Like what, specifically? Can you point me to some comment I made that was this way? I honestly have no clue what you’re talking about. If what I’m doing is being interpreted that way, then I apologize, because that is never my intention.
I already told you that many were rhetorical questions. I need to spell it out for you? You really want to go with the rhetoric of, "I just can't figure it out?" Because I believe you absolutely can figure it out but are choosing to argue rather than do the necessary self-crit.
I'd be happy to show you a few examples if you admit you are truly incapable of reviewing your own comments for shitty rhetorical questions that aren't actually addressing what I said, but deflecting / attempting a "gotcha". But I'd rather you went and did it yourself, since you have repeatedly acted in bad faith and this would be an example of you putting in the basic work of being a humble person. I am in no way interested in fetching an example for you just for you to whine some more rather than acknowledge being shitty.
Like what, specifically?
Like I keep saying, you don't even know the different basic senses of the word communism. This, despite calling yourself an ancom, lol. And virtually every attempt at a comeback reveals new ignorance. Rather than me listing them, how about you go back to all this shit you've deflected and actually respond? Remember, I'm not your teacher and you have yet to demonstrate good faith.
I’ve read quite a lot, actually.
Just not about the things you keep trying to discuss and dunk on people with.
Obviously nobody can read everything, even everything that folks like yourself may consider “basic”. There really is just too much material out there.
More bad faith coping. I've been very clear that the problem is you keeping forming and sharing strong opinions about topics you don't understand. You're now whining as if I've expected you to have read everything on the planet. That is a dishonest reaction, mischaracterizing the nature of my point so that you can save that fragile ego from some self-crit. You would avoid these kinds of situations if you eliminated the tendency of speaking and dunking in ignorance, assuming you never feel comfortable admitting to specific errors in a conversation.
That’s one of the reasons I was so happy to see a place like Hexbear on the web, where leftists could talk to one another and learn from each other. But that’s not what I’ve found here. I’ve found a lot of defensive/confrontational people who are off-putting instead of welcoming.
You cannot ask me or anyone else to believe that you're just here to learn. You are not simply asking questions from a place of humility, you're trying to dunk. And when presented with this face, you're whining even more and pretending you didn't, asking for receipts like you're a baby who can't remember or read their own words. In reality, we're just exploring how low you're willing to go to protect your ego, how many fractal excuses you can make to avoid admitting you had some shitty takes based in R*dditor ignorance.
Actually, you said I was being arrogant, I believe. Which implies that you think that I think I know what I’m talking about. I’m always going to be the first to say that I may not know what I’m talking about. Always.
You don't need to come up with these little fictions about what's implied, I've told you exactly what you being arrogant means. You're presenting strong opinions about a topic you've never read. You are choosing to make shit up rather than contend with my very clear criticism. In case you need it spelled out, making shit up about what others are saying is lying.
Maybe you’ve just run into too many ACTUAL arrogant people in your life and you’re applying that to just everyone new you meet? I don’t know.
More coping and excuses for your mistakes. The idea that you straw manned me could never actually enter your mind, right? Better make up some more stories!
Actually, they’re not. But if you’re interpreting them that way, then I suppose you need to make an adjustment?
Actually, they are. It would be in-character for you to not know when you're asking rhetorical questions, though. Or, better, to pretend to not know what one is because it's been used to criticize you.
Here's a cool one: "Why aren’t these energy generators nationalized? I thought this was a communist country??"
Oh and another: "You know why the left isn’t as popular as other philosophies, right? People like you."
i.e. your pissbaby shit you use to avoid criticism. You just can't help yourself, either - you even tried to make this criticism of you a criticism of me, yet again. Then you act surprised when people think you act in bad faith.
Like I’ve said, multiple times now, I’ve never claimed to be an expert on anything. I am often wrong. What else do you want from me?
I've told you exactly what humility looks like in this context. You do not need to pretend that I've implied you need to be an expert on anything. That is another example of acting in bad faith.
Where have I lied about anyone? Can you please point this out to me? Because I honestly have no clue what you’re talking about here.
I called it out when you did it. You deflected. Go revisit those times and list them, attempt to explain them. Then I will respond to that.
Me too! That’s why I ask questions!
The most hilariously ignorant point you made could be answered in ten minutes of googling after scores of people told you you were wrong. You've instead spent over a day writing replies rather than becoming informed. You've also doubled down on deflection and self-pity rather than doing any self-crit for why everyone is shitting on you - and thus moving on so that people will think you're acting in good faith. Such curiosity!
I’m not trying to change the subject. I’m just addressing the things you’re saying in your comments.
Lashing out like a child with, "I'm rubber, you're glue" is not addressing the things I'm saying. It's deflecting from the criticism.
What would you like to discuss, specifically?
What are the relevant senses of the word, "communism" that would lead others to make fun of you for criticizing China as not being communist despite being run by the Chinese Communist Party?
Explain the answer to me and cite your sources. It will take you just a few minutes if you know how to use a search engine and are actually curious.
It would be a lot easier if you just directly addressed what people say to you.
No, I honestly can’t figure it out. I’m sorry, but I really can’t. None of the questions that I have asked, in my intention or opinion, have been rhetorical.
Then you don't know what a rhetorical question is and I presumably now have to fucking teach you that if I want to have a "normal conversation" with you. Personally, I refuse to believe that you can't figure it out, but I guess we have to do this song and dance - or I can just start writing you off, which I will be doing soon if you continue this shit. A rhetorical question is one in which you are not actually asking for an answer, but suggesting something through a question. I'm not being psychoanalytical here, it's a common way of speaking and it's obvious.
Here's one: “You know why the left isn’t as popular as other philosophies, right? People like you.”
You are not actually asking them to enumerate why the left isn't as popular as other "philosophies" (fucking lol). You answer your question yourself, it could not be more fucking obvious. Now that you have learned information taught to fifth graders - or, more accurately, have been forced to contend with a bad habit that you'd rather not honestly deal with - you can acknowledge this, correct? I won't hold my breath.
But instead you personally attack me as if I’m on the same level as you and “should know better”. I don’t know better, ok? I don’t know better. I’m just trying here. I’m trying, and all I’m getting is shit on and insulted.
I've stated exactly what you need to do to demonstrate good faith and humility and you've repeatedly ignored it and deflected and made up stories about things I didn't ask for and how ridiculous I am for suggesting it. I've had numerous bad faith interactions with you where, rather than actually try to understand what is happening, you just fight and push back and make excuses. No matter how many times you say, "no I'm a good boy I didn't mean it, honest", you will have to deal with the fact that you've acted like a pissbaby and that yes, you should fucking know better, or more accurately, be able to acknowledge it when it's pointed out to you five, ten, fifteen, twenty times by other people you claim to be associated with.
Tell me, specifically, what I am incorrect about.
I have done so repeatedly, beginning with your equivocation on communism. It's not my fault that you deflected and forgot. Go look it up and tell me. I shouldn't have to organize this conversation, you should be able to honestly contend with what people say when they say it.
Stop insulting me personally, and just tell me what you think I’m wrong about!
You will continue to get berated so long as you act like a pissbaby.
I would 100% admit to EVERY error I’ve ever made, especially if the error was specifically pointed out to me so that I could change! This is exhausting.
Except you literally did the exact opposite at every step in this conversation where you should have. You did it with me, you did it with everyone else. When I say you lied about something or deflected, that's you avoiding admitting an error. It's a coping mechanism. Deal with that shit and stop making excuses. You have acknowledged exactly zero errors in this back-and-forth. You haven't even done the typical ego-serving thing of admitting to one error and denying the general sense of making serial errors as a matter of a deeper problem (yet), which would usually come next. This is all despite you repeatedly telling little stories to avoid what I say, dropping absurd little straw men/rhetorical questions, and generally being full of shit on topic where you'd like to fling shit at others.
[A series of asinine questions feigning incompetence]
I have been very clear and specific in my criticisms. If you are honestly confused, well fuck that sucks for you you made your own fucking bed and have to sleep in it. Maybe stop deflecting shit and you'd remember what we're talking about. I've also made it easy for you by using operational words like "lie", "make shit up", and "straw man".
But honestly, you can figure out these very basic parts of having a conversation yourself. You are a big boy with a browser and a search function and you can do the basic work of remembering criticisms I've repeated to you three or four times.
Example: "Not sure where I straw-manned you. Can you quote that for me? I’ll gladly discuss that with you.". No, that's your job. I was very clear on when this happened. Go find the quote and show it to us, then explain how your response captures my position.
The first one about nationalized energy - I honestly want to know why ANY country would choose not to nationalize their essential services. Do you know why? I’d like to know.
The fact that you couldn't figure out that, "I thought this was a communist country??" is the rhetorical question is pretty great. Keep posting your Ls, 40-year-old-who-doesn't-know-what-a-rhetorical-question-is. Pretty funny that you chose basic conversational incompetence as your general "out".
The second one - sure, maybe you can consider that rhetorical, but I answered it myself. It’s more a “figure of speech” than an actual rhetorical question. It’s just a more creative way of saying “leftist thought isn’t catching on because apparently there are many leftist assholes”.
It is a rhetorical question full-stop, and obviously so. Look at how you deny the obvious and squirm and torture yourself to avoid acknowledging something so trivial. You will clearly not be satisfied until I teach you remedial fucking English, dying on this hill lest someone else be correct that you, gasp, asked rhetorical questions.
Here's an easy way for you or any 10-year-old to know if a question is rhetorical: does it expect an actual, direct answer? If no, it's rhetorical. Gold star. Pizza party if you get five of them right.
I don’t have the energy. Sorry, but I don’t. This is fucking exhausting.
Great, so you tired yourself out by acting in bad faith so long that you've forgotten what anyone is talking about, all you can do is make knee-jerk claims like, "no you do it too probably" and "what straw men?" as if I hadn't specifically told you. I am not going to pick up that slack for you, so you can fuck off if you're not going to.
I really thought that this was a community where we could have discussions. I didn’t realize I had to major in Marxism to participate in this website.
Majoring in Marxism is when you spend 10 minutes learning the senses of a word using Google.
Look at this melodramatic pissbaby response that amounts to, you guessed it: a fucking straw man. Textbook example. Contend with this realization at your leisure, or, as seems to be the case, by deflecting from it and forgetting what I'm talking about.
Ok, let’s take the very definition of the word “Communism”:
There's only one definition? Interesting. Pretty sure I said "senses". If you don't know what I mean by that, you can feel free to ask, but I didn't know that "senses of a word" was a particularly academic term.
Last time I looked at China, they had billionaires. Last time I looked at China, the Means of Production were controlled by those billionaires. Last time I looked at China, they had social classes, money, and a huge state apparatus.
Hey look you made the same error again. You seem proud of it, lol.
Sorry, no cigar. You can do it, though, I believe in you! Keep reading! Keep thinking about the question of what things get called communist!
Am I incorrect on any of those points?
You're committing the fallacy of equivocation because you don't know the ways in which the term is used beyond the one sense you're familiar with. In this ignorance, you've decided that only that sense really exists so there is a contradiction. The idea that language has been used in other ways is somehow less plausible to you than those sneaky commie Asiatics knowing more about this than you do.
lol buddy I'm laughing at you, hard to be calmer than having a hearty chuckle at the :LIB: that thinks they're a leftist and is so tied up in their own ego that they can't admit they asked rhetorical questions.
It wasn't a figure of speech either, lol. Keep taking those Ls on gradeschool English, lib.
You wouldn't dig these holes if you were honest early and often. A tip for your mental health in the future, because it probably doesn't feel good to commit to illiteracy rather than admit fault.
Removed by mod
I already told you that many were rhetorical questions. I need to spell it out for you? You really want to go with the rhetoric of, "I just can't figure it out?" Because I believe you absolutely can figure it out but are choosing to argue rather than do the necessary self-crit.
I'd be happy to show you a few examples if you admit you are truly incapable of reviewing your own comments for shitty rhetorical questions that aren't actually addressing what I said, but deflecting / attempting a "gotcha". But I'd rather you went and did it yourself, since you have repeatedly acted in bad faith and this would be an example of you putting in the basic work of being a humble person. I am in no way interested in fetching an example for you just for you to whine some more rather than acknowledge being shitty.
Like I keep saying, you don't even know the different basic senses of the word communism. This, despite calling yourself an ancom, lol. And virtually every attempt at a comeback reveals new ignorance. Rather than me listing them, how about you go back to all this shit you've deflected and actually respond? Remember, I'm not your teacher and you have yet to demonstrate good faith.
Just not about the things you keep trying to discuss and dunk on people with.
More bad faith coping. I've been very clear that the problem is you keeping forming and sharing strong opinions about topics you don't understand. You're now whining as if I've expected you to have read everything on the planet. That is a dishonest reaction, mischaracterizing the nature of my point so that you can save that fragile ego from some self-crit. You would avoid these kinds of situations if you eliminated the tendency of speaking and dunking in ignorance, assuming you never feel comfortable admitting to specific errors in a conversation.
You cannot ask me or anyone else to believe that you're just here to learn. You are not simply asking questions from a place of humility, you're trying to dunk. And when presented with this face, you're whining even more and pretending you didn't, asking for receipts like you're a baby who can't remember or read their own words. In reality, we're just exploring how low you're willing to go to protect your ego, how many fractal excuses you can make to avoid admitting you had some shitty takes based in R*dditor ignorance.
You don't need to come up with these little fictions about what's implied, I've told you exactly what you being arrogant means. You're presenting strong opinions about a topic you've never read. You are choosing to make shit up rather than contend with my very clear criticism. In case you need it spelled out, making shit up about what others are saying is lying.
More coping and excuses for your mistakes. The idea that you straw manned me could never actually enter your mind, right? Better make up some more stories!
Actually, they are. It would be in-character for you to not know when you're asking rhetorical questions, though. Or, better, to pretend to not know what one is because it's been used to criticize you.
Here's a cool one: "Why aren’t these energy generators nationalized? I thought this was a communist country??"
Oh and another: "You know why the left isn’t as popular as other philosophies, right? People like you."
i.e. your pissbaby shit you use to avoid criticism. You just can't help yourself, either - you even tried to make this criticism of you a criticism of me, yet again. Then you act surprised when people think you act in bad faith.
I've told you exactly what humility looks like in this context. You do not need to pretend that I've implied you need to be an expert on anything. That is another example of acting in bad faith.
I called it out when you did it. You deflected. Go revisit those times and list them, attempt to explain them. Then I will respond to that.
The most hilariously ignorant point you made could be answered in ten minutes of googling after scores of people told you you were wrong. You've instead spent over a day writing replies rather than becoming informed. You've also doubled down on deflection and self-pity rather than doing any self-crit for why everyone is shitting on you - and thus moving on so that people will think you're acting in good faith. Such curiosity!
Lashing out like a child with, "I'm rubber, you're glue" is not addressing the things I'm saying. It's deflecting from the criticism.
What are the relevant senses of the word, "communism" that would lead others to make fun of you for criticizing China as not being communist despite being run by the Chinese Communist Party?
Explain the answer to me and cite your sources. It will take you just a few minutes if you know how to use a search engine and are actually curious.
Removed by mod
It would be a lot easier if you just directly addressed what people say to you.
Then you don't know what a rhetorical question is and I presumably now have to fucking teach you that if I want to have a "normal conversation" with you. Personally, I refuse to believe that you can't figure it out, but I guess we have to do this song and dance - or I can just start writing you off, which I will be doing soon if you continue this shit. A rhetorical question is one in which you are not actually asking for an answer, but suggesting something through a question. I'm not being psychoanalytical here, it's a common way of speaking and it's obvious.
Here's one: “You know why the left isn’t as popular as other philosophies, right? People like you.”
You are not actually asking them to enumerate why the left isn't as popular as other "philosophies" (fucking lol). You answer your question yourself, it could not be more fucking obvious. Now that you have learned information taught to fifth graders - or, more accurately, have been forced to contend with a bad habit that you'd rather not honestly deal with - you can acknowledge this, correct? I won't hold my breath.
I've stated exactly what you need to do to demonstrate good faith and humility and you've repeatedly ignored it and deflected and made up stories about things I didn't ask for and how ridiculous I am for suggesting it. I've had numerous bad faith interactions with you where, rather than actually try to understand what is happening, you just fight and push back and make excuses. No matter how many times you say, "no I'm a good boy I didn't mean it, honest", you will have to deal with the fact that you've acted like a pissbaby and that yes, you should fucking know better, or more accurately, be able to acknowledge it when it's pointed out to you five, ten, fifteen, twenty times by other people you claim to be associated with.
