Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Sure it doesn't. That's why you're disdain is not directed at the person spewing right-wing garbage all over the forum, but for the person calling him out for it.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
No, you claimed to be liberal, and when confronted, admitted to being a left-leaning centrist, which is a moderate.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Let's not, since no one asked, and no one cares.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
"SJWs" and "regressive left" are terms of right-wing ideologues. No one even to the right of center is concerned with SJWs. Those who do stand firmly on the right or the far-right.
What a retarded and sweeping generalization. There are numerous prominent left-wing figures such as Sam Harris, Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins, Dave Rubin, and Maajid Nawaz have used the term as well because they view this as a problem within the left, because they are mature human beings capable of criticizing the side of the political compass they fall upon when other people who identify with the left do retarded shit, and I'd expect anyone with an actual interest in supporting the left to be capable of that same self-reflection, because blindly ignoring the faults of certain ideologies that fall on the same side of the political compass as you is retarded.
Likewise, my friend King Joker is firmly left wing, and even he agrees SJWs are retards who say ideologically regressive shit and detract from the policies and political success of the left.
I may get into disagreements with Robtard and Bashar, but I can respect that they don't incorrectly try and diagnose my political opinion for me to try and make a statement.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Because it's pointless bickering that gets tiring to watch over and over and over again, and you are the ones instigating it. The fact that Surtur responds to this shit is irritating as **** too, but he's not the one going out of his way to start it and rant about "pretend victories" and shit.
Interesting. Most people would say the instigator is the person eliciting the responses you find so tiresome, and if he posted more responsibly, said responses would go away. But in your mind, the right-wing agitator is the victim of liberal bullies.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
I am a liberal who supports the ideological foundations of liberalism, however I'm simply not as left as you would like me to be. More of a classical liberal than a modern liberal but a liberal nonetheless.
A centrist is a moderate, regardless of which side he leans.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Well you were the one claiming I held right wing stances on every issue as your evidence that I'm right wing. And now that I've provided you a mountain of evidence to the contrary you're electing to ignore it and continuing to try and make me out to be right wing, despite my stances not aligning well with the right or republican party.
No, I question whether you are as liberal as you purport to be, and why you find it necessary to qualify your liberalism before taking a conservative position.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
So which is it? Am I moderately left wing or am I firmly or far right?What a retarded and sweeping generalization. There are numerous prominent left-wing figures such as Sam Harris, Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins, Dave Rubin, and Maajid Nawaz have used the term as well because they view this as a problem within the left, because they are mature human beings capable of criticizing the side of the political compass they fall upon when other people who identify with the left do retarded shit, and I'd expect anyone with an actual interest in supporting the left to be capable of that same self-reflection, because blindly ignoring the faults of certain ideologies that fall on the same side of the political compass as you is retarded.
Likewise, my friend King Joker is firmly left wing, and even he agrees SJWs are retards who say ideologically regressive shit and detract from the policies and political success of the left.
I may get into disagreements with Robtard and Bashar, but I can respect that they don't incorrectly try and diagnose my political opinion for me to try and make a statement.
I think you broadcast your political affiliation to try and score rhetorical points. No one cares what your actual political leanings are. It is only an issue because you bring it up, because you think it adds some value to your argument. I am merely trying to get to the bottom of why you think that is.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Interesting. Most people would say the instigator is the person eliciting the responses you find so tiresome, and if he posted more responsibly, said responses would go away. But in your mind, the right-wing agitator is the victim of liberal bullies.
Also "if he posted more responsibly"? What are you the ****ing thought police? lmfao. Somebody posting a political opinion you happen to disagree with when they are not attacking you personally does not make them an agitator. And I couldn't give a shit if you or him are right wing or left-wing, that doesn't change the nature or ramifications for your behaviors.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
A centrist is a moderate, regardless of which side he leans.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
No, I question whether you are as liberal as you purport to be, and why you find it necessary to qualify your liberalism before taking a conservative position.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I think you broadcast your political affiliation to try and score rhetorical points. No one cares what your actual political leanings are. It is only an issue because you bring it up, because you think it adds some value to your argument. I am merely trying to get to the bottom of why you think that is.
