Powerful people are the only ones that hold other powerful people accountable, and sometimes, powerful people are not all on the same team.
So, that said, when's the last time decent humanity, won the day? Brexit? Trump in 2016? The Heller decision in the U.S.? Luke Skywalker on the Mandolorian? They dropped a remake of The Princess Bride? George Zimmerman found not guilty? NFL and NBA and Oscars ratings are in the toilet?
Drop me some white pills folks. I'm glad the audit is going on in AZ, as a start.
Not an argument. Either answer the questions, prove me wrong, or don’t bother replying again. You’re a waste of time if you can’t even hold a conversation.
Don't try that S. Molineux bs on me. You post a shrill wall of text with some rhetorical questions peppered in the middle and then try some high school debate tactics when I tell you to chill.
Let me try again, charitably.
The provision for our defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. Men are not angels, and angels do not govern men.
Only powerful people can oppose other powerful people. But powerful people are not always on the same side. Sometimes the interests of the powerful align with freedom and human dignity, thus, sometimes the good guys win, even if they powerful people are only in it for themselves. Or, in rare cases, there are actually virtuous people in power. In a classic example, think of Cincinnatus.
So yes, sometimes the good guys win. If I listed to all the faggots on this board and took everything said to heart, I'd think that Cincinnatus was bribed, a Jewish 5th column, and the foreign invasion that Rome had to repel was an inside job.
It’s a concept that only brain damaged cowards can’t understand. I don’t care what you have to say if you can’t even substantiate your own goddamn claims. There’s nothing to talk about otherwise.
Translation: “I am projecting my own emotions onto others because the truth hurts my feelings.”
Translation: “I am too lazy and stupid to read something that takes under two minutes to read.”
Real questions. I want answers.
Answer the questions or don’t reply. Prove your own claims or don’t reply. Disprove a word that I have said or don’t reply. Have an actual argument or don’t reply.
Why do you think anyone gives a shit what you have to say if you can’t even SUBSTANTIATE it?
Translation: “I’m too weak and pathetic to accept truth when it goes against my narrative, so I’ll pretend to have the moral high ground (despite not believing in morality itself) in a vain effort to save face and show smug superiority to someone who has blown me the fuck out.”
EXISTENTIAL. THREAT.
If you don’t understand why this is the case, either do more research or ask someone. It is, in fact, an existential threat. Your lack of knowledge thereof does not change the nature of the threat.
Yeah, you said that already. The question in response to the statement remains in the aforementioned post, waiting for you to answer it. Your inability to answer it proves that you’re utterly unwilling to entertain even the possibility of effective solutions to the threat presented.
I repeat the aforementioned first question, this time toward a new subject–that being instances of said alignment in the last 75 years.
This was never in question. If you’d actually read the reply, you’d probably not be saying this as though it was. The questions you were asked were very specific. They had modifiers in them for a reason.
True enough, yes. Now answer the questions I asked or don’t bother replying again.
I am overwhelmed by your knowledge of HTML as much as your inability to be concise and clear.
I suspect you think you "win" a lot of online debates this way.
Translation: “I’m not only too fucking stupid to comprehend how the formatting on this website works, I actually fucking think that I can hide my sheer incompetence and inability to hold a discussion, answer questions, provide an argument or citations, or accept anything other than my predetermined brainwashing by misdirecting and attacking someone based on his fucking text formatting rather than the contents of his statements.”
Translation: “I am too stupid to understand sentences of more than 10 words, therefore no one can understand them because I am god himself and my solipsism is all that matters.”
You are proving literally everything I have said about you. You’re exactly what everyone knows you are. Not even trying to hide it. So much so that you’re going to reply to this post, not because you have anything to add, any refutation to what I said, any ability to answer any questions about your own beliefs, or any capability to articulate an argument of your own, but rather because you’re compelled to, either by your employers or your clinically defined mental illness.
Do as I say. Reply.
-TallestSkil circa 2021
"jeffrey epstein didn't rape anybody!"
Sure, faggot
Stormfaggot uses screech. It's not very effective