I have done so repeatedly, beginning with your equivocation on communism. It's not my fault that you deflected and forgot. Go look it up and tell me. I shouldn't have to organize this conversation, you should be able to honestly contend with what people say when they say it.
You will continue to get berated so long as you act like a pissbaby.
Except you literally did the exact opposite at every step in this conversation where you should have. You did it with me, you did it with everyone else. When I say you lied about something or deflected, that's you avoiding admitting an error. It's a coping mechanism. Deal with that shit and stop making excuses. You have acknowledged exactly zero errors in this back-and-forth. You haven't even done the typical ego-serving thing of admitting to one error and denying the general sense of making serial errors as a matter of a deeper problem (yet), which would usually come next. This is all despite you repeatedly telling little stories to avoid what I say, dropping absurd little straw men/rhetorical questions, and generally being full of shit on topic where you'd like to fling shit at others.
I have been very clear and specific in my criticisms. If you are honestly confused, well fuck that sucks for you you made your own fucking bed and have to sleep in it. Maybe stop deflecting shit and you'd remember what we're talking about. I've also made it easy for you by using operational words like "lie", "make shit up", and "straw man".
But honestly, you can figure out these very basic parts of having a conversation yourself. You are a big boy with a browser and a search function and you can do the basic work of remembering criticisms I've repeated to you three or four times.
Example: "Not sure where I straw-manned you. Can you quote that for me? I’ll gladly discuss that with you.". No, that's your job. I was very clear on when this happened. Go find the quote and show it to us, then explain how your response captures my position.
The fact that you couldn't figure out that, "I thought this was a communist country??" is the rhetorical question is pretty great. Keep posting your Ls, 40-year-old-who-doesn't-know-what-a-rhetorical-question-is. Pretty funny that you chose basic conversational incompetence as your general "out".
It is a rhetorical question full-stop, and obviously so. Look at how you deny the obvious and squirm and torture yourself to avoid acknowledging something so trivial. You will clearly not be satisfied until I teach you remedial fucking English, dying on this hill lest someone else be correct that you, gasp, asked rhetorical questions.
Here's an easy way for you or any 10-year-old to know if a question is rhetorical: does it expect an actual, direct answer? If no, it's rhetorical. Gold star. Pizza party if you get five of them right.
Great, so you tired yourself out by acting in bad faith so long that you've forgotten what anyone is talking about, all you can do is make knee-jerk claims like, "no you do it too probably" and "what straw men?" as if I hadn't specifically told you. I am not going to pick up that slack for you, so you can fuck off if you're not going to.
Majoring in Marxism is when you spend 10 minutes learning the senses of a word using Google.
Look at this melodramatic pissbaby response that amounts to, you guessed it: a fucking straw man. Textbook example. Contend with this realization at your leisure, or, as seems to be the case, by deflecting from it and forgetting what I'm talking about.
There's only one definition? Interesting. Pretty sure I said "senses". If you don't know what I mean by that, you can feel free to ask, but I didn't know that "senses of a word" was a particularly academic term.
Hey look you made the same error again. You seem proud of it, lol.
Sorry, no cigar. You can do it, though, I believe in you! Keep reading! Keep thinking about the question of what things get called communist!
You're committing the fallacy of equivocation because you don't know the ways in which the term is used beyond the one sense you're familiar with. In this ignorance, you've decided that only that sense really exists so there is a contradiction. The idea that language has been used in other ways is somehow less plausible to you than those sneaky commie Asiatics knowing more about this than you do.
Removed by mod
lol buddy I'm laughing at you, hard to be calmer than having a hearty chuckle at the :LIB: that thinks they're a leftist and is so tied up in their own ego that they can't admit they asked rhetorical questions.
Removed by mod
It wasn't a figure of speech either, lol. Keep taking those Ls on gradeschool English, lib.
You wouldn't dig these holes if you were honest early and often. A tip for your mental health in the future, because it probably doesn't feel good to commit to illiteracy rather than admit fault.