You for some reason have this idea stuck in your head that only "firmly or extremely right-wing people" criticize SJWs and that every time I criticism I make of them is me taking a conservative stance, which is quite frankly ridiculous because I've given you a slew of prominent figures on the left who criticize the parts of the left they believe to be regressive, because they believe the people with these regressive stances are a detriment to both the left and political discourse as a whole.
I consider myself a man who stands by his principles, and part of what that means is that I am willing and opening to criticizing regressive attitudes and unethical behaviors wherever I see them, even when they fall on the same side of the political spectrum as me, because if I claim to uphold a principle and apply it with a double standard based on whether or not somebody is right-wing or left-wing, then I'm not really upholding that principle.
So when I see members of the regressive left shutting down free speeches on college campuses by trying their best to get conservative speaker's platforms removed, when I see them wrongly labeling figures such as Ben Shapiro, Sargon of Akkad, and ****ing Justin Trudeau of all people as racist sexist bigots with no evidence to back up their assertions, when I see them calling for and supporting diversity quotas that promote equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity and are by nature discriminatory against certain groups of people based on their physical characteristics (and not just white people, Asians have also been unfairly hurt by college admission diversity quotas), when I see professors teaching that all white people are racist and that it's impossible for black people to be racist, when I see one of the BLM founders citing a cop murderer as one of her great sources of inspiration, when I see the Antifa group BAMN using violence to silence their political opponents (and yes BAMN is an organized group whose leaders have stated that violence and militant action are A GOAL of the organization) and websites such as everydayfeminism defend their political violence as necessary... well then you better ****ing believe I am going to stick by my principles and criticize these people just the same way as I would if they were right-wingers, because them being left or right wing does not change the fact that these attitudes and behaviors are wrong.
When I see stances from people on the left such as an excessive use of censorship which stands in opposition to the liberal value of freedom of speech, or stances supporting treating people in a collectivist and unequal way based on what group they happen to fall under rather than their own individual merits (such as affirmative action and diversity quotas that make what group a person belongs to outweigh their own individual merits, or the notion that all white people are racist and black people can't be racist) that stands in opposition to the liberal values of egalitarianism and individualism, arguments that "hate speech" should be illegal that stand in opposition to the liberal values of freedom of speech and liberty, those that actively enact or justify the use of political violence as standing in opposition to the liberal values of freedom of speech and bodily integrity and democracy, I view these left-wingers as holding ideological stances in direct opposition to liberal values, and so I criticize them.
Quite frankly, the fact that you expect me to judge Surtur as the instigator and you as the victims just because he's right wing and you're left wing, or that one cannot criticize regressive attitudes held by people on the left without being a firm or extreme member of the right spewing right wing agitation, basically that if I'm a true liberal I'm supposed to hold people to different standards of judgement based on whether or not they're left wing or right wing strikes me as a rather unprincipled double standard.
Originally posted by Surtur
Are you too much of a pussy to admit Robtard deflected to Trump first?But let me guess, that's different because reasons.
The first person to mention Trump in this thread was you; on page one in your second post, you sad little clown.
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=642408&pagenumber=1
Originally posted by Robtard
The first person to mention Trump in this thread was you; on page one in your second post, you sad little clown.http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=642408&pagenumber=1
Yes, and then the discussion moved away from it. So it's still a deflection.
Any other questions or comments?
Originally posted by Surtur
Not at all, my point is: you deflected. I was not wrong about that. So whether you did first, second, or 10th it does not change the overall fact you too deflected.
I think this post above clearly illustrates that you do not understand the meaning of 'deflection tactic', considering the fact that I don't like Le Pen and I didn't want her to win(I've made this clear before), so why would I actively "deflect" attention away from her crushing and hilarious loss in the thread about her loss? I wouldn't, sport.
eg every time you've posted a "but Clinton!" post whenever something shitty about Trump was topic as a means to distract away from Trump; that's a deflection tactic
Originally posted by Emperordmb
As far as I'm concerned yeah, you are the ones instigating this. He's making posts relevant to the SJW threads, actual relevant content to the discussion the topic was made for, and you are the ones subverting it with ***** fests all the time. If I actually paid much attention to the Trump threads and saw you making posts in there and saw him popping up and going "You guys are so obsessed and pathetic" and starting ***** fests with you every time you guys posted he'd be subject to the same scrutiny from me. Granted he may or may not be doing that, I don't know, I don't really pay as much attention to the Trump threads on here.
If? Open your eyes and take a look around! You are awfully quick to defend someone whose posting behavior you are admittedly unaware.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Also "if he posted more responsibly"? What are you the ****ing thought police? lmfao. Somebody posting a political opinion you happen to disagree with when they are not attacking you personally does not make them an agitator. And I couldn't give a shit if you or him are right wing or left-wing, that doesn't change the nature or ramifications for your behaviors.
Sorry, but if one regularly posts misinformation from propaganda sites and links to articles with sensational titles that he has not actually read—often to caricature his political opposition, distract from his inability to defend his position, or to deflect attention from an unflattering truth—because he is too lazy, stupid, or both to properly vet the information before posting it, then he deserves all the ridicule he receives for doing so—and if you want to defend that behavior, you will not be successful.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
I've only taken [b]one conservative position on this forum (abortion), and one position you construe for some reason as being inherently conservative (anti-SJWism)[/B]
Please see: Do “Real People” Worry About SJWs/Feminism?
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Quite frankly, the fact that you expect me to judge Surtur as the instigator and you as the victims just because he's right wing and you're left wing, or that one cannot criticize regressive attitudes held by people on the left without being a firm or extreme member of the right spewing right wing agitation, basically that if I'm a true liberal I'm supposed to hold people to different standards of judgement based on whether or not they're left wing or right wing strikes me as a rather unprincipled double standard.
No, I expect a fair-minded observer to conclude that the agitator in a given situation is the person whose behavior is inflammatory, and not those responding to him.
I also expect a reasonable person to apportion his concern to the matter of importance. The asymmetrical polarization of the parties in the United States has resulted in a far-right party, i.e. Republicans, and a center-left party, i.e. Democrats. No major party has been liberal in this country since the Democratic party shifted to the center in the 1990s. Ergo, the “regressive left” has no representation, much less influence in American politics. Never mind terms such as “regressive left” and “social justice warrior” being inventions of the far-right in and of themselves. One concerning himself with SJWs, which are unrepresentative of most liberals and whom have little political clout, while the opposing party is embracing actual fascists is stupidly myopic. I would expect a liberal to understand that.
Then again, you seem to have difficulty understanding what constitutes an actual double-standard in the same way you struggle to understand basic fairness.
You know, I seem to remember a couple years ago Ush making a post about how all threads and discussions about SJW's should essentially be closed because the term doesn't actually have a legit and clear meaning outside of demonizing a person that doesn't agree with a certain, generally right wing, point of view. Perhaps such a rule should be implemented again since it seems like half of the threads on this forum are making fun of SJW's, and the other half that aren't directly about them seem to derail into attacks on SJW's anyways.
Originally posted by BackFire
You know, I seem to remember a couple years ago Ush making a post about how all threads and discussions about SJW's should essentially be closed because the term doesn't actually have a legit and clear meaning outside of demonizing a person that doesn't agree with a certain, generally right wing, point of view. Perhaps such a rule should be implemented again since it seems like half of the threads on this forum are making fun of SJW's, and the other half that aren't directly about them seem to derail into attacks on SJW's anyways.