Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
You think too highly of yourself. Reborn even stated I'd been cooking you for the past day.
I was insulting you during your previous demeanour. Don't tell me you forgot the full page of satire that even had Van amused?
Ignore him. Children need to learn that adults won't bow to their antics. I'd suggest reading a book. Try: Sex and Character - Otto Weininger, 1903. There are PDFs for it online.
I was insulting you during your previous demeanour. Don't tell me you forgot the full page of satire that even had Van amused?
Ignore him. Children need to learn that adults won't bow to their antics. I'd suggest reading a book. Try: Sex and Character - Otto Weininger, 1903. There are PDFs for it online.
Lmfao, did you even read your own article? The article said Fernando was liberal, which he wasn't; his ideology is social democracy. The article also said Lula is a nationalist statist. The current guy calling the shots is Lula.
He is a communist. Always has been. He started the Foro de São Paulo (Latin American communist forum) alongside Hugo Chávez. He is allied with Chavez, Maduro, Evo Morales, Fidel, Putin, Xi, and other commie rats.
On top of that, he is extremely corrupt and was arrested for multiple corruption scandals. His pals in the Supreme Court nullified his sentences, claiming processual reasons. He is also linked to a chain of political assassinations too.
Now he and his criminal Supreme Court judges are undermining elections, illegally going after opposition members, and currently holding Bolsonaro captive.
His irresponsible administration has raised all kinds of taxes, created record-high public spending, and increased inflation like never before. Granted, inflation has improved these past few months. Still, public spending is a major problem under his administration.
He is a corrupt cretin, a horrible public administrator, and a COMMUNIST.
I would advise you to carefully research about Latin American politics if you were not a commie larping as a Christian. Fuck off. YOU KNOW SHIT ABOUT BRAZIL!
He is a communist. Always has been. He started the Foro de São Paulo (Latin American communist forum) alongside Hugo Chávez. He is allied with Chavez, Maduro, Evo Morales, Fidel, Putin, Xi, and other commie rats.
On top of that, he is extremely corrupt and was arrested for multiple corruption scandals. His pals in the Supreme Court nullified his sentences, claiming processual reasons. He is also linked to a chain of political assassinations too.
Now he and his criminal Supreme Court judges are undermining elections, illegally going after opposition members, and currently holding Bolsonaro captive.
His irresponsible administration has raised all kinds of taxes, created record-high public spending, and increased inflation like never before. Granted, inflation has improved these past few months. Still, public spending is a major problem under his administration.
He is a corrupt cretin, a horrible public administrator, and a COMMUNIST.
I would advise you to carefully research about Latin American politics if you were not a commie larping as a Christian. Fuck off. YOU KNOW SHIT ABOUT BRAZIL!
Last edited:
"Otto Weininger, born on April 3, 1880, in Vienna and who died in the same city on October 4, 1903, was an Austrian philosopher and writer. In 1903, he published *Geschlecht und Charakter* (Sex and Character), a book that became popular after his suicide at the age of twenty-three. Since then, this work has frequently served as a reference for antisemitic propaganda"
"Otto Weininger, born on April 3, 1880, in Vienna and who died in the same city on October 4, 1903, was an Austrian philosopher and writer. In 1903, he published *Geschlecht und Charakter* (Sex and Character), a book that became popular after his suicide at the age of twenty-three. Since then, this work has frequently served as a reference for antisemitic propaganda"
Hitler used many things as 'proof' that Jews were bad, things that weren't that way.
The interesting thing about the book is Mr. Weininger's views on the domains of the masculine and feminine. He actually finished the book and concluded that he was, by his own view, 'too feminine' and offed himself. Anyone who cares about such discourse would give it a go. It's a dense read though.
My guy, you are literally using a Wikipedia article to claim you know more about Brazilian politics than a native Brazilian.
Wikipedia is shit. It isn't an accurate and reliable source of information. Any moron can edit those articles. You even misread the article. lol
It doesn't get any more retarded than that. Now I see why you and Ilogiko suck each other's dicks so much; you are cut from the same cloth.
So much for the nice guy facade. Now we can trash you like the moron you are without feeling any pity for you, bastard. I don't give a shit about your friends either.
