Why are you watching an hour and a half soy boy debate? What do you think you’ll actually fucking prove? It’s like if I asked every liberal to read Stirner, and then one of them actually did it to spite me. I wouldn’t actually care.
Democrats already proposing austerity before DNC even ends
- Thread starter Eacaraxe
- Start date
I was bored and wanted more ammunition from Kim to attack Biden on.
Also, I only watched 1 hour 15 minutes, questions I didn't care for.
It’s an argument about voting and the sanctity of democratic institutions, so maximum.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,985
- 3,847
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Not really, voter turn out tends to be rather low, I mean technically most people do vote, but its still only 55% and that is for presidential elections. Its usually lower for midterms and much lower for local/state elections.
So what you're saying is that we have to ally with Iran against the Great Satan? OK.
Half this country's population of eligible voting age doesn't vote. That's a flexible definition of most. I'm angry too, dude, but I actually regret when I take it out on other people.
Sadly, I don't think most people engage with media so much as they consume. Case in point:
One can describe their worldview as like some character irrespective of the larger work that surrounds that character because there is no particular reason a character in a work shouldn't have a more reasonable position than that advanced by the work itself. Finding some phrases that summarize one's view on a particular question is not an indication of shallowness. That you and Buyetyen are looking for a reason to be dismissive doesn't change that.
Counterpoint: if your world view can be contained in a meme, you didn't put enough thought into it.
Also, when you miss the point of the media you're quoting, the people who did get it are going to see you as less credible.
Liberal fetishization of complexity even about very narrow questions such as how one should treat the idea of tactical voting will never cease to be amusing.
Ok, I totally disagree with the idea that a lesser evil isn't obviously preferable to a greater one, and missing the context of the quote isn't ideal, but, eh, the idea is more important than the fictional circumstances of the fictional character that said it.
It's also that the distinction between "lesser" and "greater" evil is rarely clear, evil is deceptive and a self-fulfilling prophecy that begets more evil, hasty action in the face of incomplete information leads to tragedy, and people don't make the choice consciously but have it forced upon them.
Or did you forget the "innocent people" Geralt killed and for whose deaths he earned his title, were the ones responsible for the Tridam ultimatum to begin with?
Many people mistake shallowness for simplicity or elegance. I've made that mistake too. Anyone who claims not to have is a liar.
On the other hand, someone who read the book can construct an effective counterargument. Personally, I don't recommend quoting sources out of context, even if it is just to express a single idea, because you set yourself up.