Single sheep rendition of "the nutcracker" feat cameraman.

But at least I could reason with a bear.

Sure you can Steve Irwin, I somehow doubt that the bear can reason with you though.

Weak sauce. Get better material.

The point was quite clear, I'm not going to feed it to you like a baby bird and I'm not going to waste more time on that, just saying "nu uh explain yourself" doesn't change anything on that front.

And it's not absurd to expect people to actually post content instead of just dumping their latest fancy somewhere. We got bots that can do the same.

A post with real content like a summary or even a decent title with a synopsis are a sign for me that the content is worth consuming, instead of just more noise that dilutes existing content actually worth reading.

I mean you can simply read the article you yourself posted to see what I mean.

How much more concrete than "there isn't much depth to any of the articles content" do you want me to be?

Instead of digging your heels in, stop with the article link-dumping.

The latter is not just criticism on you but all the other "supposed" content sharers. If you can't even be bothered to post a short summary of the content you post, why would I bother with clicking on it.

but there is no actual depth behind any of the words in the article. No actual reasoning on why Europeans are supposedly morally bankrupt.

It's figurative barf on a paper.

Man, that reading comprehension comment of yours really came back to bite you huh?

Well alright, I might have worded my comment a bit wrong in regard of the relation the title has with the article content.

What I actually mean to say is that there is a lot of talk about what European philosophers supposedly think about non-europeans and that the examples of these European philosophies are non-existent in the article.

Sure there are a few name drops, but there is no actual depth behind any of the words in the article. No actual reasoning on why Europeans are supposedly morally bankrupt except for the rather strange part in the beginning where a hypothetical coalition of Iran and allies would be stopped by the western allies if they did the same thing as the Israeli are doing now in gaza.

And I can't help but think; if they are really that outraged by what's going on in gaza, why don't they do anything about it like the hypothetical West would have?

It's figurative barf on a paper.

What a load of bullshit honestly. The article title has barely anything to do with the jumbling of words inside the article it self.