If you spent more time explaining things rather than "dunking on libs" maybe your movement would be less on the fringe. I don't have an opinion on who is more authoritarian, which is why it was obnoxious that you matter-of-factly made your point without any substance.
Genuine question, if you don't have a stance on Trotsky, and you don't know fuck all about him, why are you wading into this comment chain in the first place?
You see, the comment sections of divisive posts are a place that you can learn about opinions different than your own or to learn new things. If you want, I can go back to the neoliberal echo chambers where people are actually engaged in discussing things in good faith.
If you want to know something you merely have to ask. Maybe explain that you don't know much about a subject matter.
My initial comment was to someone who has an opinion on Trotsky and thus probably knows who he was, so I didn't feel like typing up a whole-ass essay on the guy. Y'know?
This post is the natural reaction to a failed dunk. Perhaps if you want to counter a controversial point without explaining it, don't bother posting otherwise it's the intellectual equivalent of "no, u".
Because I wanted to know, why do you think Trotsky was less authoritarian than Stalin?
If you spent more time explaining things rather than "dunking on libs" maybe your movement would be less on the fringe. I don't have an opinion on who is more authoritarian, which is why it was obnoxious that you matter-of-factly made your point without any substance.
I took it for granted that people who had a stance on Trotsky would know who he is.
I don't have a stance on Trotsky. Maybe you should check who you are responding to before you automatically start "dunking on libs".
Genuine question, if you don't have a stance on Trotsky, and you don't know fuck all about him, why are you wading into this comment chain in the first place?
You see, the comment sections of divisive posts are a place that you can learn about opinions different than your own or to learn new things. If you want, I can go back to the neoliberal echo chambers where people are actually engaged in discussing things in good faith.
If you want to know something you merely have to ask. Maybe explain that you don't know much about a subject matter.
My initial comment was to someone who has an opinion on Trotsky and thus probably knows who he was, so I didn't feel like typing up a whole-ass essay on the guy. Y'know?
This post is the natural reaction to a failed dunk. Perhaps if you want to counter a controversial point without explaining it, don't bother posting otherwise it's the intellectual equivalent of "no, u".
The comment I'm replying to also didn't explain their stance either. Is there any particular reason you wanna only whinge at me?
It's a meme sub
The original commenter you responded to was making a toungue-in-cheek meme post that was directed ambiguously.
You turned it into a serious post (which is fine) by unambiguously saying the OP "doesn't know shit" without further elaboration.
Your only excuse that you didn't want to waste time is invalidated by the numerous attempts to dunk on me in this comment thread.
Is somehow also not saying that people don't know shit.
Where did I say that. All I said was that I didn't feel like writing a lot about Trotsky when I figured we both had some knowledge of him.
I really gotta wonder why you're still doing this since you obviously think it's a waste of time.
I never said it was a waste of time, it's pretty funny dunking on dunkers.
Complaining my shitposty reply to a shitposty comment doesn't fit your personal formal debate rules isn't dunking, it's pissing yourself in public.
It's a shit posting sub, comrade.
That you seem to take the comments on deadly seriously.
you seem to have not drunk your coffee today