Not really, because I think you’re splitting hairs rather than answering my question. I called it right of centre and you called it right wing and you’re very very cross that I didn’t use your exact phrase, but you aren’t explaining what your phrases mean not why it’s important that I use them nor why you disbelieve in political centre. If your point all along was that there is no centre, maybe you should have said so earlier, and maybe you can find it in your heart to explain calmly why you believe what you believe and what you mean by the words you use instead of shouting at me for not already understanding when you consistently fail to explain.
Trying to understand your perspective is exhausting because you never answer my questions, never explain your reasoning, but instead get furious with me for not using the terminology you didn’t explain and for not already prebelieving the conclusions I’ve been challenging you to explain the rationale for, for two days now.
I begin to suspect that your position is that any party that doesn’t advocate for the abolition of money is necessarily far right and that making distinctions between them is counterproductive*, but you literally never said that and I’m having to deduce your position from how relatively cross you are about things I said. It’s neither very effective communication of ideas, nor a very persuasive debating technique, as I believe very few people who don’t already agree with you would have persisted this long or given you so many opportunities to explain.
*I disagree, and I think Trump is far, far worse than other presidents I’ve seen in the USA
Sigh. Nope. I give up. I tried very hard to get an explanation out of you, but it’s not happening any decade soon. I’ll ask my dog instead. He’s no more able to explain tankie reasoning than you are, and he’s just as likely to get distracted by irrelevant details, but at least he licks my hand instead of shouting at me when he doesn’t answer my questions.
I think you have a perspective on the world that I became interested in exploring and for some reason thought you might explain your position instead of insulting me for not already sharing. I was wrong. I give in. I won’t learn anything from you because rather than ever answering my questions or explaining your position, all I ever get is some rant about how awful I am based on some word we use differently.
I don’t understand by what mechanism you think communism eliminates hatred but all I get in response is bizzare nonsequiturs, rants, rhetoric, accusations and astonishment. At no point did you ever try giving a straightforward explanation.
If I ask my dog how we can eliminate hatred, he’ll probably go and bring me his lead, and yes, I can kind of see how he thinks that no one could possibly hate when they’re having a fantastic walk, but I’m not entirely sure it will eliminate all hatred, and I know full well he’s still going to growl at the terrier at number 35. I think he enjoys growling darkly at the terrier at number 35, and the terrier enjoys running along the fence and barking.
Some people think that if they become rich they will become happy, but I think they’re wrong. Being in desperate need definitely makes people unhappy, and we should definitely eliminate that unnecessary source of unhappiness, but happiness isn’t simply the absence of unhappiness, and universal love and mutual respect isn’t simply the absence of an exploitative capitalist elite.
Not really, because I think you’re splitting hairs rather than answering my question. I called it right of centre and you called it right wing and you’re very very cross that I didn’t use your exact phrase, but you aren’t explaining what your phrases mean not why it’s important that I use them nor why you disbelieve in political centre. If your point all along was that there is no centre, maybe you should have said so earlier, and maybe you can find it in your heart to explain calmly why you believe what you believe and what you mean by the words you use instead of shouting at me for not already understanding when you consistently fail to explain.
Trying to understand your perspective is exhausting because you never answer my questions, never explain your reasoning, but instead get furious with me for not using the terminology you didn’t explain and for not already prebelieving the conclusions I’ve been challenging you to explain the rationale for, for two days now.
I begin to suspect that your position is that any party that doesn’t advocate for the abolition of money is necessarily far right and that making distinctions between them is counterproductive*, but you literally never said that and I’m having to deduce your position from how relatively cross you are about things I said. It’s neither very effective communication of ideas, nor a very persuasive debating technique, as I believe very few people who don’t already agree with you would have persisted this long or given you so many opportunities to explain.
*I disagree, and I think Trump is far, far worse than other presidents I’ve seen in the USA
Really? Your attempt to justify your belief in reactionary propaganda is “splitting hairs?”
WHAT (supposed) “centre?”
WHERE is this (alleged) “centre” between left and right that you speak of?
Show it to me.
Sigh. Nope. I give up. I tried very hard to get an explanation out of you, but it’s not happening any decade soon. I’ll ask my dog instead. He’s no more able to explain tankie reasoning than you are, and he’s just as likely to get distracted by irrelevant details, but at least he licks my hand instead of shouting at me when he doesn’t answer my questions.
Don’t be angry at me. You could have avoided all of this. I give you the option of simply admiting that…
…remember?
Not angry, resigned.
I think you have a perspective on the world that I became interested in exploring and for some reason thought you might explain your position instead of insulting me for not already sharing. I was wrong. I give in. I won’t learn anything from you because rather than ever answering my questions or explaining your position, all I ever get is some rant about how awful I am based on some word we use differently.
I don’t understand by what mechanism you think communism eliminates hatred but all I get in response is bizzare nonsequiturs, rants, rhetoric, accusations and astonishment. At no point did you ever try giving a straightforward explanation.
If I ask my dog how we can eliminate hatred, he’ll probably go and bring me his lead, and yes, I can kind of see how he thinks that no one could possibly hate when they’re having a fantastic walk, but I’m not entirely sure it will eliminate all hatred, and I know full well he’s still going to growl at the terrier at number 35. I think he enjoys growling darkly at the terrier at number 35, and the terrier enjoys running along the fence and barking.
Some people think that if they become rich they will become happy, but I think they’re wrong. Being in desperate need definitely makes people unhappy, and we should definitely eliminate that unnecessary source of unhappiness, but happiness isn’t simply the absence of unhappiness, and universal love and mutual respect isn’t simply the absence of an exploitative capitalist elite.
Does your dog wield institutionalised power over the terrier at number 35?
Of course. What else could I possibly have meant?
What institution grants your dog this power?
Elbows.