Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei must go gaolang > your fav 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
- the unlawful use of violence or threats to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government, with the goal of furthering political, social, or ideological objectives.
false dichotomy
oversimplified and complete lack of nuance is realistic? bruh you cant be serious
can i take this as you walking back the statement?
wtf?
i have no interest in publishing anything. but publishing shit doesnt necessarily have anything to do with being an intellectual or not lmao.
Post automatically merged:
oversimplified and complete lack of nuance is realistic? bruh you cant be serious
Post automatically merged:
can i take this as you walking back the statement?
Post automatically merged:
wtf?
i have no interest in publishing anything. but publishing shit doesnt necessarily have anything to do with being an intellectual or not lmao.
Thus not a riot.
Do as you please
Nop
There is no nuance to have here. When you have enough to own a building, you have enough to feed your family if the building comes down. Stop with the capitalistic relativism.
No. I was disagreeing with you here.
Nop, people are not good or bad, they only do good or bad things.
You don't need to. I'm just taking note of the one who do, and the ones who don't :)
Do as you please
Nop
There is no nuance to have here. When you have enough to own a building, you have enough to feed your family if the building comes down. Stop with the capitalistic relativism.
No. I was disagreeing with you here.
Nop, people are not good or bad, they only do good or bad things.
You don't need to. I'm just taking note of the one who do, and the ones who don't :)
Last edited:
unless said riot has a goal of furthering political/ideological objectives. then it fits the definition of terrorism perfectly
Yep
of course there is. some people who own a building can lose it over financial struggles, or maybe own it based on loan, or even if they fully paid for the building can struggle financially after that so they have problems feeding their family.
there is always nuance, and you thinking there is none is exactly the issue with most of your posts.
the world isnt black and white. you are pumping out false dichotomy fallacies everywhere
so you insist on me either being confusionist or right wing?
Yep
of course there is. some people who own a building can lose it over financial struggles, or maybe own it based on loan, or even if they fully paid for the building can struggle financially after that so they have problems feeding their family.
there is always nuance, and you thinking there is none is exactly the issue with most of your posts.
the world isnt black and white. you are pumping out false dichotomy fallacies everywhere
so you insist on me either being confusionist or right wing?
Hm no ?
nop
Aw .. poor things.. that must be so hard. Damn, it must be life crushing..
Not in that case no. Sorry but I won't cry for a building owner. And you are the one making a fallacy here.
Right now, what I can say for sure is that you are falling into capitalist mythos. You are literally defending building owner and comparing that to people who can't feed their family, it's disgusting.
nopAw .. poor things.. that must be so hard. Damn, it must be life crushing..
Not in that case no. Sorry but I won't cry for a building owner. And you are the one making a fallacy here.
Right now, what I can say for sure is that you are falling into capitalist mythos. You are literally defending building owner and comparing that to people who can't feed their family, it's disgusting.
Last edited: