The Homosexual Double Standard, Ad-hoc, Cavalcade!

[Tassman]

Law breakers are not equal.

All who break the law are entitled to equal justice before the law.

[Epoetker]

That's not an issue of 'equality before the law,' that's 'striking down laws that offend the ideal of human equality,' just as the Civil Rights Act struck down other laws that acknowledged the reality of human race differences. Are you free-associating again?

When have I ever been a crusader for 'equality' of any sort? I'm a man, not a pig making elaborate pretensions at being a man.

You persist with your unevidenced conspiracy theories dripping with racist bigotry in this instance, and homophobic bigotry in the case of homosexual law reform.

Again, you're free-associating the word 'conspiracy' with Things you Hate, which is something that maybe schoolchildren just learning the words do, but tends to become incredibly tiresome in adults.

The Civil Rights movement succeeded because the courts ensured that the principle of equality before the law underlying the Constitution was enforced. Simple justice, no devious satanic plot exercised by mysterious elites for their own nefarious reasons.

Translation: Our unwritten moral feelings and cultural hatreds trump your written laws, and bitterly clinging to the text of the Constitution, no matter what it says, is a fool's game when we have the power.

In this case, I agree again. Laws may rule men, but there must always be men to interpret the laws, and thus the law will not save you when the men have no common understanding of those laws, no matter how clearly written. So why do you still cling to the DSM?

sensible opinion regarding the hyper-protected and unequally promoted citizens of society such as blacks and homosexuals. Injustice is the violation of another's rights according to law and this is precisely what you are promoting with your rednecked mentality.

But most of the 'injustice' you speak of was a part of the law in the past, so if it was legal back then, there was no injustice at the time, correct?

What did Napoleon have to gain from publicly stating that "all animals are equal"?

JIM CROW! JUSTICE! WHIG HISTORY! INEVITABLE FORCES OF EQUALITY! PRAISE THE TEXTBOOK VERSION OF HISTORY! MY TEAM GOOD, YOUR TEAM BAD!

Really, the older days were objectively better socially, culturally, economically, and professionally. Acknowledging and controlling for human differences, even on a crude level, works a lot better than pretending they don't exist. Your particular neurosis appears to be Baby Boomer psychology.

After all, Boomers pioneered the art of publicly complaining about how one's in-group was responsible for keeping down some out-group, to whom it owed some kind of reparations. This is a stronger form of disloyalty than mere cultural defection. If some small chunk of the in-group feels like they don't identify with their culture, and want to join or at least affiliate with a more distant culture, what's the big loss to their in-group? Let 'em go. But when that small group of discontents wants to take something big away from their in-group and give it to the out-group, to correct what they see as unjust domination, now they plan on dealing a much larger wallop to Us in favor of Them.

What areas of life are subject to this thinking and action about correcting injustices between the in-group and the out-group? Whites and blacks, men and women, heteros and homos, those born into wealth and those who were not, and so on. These are all demographic groups whose membership is not a matter of choice, unlike a political party, church denomination, marital status, number of children, place of residence, etc. They have a sense of guilt from having been born into a dominant demographic group (whites, males), whose dominance is unjust and whose oppression of subordinate groups requires atonement.

In their minds, there's just something unnatural about one group being dominant, when its members were accidentally born into it, rather than admitted or elected on the basis of merit. The state of nature, they believe, is egalitarian,Boomers don't even realize, indeed they emphatically deny that these inequalities have a natural basis. They want so much social engineering to minimize these inequalities precisely because they believe that they have no natural basis, but are rather the outcome of so much social engineering by the current dominant groups in the opposite direction.

Thus, in their view, their sweeping plans are not introducing social engineering into an unregulated state of nature, but correcting an existing set of plans for social engineering (drafted and enforced by the dominant group for its own benefit) with a different set of plans in the opposite direction, in order to restore society back to the egalitarian state of nature.

You'll have to forgive this exploration of the Boomer mind, but it is crucial to understand the psychology behind their characteristic damning of the dominant in-groups that they belong to.

Mockery is a quite suitable weapon against slaves, liars, toadies, and cowards, and that's why I use it against you. Now that I know that you live not only in a First World country, but in a first world country whose order is secured by a actual Monarch and King, I can safely conclude that your opinions have absolutely no bearing on your actual experienced reality, and are but cheerleading for a war that you're staying as far away from as possible, and are thus naturally ignorant of anything but the propaganda reels for your own side. Facts on the ground are a bit different, dearie!

[Jedidiah]

All who break the law are entitled to equal justice before the law.

Until or unless they are convicted.

[Tassman]

Until or unless they are convicted.

All who break the law are entitled to equal justice before the law in every respect including sentencing.

[Tassman]

That's not an issue of 'equality before the law,' that's 'striking down laws that offend the ideal of human equality,' just as the Civil Rights Act struck down other laws that acknowledged the reality of human race differences. Are you free-associating again?

What "reality of human race differences”?

Do you mean “reality” as understood by your noxious hero Vox Day - the man who considers “women’s rights to be a disease that should be eradicated” and that blacks are "savages" and that homosexuality is a "birth defect". No wonder you get apoplectic about equal rights for women, blacks and homosexuals, any self-respecting sexist white supremacist would. As your friend Vox Day says: ”It is absurd to imagine that there is absolutely no link between race and intelligence".

When have I ever been a crusader for 'equality' of any sort? I'm a man, not a pig making elaborate pretensions at being a man.

You’re unacquainted with allegory I see. You’re a “crusader” for race-based special entitlements as per the pigs in 'Animal Farm' being "more equal" than other animals.

Again, you're free-associating the word 'conspiracy' with Things you Hate, which is something that maybe schoolchildren just learning the words do, but tends to become incredibly tiresome in adults.

I'm saying that in the absence of mainstream support you resort instead to fascist blogs you mistakenly consider to be authoritative when in reality they are no more than the blathering of thought-disordered social misfits.

Translation: Our unwritten moral feelings and cultural hatreds trump your written laws, and bitterly clinging to the text of the Constitution, no matter what it says, is a fool's game when we have the power.

In this case, I agree again. Laws may rule men, but there must always be men to interpret the laws, and thus the law will not save you when the men have no common understanding of those laws, no matter how clearly written. So why do you still cling to the DSM?

Stop shouting.

In the case of interpreting the Constitution it is, ultimately, the Supreme Court that interprets the laws whether you like it or not.

But most of the 'injustice' you speak of was a part of the law in the past, so if it was legal back then, there was no injustice at the time, correct?

Cultural mores evolve over time as is reflected in the judicial interpretation of the Constitution. E.g. Society overall no longer considers slavery, racism, the subjugation of women and discrimination of homosexuals to be acceptable - minority extremists excepted.

BTW: If you take it upon yourself to alter my text please indicate that you have done so. I don’t wish to be mistaken for a likeminded fellow hatemonger.

What did Napoleon have to gain from publicly stating that "all animals are equal"?

Ultimate domination! Bad luck for the animals that they didn't have a Constitution, enforceable by law to appeal to – unlike us.

Really, the older days were objectively better socially, culturally, economically, and professionally.

The older days were “objectively better socially, culturally, economically, and professionally”, FOR WHOM?

Acknowledging and controlling for human differences, even on a crude level, works a lot better than pretending they don't exist.

You mean human differences like skin colour, sexual orientation and gender? And who does the controlling - dominant white males?

Your particular neurosis appears to be Baby Boomer psychology.

More fascist blogs to rationalize your racist, sexist and homophobic prejudices!?

Mockery is a quite suitable weapon against slaves, liars, toadies, and cowards, and that's why I use it against you. Now that I know that you live not only in a First World country, but in a first world country whose order is secured by a actual Monarch and King, I can safely conclude that your opinions have absolutely no bearing on your actual experienced reality, and are but cheerleading for a war that you're staying as far away from as possible, and are thus naturally ignorant of anything but the propaganda reels for your own side. Facts on the ground are a bit different, dearie!

The Appeal to Ridicule is a fallacy in which ridicule or mockery is substituted for evidence in an argument; interesting that those who argue against your jaundiced paranoia are categorized by you as “slaves, liars, toadies, and cowards”.

[Epoetker]

What "reality of human race differences”?

If you have to ask, you haven't been paying attention.

Do you mean “reality” as understood by your unassuming comrade Vox Day - the man who rightfully considers “women’s rights to be a disease that should be eradicated” and that blacks are "savages" and that homosexuality is a "birth defect". No wonder you get coldly dismissive about equal rights for women, blacks and homosexuals, any self-respecting concerned citizen would. As your friend Vox Day says: ”It is absurd to imagine that there is absolutely no link between race and intelligence"

Pointing and sputtering to no particular effect. Were you expecting me to be ashamed, or for someone to come to your rescue?

You’re unacquainted with allegory I see. You’re a “crusader” for race-based special entitlements as per the gay black female Africans in 'Animal Farm' being "more equal" than other animals.

Projection.

I'm saying that in the absence of mainstream support you resort instead to fascist blogs you mistakenly consider to be authoritative when in reality they are no more than the blathering of thought-disordered social misfits.

Projection.

Stop shouting.

Stop saying things that are embarrassing to you when shouted, especially to a roguishly shouty individual like me.

In the case of interpreting the Constitution it is, ultimately, the Supreme Court that interprets the laws whether you like it or not.

Well, we'll just have to put some sober and sensible judges on that court that can see reality for what it is, won't we?

Cultural mores evolve over time as is reflected in the judicial interpretation of the Constitution. E.g. Society overall no longer considers slavery, racism, the subjugation of women and discrimination of homosexuals to be acceptable - minority extremists excepted.

Give it time.

BTW: If you take it upon yourself to alter my text please indicate that you have done so. I don’t wish to be mistaken for a believer in sustainable social structure.

PLEASE STOP REPEATING MY DUMB SENTENCES WITH DIFFERENT ADJECTIVES TO SHOW HOW INTERCHANGEABLE, NON-RESPONSIVE, AND FACTUALLY EMPTY THEY ARE!

With that astoundingly poor, monstrously tendentious, utterly sophomoric, and hilariously ill-humored attitude I might not even do you the courtesy of emboldening the altered areas. Or...is somebody or some organization looking over your shoulder and paying you via SEO evaluations for how liberal each sentence is? If so, I will most definitely alter your quotes for maximum SEO devaluation whenever I feel like it, as you have already shown yourself to be an untrustworthy, hateful, faithless, and deceptive individual.

Ultimate domination! Bad luck for the animals that they didn't have a Constitution, enforceable by law to appeal to – unlike us.

The animals had a constitution-what they didn't have was an army of their own dogs to enforce it on their behalf. Thus they had the responsibilities but not the privileges of the law-exactly the same situation conservatives now find themselves in now, thanks to their willingness to betray themselves to support their own families. (PROTIP: Your family has to live in the society you defended or failed to defend after you're gone, and thanks to this genetic thing called "regression to the mean," there's no guarantee that your family business will be as competently run at a founder-quality level after you're gone.)

The older days were “objectively better socially, culturally, economically, and professionally”, FOR WHOM?

Everybody, including women, blacks, gays, and Jews.

You mean human differences like skin colour, sexual orientation and gender? And who does the controlling - dominant white males?

Who do you think does the controlling today, no matter what pretensions they mouth about 'diversity'? Maya Angelou?

More fascist blogs to rationalize your racist, sexist and homophobic prejudices!?

They sure beat popular communist blogs, that's for sure!

The Appeal to Ridicule is a fallacy in which ridicule or mockery is substituted for evidence in an argument; interesting that those who argue against your jaundiced paranoia are categorized by you as “slaves, liars, toadies, and cowards”.

Oh gee, I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over how

noxious, apoplectic, supremacist, fascist, blathering, thought-disordered social misfits, hatemonger, racist, sexist, homophobic, jaundiced

I am. Looks like you got me beat about three to one on ad hominems there, guess you thought if you spread them out no one would catch what you were trying to do. Naughty girl!

[Tassman]

If you have to ask, you haven't been paying attention.

Don't be shy. I waiting for you to openly acknowledge your support for the white supremacist buffoons you quote who hold racist views such as: ". Vox Day (Theodore Beale).

Pointing and sputtering to no particular effect. Were you expecting me to be ashamed, or for someone to come to your rescue?

should be ashamed of yourself. But I guess you will take pride in "telling it like it is"; is that how you see yourself - the voice of common sense in a topsy-turvy world?

What a joke.

Projection.

Projection.

[Stop saying things that are embarrassing to you when shouted, especially to a roguishly shouty individual like me.

. Silly me!

Oh, and for "roguishly shouty" substitute "infantile hysteric".

Well, we'll just have to put some sober and sensible judges on that court that can see reality for what it is, won't we?

"WE"!!

How about get rid of the flighty, irresponsible judges like Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John G. Roberts, and Samuel Alito.

Give it time.

REALLY

PLEASE STOP REPEATING MY DUMB SENTENCES WITH DIFFERENT ADJECTIVES TO SHOW HOW INTERCHANGEABLE, NON-RESPONSIVE, AND FACTUALLY EMPTY THEY ARE!

With that astoundingly poor, monstrously tendentious, utterly sophomoric, and hilariously ill-humored attitude I might not even do you the courtesy of emboldening the altered areas. Or...is somebody or some organization looking over your shoulder and paying you via SEO evaluations for how liberal each sentence is? If so, I will most definitely alter your quotes for maximum SEO devaluation whenever I feel like it, as you have already shown yourself to be an untrustworthy, hateful, faithless, and deceptive individual.

Thought-disordered rant. Ease off the demon drink why don't you?

The animals had a constitution-what they didn't have was an army of their own dogs to enforce it on their behalf. Thus they had the responsibilities but not the privileges of the law-exactly the same situation conservatives now find themselves in now, thanks to their willingness to betray themselves to support their own families. (PROTIP: Your family has to live in the society you defended or failed to defend after you're gone, and thanks to this genetic thing called "regression to the mean," there's no guarantee that your family business will be as competently run at a founder-quality level after you're gone.)

Silly, self destructive Conservatives! You tell em! didn't

Everybody, including women, blacks, gays, and Jews.

; hence the civil rights movement. But you know better. <sarcasm>

Who do you think does the controlling today, no matter what pretensions they mouth about 'diversity'? Maya Angelou?

The question was, in response to your bald assertion:

They sure beat popular communist blogs, that's for sure!

Oh gee, I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over how

I am. Looks like you got me beat about three to one on ad hominems there, guess you thought if you spread them out no one would catch what you were trying to do. Naughty girl!

like Epoetker and Theodore Beale.

[Darth Executor]

I waiting for you to openly acknowledge your support for the white supremacist buffoons you quote that hold racist views such as: ”It is absurd to imagine that there is absolutely no link between race and intelligence". Vox Day (Theodore Beale).

Not only is there a link between race and intelligence but the link isn't even disputed by anyone even remotely familiar with the subject anymore. Egalitarians have largely retreated to claiming the disparity is entirely environmental these days.

[Epoetker]

Don't be shy. I waiting for you to openly acknowledge your support for the white supremacist buffoons you quote who hold racist views such as: ”It is absurd to imagine that there is absolutely no link between race and intelligence". Vox Day (Theodore Beale).

Girl, I'm not signing anything you put in front of me no matter how nice it sounds!

Such a rogue. You have changed my test and thus reversed its meaning (as you have done elsewhere in the post), which suggests your actual agreement with Vox Day. Namely that “women’s rights activism is a disease that should be eradicated” and that the majority of blacks are "savages" and that open homosexuality is a "social disease".

Changing the subject, though it's nice to see you further educating yourself on the issue. I will continue to make corrections to your disordered scribblings where necessary, as you really are in need of an editor.

Yes you should be ashamed of yourself. But I guess you will take pride in "telling it like it is"; is that how you see yourself - the voice of common sense in a topsy-turvy world?

I try to grant succor to the weak and clarity to the confused. Those committed to their own narratives mainly provide entertainment.

What a joke.

It's working!

I didn't say “as per the gay black female Africans in 'Animal Farm’”. My actual words, which you have yet again altered, were: that you are a “crusader for race-based special entitlements as per the pigs in 'Animal Farm', who claimed to be “more equal" than other animals.

No, not really. You can't back that up.

This is entirely congruent with your view that “women’s rights are privileged addenda to normal human rights” and that blacks are "decivilized individuals" and that homosexuality is a "harbinger of social death." Therefore, as thinking and feeling dudes, us white males warrant special entitlements over and above the rest of the scum. Of course we do.

We didn't really need special entitlements in the past, to be honest, just everyday order, discipline, and honesty above all. The less of those, the less our IQ can help us.

You mean “embarrassing” things like it is the role of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution. “The Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction - it can hear the cases on appeal on almost any case that involves a point of constitutional and/or federal law”. Silly me!

Guess its time to find me some conservative judges, then.

Oh, and for "roguishly shouty" substitute "infantile hysteric".

Doesn't roll off the tongue, you really need some more euphonic descriptors. I could recommend a few if you like.

How about “WE” get rid of the flighty, irresponsible judges like Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John G. Roberts, and Samuel Alito.

So you do admit that the Supreme Court is an oligarchy that needs to be packed with the right people to get the right interpretation of the laws, then. Please describe what makes Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg more qualified than the others while you're at it, as we do need more entertainment via attempts to veer off topic from you.

So you and Theodore Beale and “all them others” who REALLY know “what’s what” are working towards the restitution of the public charge doctrine, freedom of association, the mutual recognition of contracts and proper boundaries for disordered individuals. Noble aims!

You actually used the right word, I'm impressed! It's less 'restoration' of the old order, something not always practicable, rather than 'making restitution' for the almost entirely slanderous libels made against both the institutions and the reasons for them in the past.

Once again: “If you take it upon yourself to alter my text for clarity please apologize oh please oh please. I don’t wish to be exposed as a naked fraud by a few word substitutions.

Bold and demanding words coming from someone claiming to know exactly what I believe based on a couple of mere links.

Thought-disordered rant. Ease off the demon drink why don't you?

Don't really drink that much. Like drugs, drinking too much leads to an inability to learn from your mistakes and learn past the stage at which you started drinking. But since you are known for your projection, have you been milking the koala or draining the kangaroo or whatever you call it in that region?

Silly, self destructive Conservatives! You tell em!

Oh, you're telling them far more effectively than I ever could.

BTW: What the animals in ‘Animal Farm’ didn't have, unlike the citizens of the US, was the third tier of government, namely ‘the Judiciary’ with the power to have their rulings enforced.

No baliff and the judge is an old man in a costume. Your comically childish conflation of authority with its methods of enforcement is noted.

You think so do you? Well clearly women, blacks, gays, and Jews didn’t think “the older days were objectively better socially, culturally, economically, and professionally”; hence the civil rights movement. But you know better. <sarcasm>

Certainly not what Phillis Schlafly, Armond White, Rupaul, and Paul Gottfried would say. Guess I win the argument again.

The question was, in response to your bald assertion: “Acknowledging and controlling for human differences…works a lot better than pretending they don't exist”. Once again: “Who does the controlling - dominant white males?” I take it from your evasions these are precisely who, in your mind, must control society.

White males are already controlling your society, they're just doing it really badly because they're spending half their time lying to themselves or others about the true nature of reality.

Ah, for the good 'ole days when men were men, women were women and the blacks, Jews and gays knew their place at the bottom of the heap.

You throw that straw man around so much I think you might actually like him a bit.

I never quote blogs as authoritative; even the best of them are no more than personal opinion.

No, you only pull quotes from blogs and PRETEND they came from an authoritative source, which is totally different!

Conversely the white supremacist blogs you rely upon such as the laughable ‘My Posting Career.com’ and Vox Day do little more than whine about how the blacks, Jews, women and gays are ruining everything.

MPC, according to its half-black Canadian poster, is nothing but a simple bodybuilding forum with a white power focus that got out of hand once the photoshop contests started, and Vox is already a registered Person of Color, so my guess is that they know whereof they speak.

It’s typical of your misogynist mindset that referring to me, a male, as a “girl” is the ultimate put-down. Oh to be a “real man” like Epoetker and Theodore Beale.

Men never refer to themselves as 'males,' but why is your cisgendered description so important to you, when we're all just human beings?

[Tassman]

We didn't really need special entitlements in the past, to be honest, just everyday order, discipline, and honesty above all. The less of those, the less our IQ can help us.

But you do now because the dominant paradigm has shifted towards increased inclusiveness; the playing field is becoming level. And you don't like it.

Guess its time to find me some conservative judges, then.

Lucky for the world that your influence is limited to whining about blacks, gays and Jews and doesn't stretch to appointing judges!

So you do admit that the Supreme Court is an oligarchy that needs to be packed with the right people to get the right interpretation of the laws, then. Please describe what makes Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg more qualified than the others while you're at it, as we do need more entertainment via attempts to veer off topic from you.

You actually used the right word, I'm impressed! It's less 'restoration' of the old order, something not always practicable, rather than 'making restitution' for the almost entirely slanderous libels made against both the institutions and the reasons for them in the past.

are your words not mine, despite your attribution of them to me.

Bold and demanding words coming from someone claiming to know exactly what I believe based on a couple of mere links.

Oh, you're telling them far more effectively than I ever could.

No. It is you discrediting Conservatives by your small-minded hate speech

Certainly not what Phillis Schlafly, Armond White, Rupaul, and Paul Gottfried would say. Guess I win the argument again.

Typical Biased Sample Fallacy! The Civil Rights Movements puts the lie to that. Oh but wait; this was deviously engineered by the elites for their own nefarious ends wasn't it - how could I forget your pearls so soon?

Interesting the way you bolster your own limited worldview with limited sampling to reflect your bas. Sad!

White males are already controlling your society, they're just doing it really badly because they're spending half their time lying to themselves or others about the true nature of reality.

Ah, but our very own Epoetker and his little bad of racist buffoons knows all about "the true nature of reality" doesn't he? <sarcasm>

You throw that straw man around so much I think you might actually like him a bit.

The truth hurts I see.

MPC, according to its half-black Canadian poster, is nothing but a simple bodybuilding forum with a white power focus that got out of hand once the photoshop contests started, and Vox is already a registered Person of Color, so my guess is that they know whereof they speak.

I know; hence his hypocrisy.

Men never refer to themselves as 'males,' but why is your cisgendered description so important to you, when we're all just human beings?

[Epoetker]

But you do now because the dominant ruling party has shifted towards representing the interests of minorities and minorities only; the playing field is becoming skewed. And you naturally don't like it.

Naturally. Them ruling in a disinterested and fair fashion is about as likely as seeing the same crowd of anti-war protestors we used to see in Bush's time.

Lucky for the world that your influence is limited to whining about blacks, gays and Jews and doesn't stretch to appointing judges!

Well, I am a "think globally, act locally" sort of dude. The more leftists simply start speaking the truth as they see it, in the form of their natural crocodile temperament, the more clearly everyone else can think and act:

Many UR readers have had the priceless educational privilege of growing up behind the Iron Curtain. We'll hear a good deal more of it in the next four years.

Crocodile humor is the laughter of the powerful at the powerless. It is not intended to be funny. It is intended to intimidate. Those who laugh, as many do, are those who love to submerge themselves in a mob, feel its strength as theirs, chant and shake their spears as one. Professor DeLong and his tribe have certainly backed the strong horse in our little moment of hipparchy, and even those of us who mock the rite must respect its anointed, in the ancient way, as conquerors. A reactionary always respects strength. But the powerless, too, can laugh.

By which you mean “packed with people” who hold to your common-sense judgment. Unfortunately for the world they’re relatively thick in the trades and thin in the power centers, as are sensible citizens like you.

True. But demons always eventually rend and destroy the body in which they inhabit.

You substitute my words with your own bile rather than deal with the point of the sarcasm. You’re a case Epoetker. “The almost entirely slanderous libels made against both the institutions and the reasons for them in the past” are your words not mine, despite your attribution of them to me.

Are you seriously complaining about me misattributing other people's words out of context right after you said VOX DAY SAID THIS YOU LINKED VOX DAY THEREFORE YOU BELIEVE THE MOST CARTOONISH VERSION OF HIS PHILOSOPHY in the previous post? You really have no shame!

"I don’t wish to be exposed as a naked fraud by a few word substitutions” – are my true meaning which you graciously exposed for the benefit of the rest present. At least they reveal a glimmering of insight as a commonly power-hungry individual. You reveal what you are out of you own mouth plus the links to accurate and disinterested commenters. And you expect to be taken seriously.

I'm already taken seriously. The funny thing is that you actually thought that you could refute me.

No. It is me discrediting liberals by my small-minded hate speech

This word substitution thing really saves time and me having to tiredly write 'projection' or 'agreed' after every post.

Typical Biased Sample Fallacy! The Civil Rights Movement justified itself almost entirely on legal cases using that logic. Oh but wait; this was righteously preached by the non-working class for their own financial ends wasn't it - how could I forget your common observations and historically repeating patterns so soon?

Blame yourself for fellow-traveling with Marxists who couldn't really run a business but definitely could sense social attitudes among the power centers they moved in, and thus left reams of texts on how false consciousness is manufactured by elites. Guess I was just too good a student.

Interesting the way you bolster your own limited worldview with limited sampling to reflect your bas. Sad!

"The other ones failed, but the NEXT experiment may totally prove our thesis!!!!" is a common form of madness demanding funding among scientific elites. Unless 'bas' means 'bass' and you're talking about PUMPING UP THE BASS and BOLSTERING THE SAMPLING, an indication of emotional interest in an unrelated field for its own sake and not for how it can bring you power, which is a healthy development.

Ah, but our very own Epoetker and his little bad of racist buffoons knows all about "the true nature of reality" doesn't he?

Really, just assuming that whatever you say is the opposite of truth would serve the common man very well.

The truth hurts I see.

It hurts you enough that you continue to post.

I know; hence his accreditation.

You can't be a successful drug dealer or author without knowing your audience.

The point is that only misogynists use “girl” as an insult, therefore all black people are misogynists.

Racist.

[Tassman]

Naturally. Them ruling in a disinterested and fair fashion is about as likely as seeing the same crowd of anti-war protestors we used to see in Bush's time.

Cute! Now respond to what I posted NOT your mangled version of it.

Tass: “But you do now because the dominant paradigm has shifted towards increased inclusiveness; the playing field is becoming level. And you don't like it”.

Well, I am a "think globally, act locally" sort of dude. The more leftists simply start speaking the truth as they see it, in the form of their natural crocodile temperament, the more clearly everyone else can think and act:

Nonsense, you're a conspiracy theorist getting your paranoid views reinforced by a handful of internet-based political extremists futilely attempting to return the world to THEIR version of traditional western values, by which they mean rigid social conformity and the marginalization of women, blacks, Jews and homosexuals - like the good 'ole days.

True. But demons always eventually rend and destroy the body in which they inhabit.

