Who will be the 47th President of the United States of America?


  • Total voters
    15
  • Poll closed .
Your entire argument is based on, once again, using a term wrong by definition
Sigh... Another miss. Aie aie aie...


Thinking someone can have some control of their lives given the situation is a meritocracy
Yes, indeed.

That's precisely what I'm trying to make you understand. Meritocracy is the belief of control and the fact that people should be more rewarded for being able to get a better control over their own lives rather than others, when in reality...

.. it simply does not work that way.

And you are - once again - showing me that you don't understand - once again - what I'm saying. And this is - once again - really disappointing.. Because I've tried everything with you guys.


Meritocracy isn't wrong
Its not only wrong, its a toxic belief system that does not and will simply never exist.




people should try to better themselves as long as its within their reach

however not everything is within reach for everyone
"From each according to their ability to each according to their needs" ?


there were always those that hit rock bottom.
No. That mostly began during the neolithic and the rise of patriarchy, slavery and prehistoric capitalism.

Society are not fataly bound to let some people down. Human are not evil by nature, that the myth capitalism is trying to sell you.


The problem is that under unregulated captialism, it's easy to hit rock bottom with no fault of your own.
There is no "own fault" under capitalism. We all began with specific capitals and therefore very specific path in life. The myth of control through hard work is just that, a myth.


Logiko is just once again being close minded and enforcing his views and assumptions on other people.
No. Those who are close minded here, are those, like you, who refuse to question a myth you have been fed with your entire life.


He keeps trying to remove any fault or accountability on the left.
Oh but there is accountability. We can for quote for example people like Mao or Staline who used marxists principles through opportunistic tendancy. We can also question the leninist positions of some communist and their strange apology of the atrocity commited by Staline and consort. But here, we are talking about a fight between two groups of people who are already AWARE of the BS that is meritocracy, liberalism and therefore capitalism.

Me with my anticapitalistic and antifascist fight and you and your anti-woke propaganda.. We are not fighting on the same plane anymore mate. You are still fighting scarescrows that I'm already trying to find my way around "the Destroyer".



I tried to be nice and understanding, so I ereased the message I wanted post in addition to my reply this morning but since you keep this attitude.. here we go:


And since I'm starting to get fed up of the way you act here let me add this:


I can say that you don't understand what you are talking about.. based on this sentence:

Dylan Mulvaney himself said he came out as gay(and centered his activities around his identity as a gay man), then non binary and then queer. Instead of reporting people for non existent transphobia, how bout listening to the people you are trying to be a white savior towards.
You still don't understand what transphobia or the difference between an identity and a sexual preference are

Words matter.

With your words, I can pinpoint your political compass. Not leftist because you would understand why not questionning merit is a problem and not far right or conservatist because you know too much about the political reality of the world to fall into this extrem.

So looking at the way you speak to me or treat the way try to prevent toxic behavior here. I'd place you on the Apolitical-liberal point of the political spectrum. The one that don't understand why saying that "he" about a transwomen is transphobe or why saying "people can improve themself and reach high if they want is purely liberal.

Since the day i've been talking here and reporting people, you act and talk like I'm the one who is trying to label people to try to get the moral high ground. But in reality I'm not the one doing that here ... YOU are.

Because YOU are the one who is trying to be edgy while understanding PERFECTLY the political/historical context and reasons why I'm talking the way I do. YOU (and other mods here) are the one denying cases transphobia when after reading people who are literally explaining that trans women are men you throw me a "buzzword", YOU are the one denying cases of clear toxicity, YOU are the one refusing to open the debate on the repolitization of already political subjects.


You are hidding being your power, your derogatory behavior, your casual ignoring but yet clearly targeted sarcasm to appear like you know everything about politics.. when in reality what you have is the surface level.

Your historical and economical knowledge are without a doubt BETTER than mine. But you miss the most important part :

The political knowledge. Or at least, that's what appears through your words.

- Denying transphobia
- Confusing identity and sexual preferences
- Not understanding why I use certain labels the way I do
- Refusing the politicization of discussions
- Targetting the only leftistS in the room with your words
- Not understanding the notion of meritocracy


Dude.. I'm not the one who has a problem of identity here.


America at the very least, has become more right wing and conservative over the past 15 years and its for a reason.
The reason : Trump, Liberals and people like you.

Not the left. We have our problems, but the rise of the far right or the right wing is not on us.

You have to be the smartest not hardest. Don't blame the game just because you don't understand. Unregulated capitalism is beautiful. Regulated capitalism is where "the system is made to keep you poor" is all about. When company joins governaments to regulate economy. That's when you are doomed to be poor. Not when everyone is free to do what they want.
Tell me, in an anarcho capitalist society. Are the boss and the employee paid the same ?

You didn't read my post properly 🙄
I'm sorry, I'm a bit lost on the convo, and for once the apathie here is starting to get to me a little.

except the countries where they are the majority and oppress&forcefully convert religious minorities
Indeed I'm not counting the exception where Islam is actually used as a tool of oppression. But it does exist yes.

What point are you trying to make?
The point is that if we start calling Hamas or Israel "terrorist organization", we can't bring them in front of international justice on those terms. The International laws only recognize the action of atrocities (war crime / genocides etc.) and its logical. If it wasn't the case, any state would be able to call their opposition "terrorist" and suppress them that way while being justified. Sometimes acts of terrorism considered by one nation are actually acts of resistances for another.

Where suppressing/oppression might have been justified?
So you don’t think there was a point in time in the history of Israel-Palestine conflict where the Israelis had a good reason to fear the PS/Arab force?[/QUOTE]
Palestinian were stripped of their homes and land and ethically cleansed. There were massacred. In that context, suppression and oppression is the worst answer to the problem.

So if a group of cannibals decided to set up shop in a country, and threatened to eat your neighbors you don’t think that’s a good reason to oppress them and keep them away?

violence always requires a justification. We have to weight wether is good enough or not
Who is threatenning who right now ? Look at the death count please.
 
Are you comparing the Palestinians who lived there before the mass migration of Jews to cannibals?
The situation is long past this stage anyway.
Are you retarded?
Post automatically merged:

They did try means other than violence, look up the multiple two state deals they tried to work with. The PS/Arab forces basically told them to fuck off and kept attacking them
 
so you're in between just like a rational person should be I see
Yeah at some points Israel probably had a good reason to be that anal about Palestinians. Modern day? Nah. I’ve said several times the war can’t go for long and they’re wrong for the occupation of the West Bank
Post automatically merged:

You're using a hypothetical that uses a false equivalence between Palestinians and Cannibals. You can't blame him for not engaging with that premise.
False equivalency? It perfectly tracks. If one poses a reasonable threat to the other violence may be needed.
 
They did try means other than violence
Yes.
They tried oppression and suppressions of rights
They tried the the impronment of an entire population within walls
They tried checkpoints
They tried profiling from soldier onto kids and innocent people
They tried land appropriation
They tried arbitrary prisonners

..They actually tried a lot of BAD things. Not the actual things that were needed:

- The end of colonization
- The renunciation of Palestinian lands in the limits of 1948
- The freedom of people of Gaza
- The stop of the oppressions of Palestinian minorities in Israel
Etc.

I suppose the employee can reinvest their money in their business if they want to in an anarcho capitalist society, right ?


this is basically what states always have been doing
Hence why its important not to recognize the word "terrorism" in international laws. Its a way to protect nation that could be under oppression.


so you're in between just like a rational person should be I see
Nuance is not always a rationnal mindset. It can also be a symtom of biases.
 
By that logic, Israelis pose an existential threat to Palestine as well. Even more so since from their perspective they're an invading force.
Now ask me if I think their war against Israel in 48 was justified
Post automatically merged:

- The end of colonization
- The renunciation of Palestinian lands in the limits of 1948
- The freedom of people of Gaza
- The stop of the oppressions of Palestinian minorities in Israel
Etc.
you do realize 90% of this is achieved if they settled with Israel in 67 right
 
have you ever managed to convince me
I don't think so no. But some of you did on multiple occasions and this despite my radical mindset.

So It might be time for you guys realize who is really biased and who is not here. And why the injonction for nuance is actually not the brightest move there is.

Because when I'm explaining how meritocracy impacted my life in all its aspect during 10 years and what I get in reply is "you use the term wrong".. there is a bit of a problem of understanding between us. So its your turn to understand that I'm making a LOT of efforts to reach you guys.

And my hand is still open.



Bruh that’s a propaganda channel. I also asked him to ask me, aka my opinion. I don’t regurgitate propaganda
No. Just a religious and militant channel. This is actually a pretty clear explanation of the conflict. You should watch it. There is nothing complicated in understanding why Palestinian were revolted by the land divisions at the time.

But go ahead, if you have a better explanation of the conflict. Do give me the link and I will add it to the library !
 
Last edited:

AL sama

Red Haired
I don't think so no. But some of you did on multiple occasions and this despite my radical mindset.

So It might time for you guys realize who is really biased and who is not here. And why the injonction for nuance is actually not the brightest move there is.

Because when I'm explaining how meritocracy impacted my life in all its aspect during 10 years and what I get in reply is "you use the term wrong".. there is a bit of a problem of understanding between us. So its your turn to understand that I'm making a LOT of efforts to reach you guys.

And my hand is still open.

:gokulaugh::gokulaugh:
 
Top