Wikipedia is shit. It isn't an accurate and reliable source of information. Any moron can edit those articles. You even misread the article. lol
It doesn't get any more retarded than that. Now I see why you and Ilogiko suck each other's dicks so much; you are cut from the same cloth.
So much for the nice guy facade. Now we can trash you like the moron you are without feeling any pity for you, bastard. I don't give a shit about your friends either.
Last edited:
Perhaps I would find this:
"In his book *Sex and Character*, Weininger asserts - and attempts to prove scientifically - that all human beings are composed of a combination of masculine and feminine substances. The male aspect is characterized as active, productive, conscious, and moral/logical, while its female counterpart is passive, unproductive, unconscious, and amoral/alogic. In this sense, the masculine/feminine duality is a version of the traditional metaphysical duality of spirit and flesh."
"In his book *Sex and Character*, Weininger asserts - and attempts to prove scientifically - that all human beings are composed of a combination of masculine and feminine substances. The male aspect is characterized as active, productive, conscious, and moral/logical, while its female counterpart is passive, unproductive, unconscious, and amoral/alogic. In this sense, the masculine/feminine duality is a version of the traditional metaphysical duality of spirit and flesh."
Perhaps I would find this:
"In his book *Sex and Character*, Weininger asserts - and attempts to prove scientifically - that all human beings are composed of a combination of masculine and feminine substances. The male aspect is characterized as active, productive, conscious, and moral/logical, while its female counterpart is passive, unproductive, unconscious, and amoral/alogic. In this sense, the masculine/feminine duality is a version of the traditional metaphysical duality of spirit and flesh."
"In his book *Sex and Character*, Weininger asserts - and attempts to prove scientifically - that all human beings are composed of a combination of masculine and feminine substances. The male aspect is characterized as active, productive, conscious, and moral/logical, while its female counterpart is passive, unproductive, unconscious, and amoral/alogic. In this sense, the masculine/feminine duality is a version of the traditional metaphysical duality of spirit and flesh."
Trust me, if a US marxists uses an article to debunk the reality of the state of precarity and marginalization in France against a voter of Le Pen, I will trust the marxist far more than any kind of BS given by the LePen voter
Just so you know, confirmation bias is a tool of survival, it can be both good and bad depending on what you do with it.
I've experienced first hand that, unchecked, confirmation biases will lead you inevitably toward a form of reactionnarism. Now, this doesn't mean that you don't have to use it. In fact just like it can be usefull for survival, confirmation biases are also usefull politically when you need to check an information rapidly (this is a tool I uses quite often here).
Now, the trick is to UNDERSTAND that we are using it and CONTROL it. This comes only after being deeply aware of ourselves and learning how we function and what informations we tend to be susceptible of eating without attention.
For example, I'm highly susceptible to emotionnal reactionnarism. Mainly because I can't erase completely the way I have constructed my thinking process in the past. So I keep that in check, always.
As for information like this one (trusting a marxist more than a french man), it all comes down to a simple calculus of the viability of the information.
I know from experience that people on the far right spectrum will give me little to no viable informations, so in the balance, if I compare them to a marxist, even in the US, I have a lot more chances to agree with the marxist, so the result will be me trusting the US marxist far more than the french bigot.
It's not about tribalism, it's about the experience of oneself
I've experienced first hand that, unchecked, confirmation biases will lead you inevitably toward a form of reactionnarism. Now, this doesn't mean that you don't have to use it. In fact just like it can be usefull for survival, confirmation biases are also usefull politically when you need to check an information rapidly (this is a tool I uses quite often here).
Now, the trick is to UNDERSTAND that we are using it and CONTROL it. This comes only after being deeply aware of ourselves and learning how we function and what informations we tend to be susceptible of eating without attention.
For example, I'm highly susceptible to emotionnal reactionnarism. Mainly because I can't erase completely the way I have constructed my thinking process in the past. So I keep that in check, always.
As for information like this one (trusting a marxist more than a french man), it all comes down to a simple calculus of the viability of the information.
I know from experience that people on the far right spectrum will give me little to no viable informations, so in the balance, if I compare them to a marxist, even in the US, I have a lot more chances to agree with the marxist, so the result will be me trusting the US marxist far more than the french bigot.
It's not about tribalism, it's about the experience of oneself
Last edited:
