced to acknowledge there is at least a grain of truth/possibility of.

    I mean, to the extent that Bernie wasn't literally assassinated for his views like MLK sure, you could say that he has white privilege.
    Oh, now I see......any lefty who attacks another lefty is clearly a product of what the CIA Infiltrators have done, and hence are not a "true lefty".

    Must be hard to know who the real lefties are these days, eh?
    Which is why ideological purity and gatekeeping are so important.
    Quote Originally Posted by cucaldvida View Post
    ...suck on the devices of the callow people...

  14. #16694

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,347
    gotta have to agree with alistair on this one, you guys sound like crazies basically arguing that the left is the way it is because of the CIA having ops to disrupt the movement.

    being affected by outside forces doesnt absolve you from having to use your brain, the example of that op-ed of identity driven fanfiction of a random teacher preaching her virtue to a crowd of receptive and interested kid sounds like a million other stories from any political or ideological side. You might argue that the ideology she's preaching has been touched by outside forces but fuck, what ideology hasen't.

    To say that the modern left can be excused for its stupid narratives because of government agencies paying jackson pollock in the 80's makes you sound like a fucking loonatic.

    The left ideals of fairness, equality, inclusion and respect are absolutely vital to a good society, but if you can't accept that an op-ed saying that bernie sanders wearing a coat and mitts at the inauguration is a sign of white privilege is fucking crazy then you've lost the plot.

    I mean Bernie fucking Sanders, the man that got arrested multiple times protesting for equal rights. The man that has spent his whole life calling for free healtcare and education, and rising to power to actually get those things done. How can his skin color be important? Could he have done anything else in his life not to get wrapped up in that package?

  15. #16695
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    8,759
    oh dis gun b gud
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

  16. #16696
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    5,326
    *unfolds special autism-watching deckchair

  17. #16697
    Super Chillerator Global Moderator teds :D's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 9, 2011
    Posts
    9,985
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    *unfolds special autism-watching deckchair

  18. #16698
    Super Chillerator Global Moderator teds :D's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 9, 2011
    Posts
    9,985
    FUCK YOU VENEC

  19. #16699
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    10,005
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

    The valid types of ad hominem arguments are generally only encountered in specialized philosophical usage. These typically refer to the dialectical strategy of using the target's own beliefs and arguments against them, while not agreeing with the validity of those beliefs and arguments. Ad hominem arguments were first studied in ancient Greece; John Locke revived the examination of ad hominem arguments in the 17th century.

  20. #16700
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    17,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

    The valid types of ad hominem arguments are generally only encountered in specialized philosophical usage. These typically refer to the dialectical strategy of using the target's own beliefs and arguments against them, while not agreeing with the validity of those beliefs and arguments. Ad hominem arguments were first studied in ancient Greece; John Locke revived the examination of ad hominem arguments in the 17th century.
    I’m attacking your shitty ideas, not you...
    meh

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •