Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang>jurota i refuse to pay my taxes imagine thinking trump is the good guy is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win tax is the best thing ever happened to us they tried to kill trump because he's the good guy trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
Then make the poll and prove me wrong. I love that.
"The sex slave of bok haram are angry" > Considered a terrorist organization
"Don't touch to our social aids" > Considered French
No. up to scientific datas.
Why am I not surprised that you don't see the problem. Yes, this is Islamophobia, it's based on islamophobic rethoric > ("muslims and strangers are taking our social aids")
Damn.. even a logic AS BASIC and childlish as the one of ChatGPT couldn't even make you understand the problem ?
Welp, some people are lost..
The benefits = the social aids.
In France, the far right consider that social aids should not be allowed to minorities like muslims. They consider that migrant (that are all muslims in their heads) are making children just to have the right of social aids. In short, they don't want to pay for minorities in difficulties. And this caricature is appriopriating this rethoric.
Riss is literally using their rethoric to mock them and BokoH.. Riss has been saying anti-muslim stuff for a while now. Time to understand.
Here is a caricature by him that was shared by Eric Zemmour a far right crypto fascist leader:
Here > Using the common rethoric that muslims are everywhere in subburbs and chases Jews. But without forgetting to add on the common racist moral panic about veil on women by showing that all women in the neughtborhood are under a burka.
Here > By using the far right rehoric that leftist have become muslims (because you see, they want to protect muslim from oppressions)
Or here: with journalist in 2017 who are noticing the fact that Riss is confusing muslim and terrorists:
"The sex slave of bok haram are angry" > Considered a terrorist organization
"Don't touch to our social aids" > Considered French
No. up to scientific datas.
Why am I not surprised that you don't see the problem. Yes, this is Islamophobia, it's based on islamophobic rethoric > ("muslims and strangers are taking our social aids")
Damn.. even a logic AS BASIC and childlish as the one of ChatGPT couldn't even make you understand the problem ?
Welp, some people are lost..
The benefits = the social aids.
In France, the far right consider that social aids should not be allowed to minorities like muslims. They consider that migrant (that are all muslims in their heads) are making children just to have the right of social aids. In short, they don't want to pay for minorities in difficulties. And this caricature is appriopriating this rethoric.
Riss is literally using their rethoric to mock them and BokoH.. Riss has been saying anti-muslim stuff for a while now. Time to understand.
Here is a caricature by him that was shared by Eric Zemmour a far right crypto fascist leader:
Here > Using the common rethoric that muslims are everywhere in subburbs and chases Jews. But without forgetting to add on the common racist moral panic about veil on women by showing that all women in the neughtborhood are under a burka.
Here > By using the far right rehoric that leftist have become muslims (because you see, they want to protect muslim from oppressions)
Or here: with journalist in 2017 who are noticing the fact that Riss is confusing muslim and terrorists:
I think I understand the context and what those drawings are saying a little bit more than you do, I'm sorry pal.
When you use far right rethoric to mock people under oppression, you are not making a simple caricature, you are participating is said oppression.
>> I invite you to watch this video
A good caricature makes fun of the system and the power WITH the oppressed, not at their expenses.
When you use far right rethoric to mock people under oppression, you are not making a simple caricature, you are participating is said oppression.
>> I invite you to watch this video
A good caricature makes fun of the system and the power WITH the oppressed, not at their expenses.
What's it like to be super privileged and have an easy life based on the above? 
When you prime an AI with false information, based on your own subjective view of reality, then of course it will churn out what you want it to say. It matters not how solid a logical argument is if it's founded on an unstable foundation.
Ergo, your argument was sophistry from the start.
For the assistance of those who believe it just "fancy words" please find the definition of sophistry: the use of clever but false arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.
You used religious figures as an allegory to strengthen your argument, but it's a false narrative. Not that I expect you to listen or even comprehend something outside of your own world view.
Post automatically merged:
When you prime an AI with false information, based on your own subjective view of reality, then of course it will churn out what you want it to say. It matters not how solid a logical argument is if it's founded on an unstable foundation.
Ergo, your argument was sophistry from the start.
For the assistance of those who believe it just "fancy words" please find the definition of sophistry: the use of clever but false arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.
You used religious figures as an allegory to strengthen your argument, but it's a false narrative. Not that I expect you to listen or even comprehend something outside of your own world view.
Last edited:
Is tit for tat really the way we should be approaching this? This is about now - not then. Besides, there were plenty of women who also believed in the same values back then. It was a product of it's time.
Heck, even Queen Victoria; lauded as the ruler of the Empire, said this on Feminism:
I'd say the above shows it was somewhat a product of it's time (as I said above); rather than a concerted effort to re-educate. You could try to argue the same for the present, but the fact that we have agencies who try to make things "more inclusive" in modern day society is proof of a minor attempt to re-educate.
I am -not- saying there was never an attempt to keep women down, but values change in time. Many believed in them, both men and women. Nowadays, it would be facetious to claim there aren't dogmatic "educators" who try to "re-educate" men/whites/"Cis" people/etc, which was my point. I was not saying it never happened in the past.
