I don't know.. I tried literally everything on this thread, from disrespect to empathy and study flooding... I tried EVERY techniques I know. It seems like no matter what I do, it's just impossible for them to listen to me. It's like there is a invisible wall that can't be crossed.

And YET.. I've crossed that wall many times. I deradicalized from SO MANY conservatives and hurtfull ideologies.. so I'm SURE there is a way to get people like Ravager or Nameless to listen.. I just don't know what it is.

In those past two comments. I'm really genuine, there is absolutely zero attempt to disrespect. I'm simply trying to convince them. I'm trying the common denominator to start from that. There is 9 out 10 chances that he will laugh at my post. So I need to speak to the 1/10. But that.. I don't know how to do.

Now.. If someone knew that, this would create peace on earth... so I get that it is not an easy task.

:josad:

But I can't really give up the challenge.
Well, I think it would be better framed not as them listening to you, or listening to your ideology, but as us seeing what is good, it's up to each of us to decide what that is and follow it,
 
I swear I see so many restrictions and draconian enforcement of rules in forums that are left leaning when it should be the exact opposite if the "workers" (the members in the forum) in question actually owned the production.

You'd think the rules and implementation of those rules would be more lenient in a left-leaning place but no, they're even stricter, somehow. Just because the members in there are complacent about it =/= they have guaranteed rights on what they could do without risk of constant intervention.
My experience irl with left leaning people is very negative. They are usually incompetent, envious, lazy and dishonest people. I don't expect any good from a gathering of such people, be it online or not.
Post automatically merged:

And YET.. I've crossed that wall many times. I deradicalized from SO MANY conservatives and hurtfull ideologies.. so I'm SURE there is a way to get people like Ravager or Nameless to listen.. I just don't know what it is.
You simply need to speak the truth, be honest and have takes that make sense to make me agree with you. You have failed so far.
 
And YET.. I've crossed that wall many times. I deradicalized from SO MANY conservatives and hurtfull ideologies.. so I'm SURE there is a way to get people like Ravager or Nameless to listen.. I just don't know what it is.
How did you do it for yourself ? Was it instantaneous ? Did it come from someone or your very self ?

Do you believe in changing people's minds on a weeb forum while the weebs probably have their own surroundings ? Wether it's relatives or their internet algorithm keeping them close to their ideologies ? In the end, how could you change people when there is pretty much no free-will ?
 

AL sama

Red Haired
How did you do it for yourself ? Was it instantaneous ? Did it come from someone or your very self ?

Do you believe in changing people's minds on a weeb forum while the weebs probably have their own surroundings ? Wether it's relatives or their internet algorithm keeping them close to their ideologies ? In the end, how could you change people when there is pretty much no free-will ?
:milaugh::milaugh:
 

Uncle Van

Taxes Are a Sickness
I understand, but the World is not our problem.

If anybodies disconnected from reality, it is you mate. Just because you spout out these words doesn't make them fact. Just spinning lies.

"And republicans are telling even more lies. that's what you can see." A statement that again is just vapid and empty nonsense. Sure Parties can lie, Individual people can lie. What lies? Just Lies? Lie lie lie lie. Maybe instead, You hear truths you don't like and in your head consider them as lies, Mate that's just running from the truth like a coward.

You say Systemic Racism yet never provide concrete evidence of it, Just wishful thinking that there's something there, I.E. Conspiracy bullshit.
American's have the opportunity to make something of themselves, Sure not everyone is on equal footing, That's an impossibility. Stop day dreaming about a fantasy that could never actually happen.

Also I find it funny, Some fucking white frenchie dude is basically saying what the black rapper is saying is wrong... GD bruh your optics are wrong.
Systematic racism is a real thing. He's just, like in almost every topic, terrible at explaining it. One of the reasons it's terrible is because he's unable to debate with others as people, but instead talks down to them as misguided individuals not listening to his truth.
 
No, you're just taking things way out of proportion.
Expected of you.
Well.. It takes a mountain to make someone change their mind. My goal was to see if I can change yours. So I needed to put the effort in.


You'd think the rules and implementation of those rules would be more lenient in a left-leaning place but no, they're even stricter, somehow.
I have a lot of things to say to the moderation. But really, they are not restrictive. It can be a bad but also a good thing.


Well, I think it would be better framed not as them listening to you, or listening to your ideology, but as us seeing what is good, it's up to each of us to decide what that is and follow it,
If we had waited for people to find out what is good, we would still be in feodalism. Some things needs to be taught, some things need to be understood.

You can't expect someone who lives in a conservative background to suddenly understand out of the blue why materialism and intersectionnality. There are material condition that prevent those people to understand those concept, so it's OUT job on the left to explain and educate the masses on the notion that will make the world a better place.

And yes, it means that there are better values than others. There is no such thing as relativity in politics.


You simply need to speak the truth, be honest and have takes that make sense to make me agree with you. You have failed so far.
What you don't understand is that I've always be honest to limit with you guys. I've literally been taking my life as a constant example to make you understand that I come from ideologies similar or close to yours and therefore I KNOW that they are wrong and I have things to prove.

So I know for a fact:
- That you guys are wrong
- That there is a way to make you understand

I simply do not have the tool to do that.

-----------

I've failed, yes. Now, I would like to know one thing. Through a simple epistemologic question, that has always been ignored until now.

What would it take for you guys to reconsider your beliefs ?


> Logically. If you say "nothing". You should be understanding right here that you are under the influence of a sectarist ideology.


How did you do it for yourself ? Was it instantaneous ? Did it come from someone or your very self ?
Complicated...

At the very beginning, I think I discovered some content that made me questionned everything I knew. I was in a metaphysical journey at the time, very naive and completely defenseless in term of critical thinking. So once I did this.. well I doubted about everything without restrain.. and I fell into complotism quickly.

I went so deep into doubt that I doubted about my own life and the nature of complotism itself. Doubt send me to complotist but I went so deep into the process that I circled back. In other words I did this:

"I don't know what I believe" > "I should doubt everything" > "Wait the illuminatiiii !" > "Am I real ?" > "Yes I'm real" > "Isn't complotism a way to manipulate us ?" > "Wait complotism is nonsense"

What is interesting here, is that complotism was not really important for me. What was at the time was the nature of reality. I wanted to understand my world because I had a frustration of not understanding anything about it.

I felt first in complotism and later in some far right ideas and later in some Islamophobic one and later in some liberal one.. I always had in mind to make progress toward the reality of the world in a progressive way, so I tried to check a lot of things to verify - like complotism - how much I was close to this reality. And through trial and error with the help of activist, datas and Science, I progressed toward leftism:

- Esoteric complotism
> Deep state complotism
> Antisemitic complotism (at a time when I wanted to understand why Israel had a treatment of favor from France politics and medias)
> Libertarianism
> Liberalism
> Leftism
> Antimeritocratic leftism
> Materialistic leftism
> Radical leftism

All the ideas before the one I have right now failed the examination of reality. They have always been disproven in general and for me. They simply either do not work to understand the world or are hurtfull.

So.. to answer your question. The willingness of the process comes from me, but it only works in reaction to things that people have said or show to me.

I change because I allow myself to change.

For ex. Right now, I'm not allowing myself to radicalize rapidely toward the left. Because it would be a bit too fast, I just come from a radicalization. This is a tought subject and I don't want to make mistakes. But there will come a point where I will allow myself to be open on ideas I might not really be confortable about and it could change my mind.. or not.

I know that I now have the mindset to understand the reality of the world, I simply lack the clear vision on the way it could be changed.

Do you believe in changing people's minds on a weeb forum while the weebs probably have their own surroundings ?
It's a challenge. See it more like an exercice for me.

Changing his mind will not change the world of this forum, but it might allow me to understand how this process works and give me tools to replicate it in other situations.

In the end, how could you change people when there is pretty much no free-will ?
That's the big question.. I need to figure out what is the right button to switch. I know that there is at least one or we would be incapable of learning. So it's a question of trial and error.

Macron saying that Netanyahu "shouldn't forget that his country was created by the UN" :kuzanshut:
One good point in seven years. I guess we have to be thankfull..

He's just, like in almost every topic, terrible at explaining it.
Okay. I can take that critic.

It might be true, I might actually be horribly bad at explaining the concept. Now.. that's not the cases of other leftists.. and explaining is something that I have done AFTER sharing good and helpfull content on the matter.

So I get that noone can understand me. I can even accept that. But not everyone else whose work I'm sharing constantly.

One of the reasons it's terrible is because he's unable to debate with others as people, but instead talks down to them as misguided individuals not listening to his truth.
I'm not here to debate. Systemic racism is not a debate, it's a scientific fact. Studies should be enough to make everyone understand. But it's not enough so I share also video of vulgarization on the topic... but it's not enough so I need to explain the concept in detail.

Debate has no places in matter like this one.

The reality is that I'm not bad at explaining. It's you guys that are bad at accepting that some things are not debatable and therefore bad at listening.
 
@Logiko I am writing a comment replying to your comment, but I would like to say, I think it may be good to change topics a bit, becauze these messages are getting so big it's taking a bit to scroll through them, and we can come back to it in a bit, what do you think?,
 
I wasn't talking about this place, but rather somewhere else.
I see. That's because there is something called the right and the system that exist. Those forum would not need those rules if the system was positive. People there actually agree to those rules, not against themselve, but as a protection.

Without those rules and strong value, the place would turn out like the system.. like Worstgen.

It doesn't mean that all rules are good, but usually, those rules have reasons to exist.


@Logiko I am writing a comment replying to your comment, but I would like to say, I think it may be good to change topics a bit, becauze these messages are getting so big it's taking a bit to scroll through them, and we can come back to it in a bit, what do you think?,
It's ok. I think I've said what I needed on the subject.

But writing big post is kinda my signature. I can't really stop myself

:robinsweat:
 
"I don't know what I believe" > "I should doubt everything" > "Wait the illuminatiiii !" > "Am I real ?" > "Yes I'm real" > "Isn't complotism a way to manipulate us ?" > "Wait complotism is nonsense"
No offense but the part in which you're questioning your very own existence sounds like mental illness.

Maybe for your case ignorance hadn't led you toward far-right ideas. But you were just tricked.

Or at least this is some part of it.


That's the big question.. I need to figure out what is the right button to switch. I know that there is at least one or we would be incapable of learning. So it's a question of trial and error.
You should check out on sociology of changing people's minds. It's probably a thing. As a matter of fact, I just searched that and it seems like facts don't change people's minds. Sometimes it's just not enough.
 

Uncle Van

Taxes Are a Sickness
Okay. I can take that critic.

It might be true, I might actually be horribly bad at explaining the concept. Now.. that's not the cases of other leftists.. and explaining is something that I have done AFTER sharing good and helpfull content on the matter.
You're bad at explaining things because you can't do it without assuming someone else's moral compass and talking down to them. That gives people a reason not to listen to you.

So I get that noone can understand me. I can even accept that. But not everyone else whose work I'm sharing constantly.
Everyone understands you actually. It's just when the things you say is flooded with fallacies or things simply untrue, you talk down to them insinuating that you're smarter than them. In turn, people don't have a reason to listen to you.

I'm not here to debate. Systemic racism is not a debate, it's a scientific fact. Studies should be enough to make everyone understand. But it's not enough so I share also video of vulgarization on the topic... but it's not enough so I need to explain the concept in detail.
Debate is one of the most basic, simplest, and mandatory ways of reaching people. If you can't even find some common ground with someone, you can't even start to convince anyone of anything. You choose to throw negative connotations on their way of life(that you assume about) which makes them dismiss whatever you have to say.

The reality is that I'm not bad at explaining. It's you guys that are bad at accepting that some things are not debatable and therefore bad at listening.
And here, you once again put the blame on everyone else instead of yourself. It's one of the reasons people say you have no self awareness. You have a reputation of being preachy and a massive hypocrite, and since you always put the blame on everyone else, you just prove their point which gives them even more reason to not listen to you.

Ravager and Nameless for example have listen to me before, and I've convinced them on some more left leaning talk, but they don't give a damn about you even when you say the same thing, simply because you don't treat them as people.
 
Without those rules and strong value, the place would turn out like the system.. like Worstgen.

It doesn't mean that all rules are good, but usually, those rules have reasons to exist.
Alternatively, the availability of exclusive information on a site can also explain why a large number of people remain complacent with posting there, even if the rules in place may or may not be applied fairly, if there aren't any alternative sites that they can migrate elsewhere to.
 
No offense but the part in which you're questioning your very own existence sounds like mental illness.
No offense taken.
There was a moment of derealization at one point indeed. It was a bad mental state conditionned by a stressfull period for me due to a number of personnal things that I won't developp. So this place of intense doubt was also helped by my mental state.

Now, it doesn't means that everyone must do what I did. Too much doubt is not good. Really not pleasant and difficult to recover from.


Maybe for your case ignorance hadn't led you toward far-right ideas. But you were just tricked.
In a sence yeah.. but by the algorithms, this movement toward far right ideas was helped by a number a various things that I was seeing on youtube at the time. It lead me to be off on a large number of subjects.

Ignorance also helped. I had no knowledge of any political things at the time so I could be molded very easily.


You should check out on sociology of changing people's minds. It's probably a thing.
Good idea ! I might. I already I understood a few important things because of this:


Stuff like this content might help us understand how to make a difference.


I just searched that and it seems like facts don't change people's minds. Sometimes it's just not enough.
It wouldn't be surprising. That's why I often tries, instead of talking about facts, to talk about the values behind opinions or ask questions like "What would you need to question your belief system ?" which is a technique of street epistemology.

If they answer me "science".. then we have a common ground.. but when they don't take science seriously, there is not much to do..

You're bad at explaining things because you can't do it without assuming someone else's moral compass and talking down to them. That gives people a reason not to listen to you.
Oh... this again ? This is tiring..

Mate, if you can't understand that similar political opinions and philosophical values are regrouped behind certains political groups or institutions, we are not gonna make any progress.

Everyone understands you actually. It's just when the things you say is flooded with fallacies or things simply untrue, you talk down to them insinuating that you're smarter than them. In turn, people don't have a reason to listen to you.
Talks down, yes. Maybe. i've said it, I take a volontary arrogant shape to protect myself.

Flooded with fallacies ? No. Sadly for you, not at all. What I say is the result of the work of other people. And i'm always careful to repeat this work with care, details and no fallacy. And when I don't know, like in the discussion that I have with Blax about anarchism and communism, I ask questions and do not assume anything. I can make mistakes, but those are exceptions.

I'm not smarter than Ravager or Nameless, i'm simply for informed on various political and scientific subjects. And on different of those subjects, there is no debate to have.

In turn, people don't have a reason to listen to you.
Fair. Then listen to the work of those I promote.


Debate is one of the most basic, simplest, and mandatory ways of reaching people.
Yes. For things that need to be debate. We do not debate if the earth is flat, we debunk it. We do not debate if Gun create less violences, we debunk it.

When studies have proven some points, there is no debate to have.

Also, and that something that peple like you don't understand, debating with problematic ideas gives them a place and legitimize them as legitimate idea to debate. It displace the overton windows toward problematic vision and opinion and the marginalize more rationnal behaviors.

And this should not happen. All opinions should not be debated.


If you can't even find some common ground with someone, you can't even start to convince anyone of anything.
And that's the problem. There is none. When people refuse to listen to science, there is no common ground to debate on.


You choose to throw negative connotations on their way of life(that you assume about) which makes them dismiss whatever you have to say.
I never attack the personnal life of people. I only attack the opinion shared and the behaviors. And yes, when those opinions are negative, don't expect me to think that their way of life is positive.

Again, we don't live in a world where people with hardcore conservative ideas can just think outside of the box by themselves (the same works in reverse for people like me). Political opinions LIKE behaviors and experiences are the result of material conditions and environmental pressure.

It's time to stop believing in the myth of the lonely positive cow boy.

And here, you once again put the blame on everyone else instead of yourself.
Indeed. Because I scratched the others possibility.

If people were coherent and indeed refused to listen to me while being rational people, they would be at least understanding the power of basic scientific researches. Those researches that I'm constantly flooding this thread with and which are all over The Leftist library.

BUT

Those guys refuse those evidences. They refuse even to consider as scientific the study that I share.

Which means that the problem is not me not explaining well enough or my arguments being bad or my behavior being arrogant, it's the behavior of those people that are not willing to listen to anything remotely rationnal.

So.. yeah. People here have a problem at listening. Which is exactly what Mathias is saying when he says that it is sometimes explained that people, even in front of facts, will have hard time accepting it.


It's one of the reasons people say you have no self awareness.
And here it's you not understanding that I do.

We can throw the ball at each others for hours like that. :kayneshrug: So.. how do we stop this ? Well, we look at who has the facts on their side, and who refuses to listen.

My arrogance is only an excuse for you guys to protect yourself from self-questionning. You don't need me to refuse the data I provide. You have denied their legitimacy long before I arrive.

and a massive hypocrite
Oh ? That's new. Hypocrite on what exactly ? Do you understand the meaning of this word ?

:snoopy:



and since you always put the blame on everyone else, you just prove their point which gives them even more reason to not listen to you.
I think you have an observation problem lol
Those guys actually keep on proving my point.


Ravager and Nameless for example have listen to me before, and I've convinced them on some more left leaning talk, but they don't give a damn about you even when you say the same thing, simply because you don't treat them as people.
And the cat is green...

Mate, they are closer to you politically than you from me. Of course they will listen to you.

simply because you don't treat them as people.
Well, that might be why I'm constantly attacked by those guys on my mental condition ?
or
Why people like you and them keep on gaslighting the F out of me and lying about most of the things I say btalantly or deforming things factually?
or
Why i've been insulted like CRAZY by guys like this on this forum or even had death threats sent to me while still trying to discuss ?


Poor snowflakes..

"I don't treat them as people" ?.. You guys see three labels and someone saying "you are wrong" and you panic. Meanwhile I have to tank the negativity of this forum and I STILL MANAGE TO NEVER INSULT ANYONE and be respectfull of not crossing any line and be empathic EVEN when a person is being the biggest deepsh*t toward me and completely and REALLY dehumanize me by literally question my personnal life and my existence.

Y'a un moment où il va falloir arrêter de se foutre de ma gueule.

The moment I will start to give you (my political opposant here) back 10% of what you ACTUALLY gave me on this forum when I was actually not trying to be respectfull, then yes, you will be able to tell that I'm negative or problematic or don't treat people as people. But this will be so violent that I will be instant Banned.

You, Van, keep talking about my lack of self awareness but you don't even realize the CONTROL that I manage to developp everyday while replying here to people who are literally looking at me like a parasite.

It's ok. I don't mind. I signed this contract when I came on this forum with the mindset of doing something about the negativity. But really, you are not the genius you think you are by trying to make me look like someone who dehumanizes people here.
 

Uncle Van

Taxes Are a Sickness
No offense taken.
There was a moment of derealization at one point indeed. It was a bad mental state conditionned by a stressfull period for me due to a number of personnal things that I won't developp. So this place of intense doubt was also helped by my mental state.

Now, it doesn't means that everyone must do what I did. Too much doubt is not good. Really not pleasant and difficult to recover from.



In a sence yeah.. but by the algorithms, this movement toward far right ideas was helped by a number a various things that I was seeing on youtube at the time. It lead me to be off on a large number of subjects.

Ignorance also helped. I had no knowledge of any political things at the time so I could be molded very easily.



Good idea ! I might. I already I understood a few important things because of this:


Stuff like this content might help us understand how to make a difference.



It wouldn't be surprising. That's why I often tries, instead of talking about facts, to talk about the values behind opinions or ask questions like "What would you need to question your belief system ?" which is a technique of street epistemology.

If they answer me "science".. then we have a common ground.. but when they don't take science seriously, there is not much to do..


Oh... this again ? This is tiring..

Mate, if you can't understand that similar political opinions and philosophical values are regrouped behind certains political groups or institutions, we are not gonna make any progress.


Talks down, yes. Maybe. i've said it, I take a volontary arrogant shape to protect myself.

Flooded with fallacies ? No. Sadly for you, not at all. What I say is the result of the work of other people. And i'm always careful to repeat this work with care, details and no fallacy. And when I don't know, like in the discussion that I have with Blax about anarchism and communism, I ask questions and do not assume anything. I can make mistakes, but those are exceptions.

I'm not smarter than Ravager or Nameless, i'm simply for informed on various political and scientific subjects. And on different of those subjects, there is no debate to have.


Fair. Then listen to the work of those I promote.



Yes. For things that need to be debate. We do not debate if the earth is flat, we debunk it. We do not debate if Gun create less violences, we debunk it.

When studies have proven some points, there is no debate to have.

Also, and that something that peple like you don't understand, debating with problematic ideas gives them a place and legitimize them as legitimate idea to debate. It displace the overton windows toward problematic vision and opinion and the marginalize more rationnal behaviors.

And this should not happen. All opinions should not be debated.



And that's the problem. There is none. When people refuse to listen to science, there is no common ground to debate on.




I never attack the personnal life of people. I only attack the opinion shared and the behaviors. And yes, when those opinions are negative, don't expect me to think that their way of life is positive.

Again, we don't live in a world where people with hardcore conservative ideas can just think outside of the box by themselves (the same works in reverse for people like me). Political opinions LIKE behaviors and experiences are the result of material conditions and environmental pressure.

It's time to stop believing in the myth of the lonely positive cow boy.


Indeed. Because I scratched the others possibility.

If people were coherent and indeed refused to listen to me while being rational people, they would be at least understanding the power of basic scientific researches. Those researches that I'm constantly flooding this thread with and which are all over The Leftist library.

BUT

Those guys refuse those evidences. They refuse even to consider as scientific the study that I share.

Which means that the problem is not me not explaining well enough or my arguments being bad or my behavior being arrogant, it's the behavior of those people that are not willing to listen to anything remotely rationnal.

So.. yeah. People here have a problem at listening. Which is exactly what Mathias is saying when he says that it is sometimes explained that people, even in front of facts, will have hard time accepting it.



And here it's you not understanding that I do.

We can throw the ball at each others for hours like that. :kayneshrug: So.. how do we stop this ? Well, we look at who has the facts on their side, and who refuses to listen.

My arrogance is only an excuse for you guys to protect yourself from self-questionning. You don't need me to refuse the data I provide. You have denied their legitimacy long before I arrive.


Oh ? That's new. Hypocrite on what exactly ? Do you understand the meaning of this word ?

:snoopy:




I think you have an observation problem lol
Those guys actually keep on proving my point.



And the cat is green...

Mate, they are closer to you politically than you from me. Of course they will listen to you.


Well, that might be why I'm constantly attacked by those guys on my mental condition ?
or
Why people like you and them keep on gaslighting the F out of me and lying about most of the things I say btalantly or deforming things factually?
or
Why i've been insulted like CRAZY by guys like this on this forum or even had death threats sent to me while still trying to discuss ?


Poor snowflakes..

"I don't treat them as people" ?.. You guys see three labels and someone saying "you are wrong" and you panic. Meanwhile I have to tank the negativity of this forum and I STILL MANAGE TO NEVER INSULT ANYONE and be respectfull of not crossing any line and be empathic EVEN when a person is being the biggest deepsh*t toward me and completely and REALLY dehumanize me by literally question my personnal life and my existence.

Y'a un moment où il va falloir arrêter de se foutre de ma gueule.

The moment I will start to give you (my political opposant here) back 10% of what you ACTUALLY gave me on this forum when I was actually not trying to be respectfull, then yes, you will be able to tell that I'm negative or problematic or don't treat people as people. But this will be so violent that I will be instant Banned.

You, Van, keep talking about my lack of self awareness but you don't even realize the CONTROL that I manage to developp everyday while replying here to people who are literally looking at me like a parasite.

It's ok. I don't mind. I signed this contract when I came on this forum with the mindset of doing something about the negativity. But really, you are not the genius you think you are by trying to make me look like someone who dehumanizes people here.
Uhhheee....

2 Quick questions: do you even know my political stance? Do you even know my personal values?
 
During the Trump campaign of 2016 there was definitely a lot of manipulation with algorithms on YouTube, Facebook and internet as a whole. This was fully demonstrated by stuff like Cambridge analytica.

Also asking people what are their values and what should you do to make them change their minds is way too direct imo. But yes you have to find that out
 
Uhhheee....

2 Quick questions: do you even know my political stance? Do you even know my personal values?
While you might have evolved on certain subjects, I feel like I have a little idea yeah:

1. You made fun or rant multiple times about people like me who "ridiculizes" leftism for people. I think I remember you telling me something similar one day.

> This means that from the get go, I can say two things :
A - You are not a radical leftist (because I'm really not some kind of alien, my stance are actually not spectacular and my behavior also)
B - You don't understand radical leftism (even if you might know the history of it)


2. You systematically ridiculized my attempts to stop transphobia on this section. Judging that there was no transphobia, that I was not understanding the word etc.

> This means that you are definitely not on the side of people who suffer from it, worse, you are against those who question the problem (and yes, there was, it was really not something subtil and I'm sure that if I talk about the subject again, it will come back). This alone could put you on the category of conservatist, but let's not jump the gun.

3. On a thread where I tried to warned you about someone making an apology of Nazi and scientific racism rethoric, you went I tried to explain to me that I needed to let the guy talk. Then went on to express that:
Racial differences are facts.
When:
A. It's wrong, there is no such thing as "races"
B. It comes from scientific Racism, which is the base of Nazi Rethoric and basically the historic base for racism.

> This along should put you BEYOND nameless on the political spectrum... but LET'S SAY that I'm tolerant and I'll not judge you on one.. or even two very problematic opinion:

4. You are delivering high end meritocratic rethoric, and refuses to understand or even accept the notion of respect for people in difficult situation such as obesity, as I explained here:

Here you proudly explaining how "woke" (I suppose) are telling people that they are perfect the way they are and that society needs to change to accommodate them instead of telling them that they have the power to "improve yourself and the sky is the limit"

The second pattern that you seems to want people to be told about (instead of woke sh*t I suppose) is that people can just improve themself and that the sky is the limit. This is the CORE IDEOLOGY of Liberalism which takes its roots in the philosophy of the enlightened and the old school Kantian belief that one can achieve greatness out of themself and their own mind thus completely forgetting the impact of the societal structure they are appart of. This is basic self development methodology.

This is the basis of the myth of Meritocracy!

This is why capitalism is so strong yet so oppressive and why meritocracy will never exist. Simply because this is NOT how reality work as explained in THIS VIDEO. (there are other contents about Meritocracy and sociology in the library)
> This straight up shows a pro-meritocratic vision (and yes, you are trying to deny it, but you have delivered this defense of meritocratic and pro self development all over the place) and therefore a very Liberal way to see the world. Which by defaut put you AT BEST in the center right.

5. You ridiculize people who want change, you refuse to aknowledge negativity, you gaslight and lie constantly or deform argumentation that you don't or refuse to understand.

> These are common techniques used by people like Nameless or Ravager. So let's say that this makes you closer to them than leftism or even rationnalism.

6. As shown here, not only you do not understand Patriarchy or feminism, but you even used the feminist arguments that I used and DEFORMED THEM to throw me under the bus to make me look like that I was making fun of suicidal men because they were men..

You openly mocked people committing suicide because "Who cares. They're men!
> For a random radical leftist that doesn't know you, this type of lie and rethoric deformation, but also the fact of saying that to someone who literally dealt with the condition,would put you INSTANTLY on the same side and same political group as people like Nameless who think that people like me are parazites.

But let's say that I can't judge you on one or two and or even THREE very problematic opinions or behavior.. So I will NOT put you on the same side as them because you have an actual knowledge of political history, and you make some interesting point sometimes.. But, since you clearly are not a radical leftist and have clearly anti-progressist and pro statu co views. ("the extrems are bad, the center is the rationnal way" etc..)

... for me, you are on the idealist side, somewhere between Macron and Bernie. Meaning AT BEST on the progressive side of liberals and at worse on the conservative side of liberals, with a touch of confusion of course. I would not call you a conservatives, but you clearly not a leftist.

The fact that we oppose and we clash so much is a simple reflection of the incompatibility within our philosophy.


Also asking people what are their values and what should you do to make them change their minds is way too direct imo
Careful, I'm not asking them what I should do to change their mind. What I'm asking is :"what would be needed for them to change their belief system ?"

Some people will say "an event in my life", "a relative that change their minds" or "a scientific study" etc. It can be a whole lot of things, It doesn't need to be me.

The importance here, is to know our own limits in our knowledge, the reason why believe something rather than something else and make the person question the basis for their own belief system.

"I trust science"
"Ok here is a sociological study"
"Sociology is not a science"
"Why do you think that ?"
"Because it's run by leftist"
"So you do not trust science then"

Etc.. This is a common discussion that I had here. Sadly.. this doesn't make people realize their contradiction. They have a premisse and contradict this premisse at the same time and yet... they say things like ....

>>

A reply made after I shared this type of content:



And I'm the one who speak nonsense... lol
 
Last edited:

Uncle Van

Taxes Are a Sickness
Welp...there goes my post limit for a bit...

While you might have evolved on certain subjects, I feel like I have a little idea yeah:
My opinions on subjects never changed though. The closest thing is Isareal-Palestine which was something I knew nothing about.

1. You made fun or rant multiple times about people like me who "ridiculizes" leftism for people. I think I remember you telling me something similar one day.
You're once again using yourself to represent leftist as a whole. And just because I disagree with the methods of people who fancy themselves leftist, doesn't mean I'm against leftism itself. T

> This means that from the get go, I can say two things :
A - You are not a radical leftist (because I'm really not some kind of alien, my stance are actually not spectacular and my behavior also)
B - You don't understand radical leftism (even if you might know the history of it)
A. I'd be called a radical leftist by definition with the changes I support though.
B. I literally explained the history and necessity of radical leftism and you agreed with it if I remember correctly....

2. You systematically ridiculized my attempts to stop transphobia on this section. Judging that there was no transphobia, that I was not understanding the word etc.

> This means that you are definitely not on the side of people who suffer from it, worse, you are against those question the problem. This alone could put you on the category of conservatist, but let's not jump the gun.
I disagreed with your attempts to get Zenos7 punished or watched for simply using words correct by defintion. That does not mean I don't support trans people or their rights, and saying such outright contradicts my posts about them. This is such an extreme exaggeration and reaching on your end.

3. On a thread where I tried to warned you about someone making an apology of Nazi and scientific racism rethoric, you went I tried to explain to me that I needed to let the guy talk. Then went on to express that:
I'm a moderator. I wanted the guy the elaborate so I could decide the exact punishment. I never said he was okay or supported what he said so...

When:
A. It's wrong, there is no such thing as "races"
B. It comes from scientific Racism, which is the base of Nazi Rethoric and basically the historic base for racism.

> This along should put you BEYOND nameless on the political spectrum... but LET'S SAY that I'm tolerant and I'll not judge you on one.. or even two very problematic opinion:
You're deliberately attributing scientific facts with Nazism as a scare tactic. Race does exist. The human race for example. Climate differentiates the human race in many ways, one of them being those with lighter skin tones being more susceptible to skin cancer.

4. You are delivering high end meritocratic rethoric, and refuses to understand or even accept the notion of respect for people in difficult situation such as obesity, as I explained here:
You're assuming I don't understand or refuse to accept? You're once again exaggerating and trying to correlate your assumptions with what I said. We were talking about something very specific, which is the method of telling people they are perfect and everyone else the problem, appeals to narcissists. How does saying that correlates to me believing obese people deserve no respect, I do not know.

> This straight up shows a pro-meritocratic vision (and yes, you are trying to deny it, but you have delivered this defense of meritocratic and pro self development all over the place) and therefore a very Liberal way to see the world. Which by defaut put you AT BEST in the center right.
As mentioned before, you exaggerate and assume what I believe with specific circumstances, and try to correlate it to a broad spectrum.

5. You ridiculize people who want change, you refuse to aknowledge negativity, you gaslight and lie constantly or deform argumentation that you don't or refuse to understand.
Sounds like you're once again using yourself to represent everyone else. And I would always post links to prove whatever I said about you. With me, you heavily exaggerate.

6. As shown here, not only you do not understand Patriarchy or feminism, but you even used the feminist arguments that I used and DEFORMED THEM to throw me under the bus to make me look like that I was making fun of suicidal men because they were men..
Yeah no. I was specifically talking about you laughing off posts about men's struggles which included high rate of suicide. That doesn't correlate to not understanding patriarchy and feminism in the U.S.

But let's say that I can't judge you on one or two and or even THREE very problematic opinions or behavior.. So I will NOT put you on the same side as them because you have an actual knowledge of political history, and you make some interesting point sometimes.. But, since you clearly are not a radical leftist and have clearly anti-progressist and pro statu co views. ("the extrems are bad, the center is the rationnal way" etc..)
Never said nor implied that the center was the rational way. And extremes is not the same as being a radical. Once again, you assume and exaggerate what I think.
 
Top