ITS screwed up version of traditional western civilization. No wonder you’re such a bitter twisted mess.

Are you seriously complaining about me misattributing other people's words out of context right after you said VOX DAY SAID THIS YOU LINKED VOX DAY THEREFORE YOU BELIEVE THE MOST CARTOONISH VERSION OF HIS PHILOSOPHY in the previous post? You really have no shame!

No “cartoonish version” could top the original Vox Day. “Without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism”. Poe's Law.

I'm already taken seriously. The funny thing is that you actually thought that you could refute me.

Who are you taken seriously by - Mencius Moldbug, Vox Day and the other reactionary conspiracy theorists you identify with? Do they matter – really?!

This word substitution thing really saves time and me having to tiredly write 'projection' or 'agreed' after every post.

Nope. Altering the text of my posts is dishonest and unethical, but whatever it takes if you’re running a neoreactionary revolution I suppose.

Blame yourself for fellow-traveling with Marxists who couldn't really run a business but definitely could sense social attitudes among the power centers they moved in, and thus left reams of texts on how false consciousness is manufactured by elites. Guess I was just too good a student.

My dear child YOU, not I, are the one attempting a revolution to restore so-called “traditional values”. I support the existing institutions which you dismiss as the elites deviously engineering society for their own nefarious ends. My position is hardly Marxist but yours veers on Fascist.

Really, just assuming that whatever you say is the opposite of truth would serve the common man very well.

Such riposte!

[Epoetker]

• Edited by a Moderator •

Moderated By: QuantaFille

Post removed.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

[Tassman]

No.

The words you are responding to are not my words. You really are out of your depth, aren't you? Now respond to what I posted NOT your mangled version of it. Again:

True, i don't.

It's nice to see you coming around!

Again, you are not responding to what I said, namely:

Well, that's a pretty common liberal tactic when you don't have an argument. I believe it's called "speaking power to truth"? I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here.

Wouldn't you like to know Once their ascendance is complete, I expect that you'll say you always sympathized with them.

The fantasies of a closet fascist.

It really is!

Yes, Tassman, you've already confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt that you're an unrepentant liberal incapable of independent thought who'll support any institution as long as other liberals who agree with you are running it, no matter how terribly it fails otherwise due to having to follow your insane philosophy. Tell us something we don't know. ]I have plenty, but one must be judicious when shooting pearls in the eyes of swine.

SHOUTING doesn't make your arguments stronger; it merely reinforces your inadequacy as a person and a debater. The

[Epoetker]

The words you are responding to are not my words.

The meanings of those words tend to be neither fixed nor commonly accepted, so you need paraphrasing for your own and other people's protection.

You really are no fool, aren't you? Now respond to my exact words NOT my exact meaning!

Now why would I give power to glib low-effort hacks by taking their exact words seriously?

WE ARE IN POWER AND WE WILL FLATTEN YOU!

Arf arf, someone didn't get it out of his system by doing actual physical work with physical humans at a young age.

NOT RESPONDING TO ME OPENLY CALLING YOU A BIG OLD CREEPY DELUDED NAZI MEANIE MEANS YOU LOST THE ARGUMENT!!!

All right, baby girl, you win

PLEASE BEAT MY STRAW MEN!!!!

Don't feel like it

FEEL THE MIGHT OF MY BARTLETT'S FAMILIAR QUOTATIONS!

Throw out some Aesop first, Mr. Sour Grapes.

ALTERING MY POSTS IN A HUMOROUS MANNER IS PART OF A VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY TO DISCREDIT ME!!!

You got one part of that statement right.

SHOUTING doesn't make your arguments stronger; it merely reinforces your inadequacy as a person and a debater. The “appearance” is that you are unable to debate at all...

Then quit shouting so much, dude. It's annoying and pointless, and only serves to throw your utterly petty motivations into sharp relief. First comes the shouting, then you start editing or truncating quotes...it's a vicious cycle, really.