Heck, even Queen Victoria; lauded as the ruler of the Empire, said this on Feminism:
I'd say the above shows it was somewhat a product of it's time (as I said above); rather than a concerted effort to re-educate. You could try to argue the same for the present, but the fact that we have agencies who try to make things "more inclusive" in modern day society is proof of a minor attempt to re-educate.
I am -not- saying there was never an attempt to keep women down, but values change in time. Many believed in them, both men and women. Nowadays, it would be facetious to claim there aren't dogmatic "educators" who try to "re-educate" men/whites/"Cis" people/etc, which was my point. I was not saying it never happened in the past.
You do realize that I only used ChatGPT to give me the idea of the allegory, right ? The allegory itself holds up on its own mate, it's basic enough for you to understand.
Don't you "sophistry" at random lol
If you can't understand that level of allegory, really, you are lost mate.
If there was not people who try to attack other people for who they are, there would be no need to educate the population on representation mate.
Don't you "sophistry" at random lol
If you can't understand that level of allegory, really, you are lost mate.
If there was not people who try to attack other people for who they are, there would be no need to educate the population on representation mate.
No matter how many times you use the word "mate" nobody will find you relatable.
You're screaming into the void. Your allegory does not hold up. The narrative is flawed; and you are most certainly trying to deceive others into believing your point of view.
Your allegory is based on oppression politics, on a hierarchy of struggle, which I categorically disagree with. Suffering is not a competition. I too have suffered homelessness, physical and psychological abuse, and medical malpractice, but I won't say abusing me is worse than abusing those who haven't experienced it. Yet you say somehow that laughing at, or deriding Christians, is right but doing the same to Jews and Muslims is wrong because of so-called 'oppression'.
Your views are malice disguised as sympathy. Envy masquerading as righteous indignation. You're a cretin, and the sad thing is, you cannot even see it.
You're screaming into the void. Your allegory does not hold up. The narrative is flawed; and you are most certainly trying to deceive others into believing your point of view.
Your allegory is based on oppression politics, on a hierarchy of struggle, which I categorically disagree with. Suffering is not a competition. I too have suffered homelessness, physical and psychological abuse, and medical malpractice, but I won't say abusing me is worse than abusing those who haven't experienced it. Yet you say somehow that laughing at, or deriding Christians, is right but doing the same to Jews and Muslims is wrong because of so-called 'oppression'.
Your views are malice disguised as sympathy. Envy masquerading as righteous indignation. You're a cretin, and the sad thing is, you cannot even see it.
What's it like to be super privileged and have an easy life based on the above?
When you prime an AI with false information, based on your own subjective view of reality, then of course it will churn out what you want it to say. It matters not how solid a logical argument is if it's founded on an unstable foundation.
Ergo, your argument was sophistry from the start.
For the assistance of those who believe it just "fancy words" please find the definition of sophistry: the use of clever but false arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.
You used religious figures as an allegory to strengthen your argument, but it's a false narrative. Not that I expect you to listen or even comprehend something outside of your own world view.
Post automatically merged:
When you prime an AI with false information, based on your own subjective view of reality, then of course it will churn out what you want it to say. It matters not how solid a logical argument is if it's founded on an unstable foundation.
Ergo, your argument was sophistry from the start.
For the assistance of those who believe it just "fancy words" please find the definition of sophistry: the use of clever but false arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.
You used religious figures as an allegory to strengthen your argument, but it's a false narrative. Not that I expect you to listen or even comprehend something outside of your own world view.
Ok Mate
Nop
Oh, so you are denying sociology now I guess ?
You are the only one here who is making it into one.
Are you using the oppression you suffered to say that others should suffer too ?
You are speaking to a mirror mate.
This allegory was enough for me to reason and understand the problem with mocking muslims and Islam when I was in my islamophobic phase.. At least I tried..
Nop
Oh, so you are denying sociology now I guess ?
You are the only one here who is making it into one.
Are you using the oppression you suffered to say that others should suffer too ?
You are speaking to a mirror mate.
This allegory was enough for me to reason and understand the problem with mocking muslims and Islam when I was in my islamophobic phase.. At least I tried..
Ok Mate
Nop
Oh, so you are denying sociology now I guess ?
You are the only one here who is making it into one.
Are you using the oppression you suffered to say that others should suffer too ?
You are speaking to a mirror mate.
This allegory was enough for me to reason and understand the problem with mocking muslims and Islam when I was in my islamophobic phase.. At least I tried..
Nop
Oh, so you are denying sociology now I guess ?
You are the only one here who is making it into one.
Are you using the oppression you suffered to say that others should suffer too ?
You are speaking to a mirror mate.
This allegory was enough for me to reason and understand the problem with mocking muslims and Islam when I was in my islamophobic phase.. At least I tried..
Post automatically merged:
Ban the overt - enable the subversive. I know, my dude.