I don’t think the question is to be taken that literally.

Thats how writing works.

However, you can still have an opinion about the overall organisation regardless of the nuance.

It’d be meritable if that person were six to eight years old.

Manipulating the audience doesn’t encourage good faith discussion.

Seatbelts - Gotta Knock a Little Harder

He always takes the bait. I think it’s funny.

Ignorance is bliss.

deleted by creator

But, squid, you don’t have any friends on the .ml mod team else you’d have already called in a favor.

Undergrad. You’ve no degree and no work experience. Perhaps the most important thing you’re going to learn from this project is humility.

All his conclusions and logical fallacy align with the neoliberal flavor of the day. Why the fuck would you start a discussion, squid, while claiming this isn’t the place to discuss? Typical.

You left out a core argument against high-priced art: A large proportion of transactions have the underlying intent of money laundering, illegal kickbacks, and tax avoidance.

Don’t tell him his shallow neoliberalism is flawed under penalty of bot down votes and ban. He’s not a healthy person.

deleted by creator

If the existence is a terroristic act how do you call farmers who breed these creatures on purpose?

Capitalists.

Our mass media can incite fear of chickens, pigs, and cattle. Then their existence itself can be defined as a terrorist act. We’ll redefine vegan to mean only those that eat terrorists to save the other animals. Actual vegans can call themselves “vegetablers”. Nothing changes and everyone feels good because if they don’t feel good then they’re not human.

OK. I’ll assign more benefit of the doubt.

To be moral and ethical in their voting choice, to serve systemic design intent, to serve the practicalities of implementation, an individual need not care about others’ votes.

So, it’s incorrect to set as a prerequisite a belief in success of a 5% goal to vote for it. Presenting as you did exemplifies the propaganda-fed ego of the neoliberal. The meaning in voting is not to make you feel good about yourself for choosing the bandwagon that wins. All should vote for whom best represents them with reckless disregard for the short-term outcome.

The eventual counterargument to what I’m saying is rooted in utilitarianism: Democracy produces at best mediocre outcomes. The systemic design answer was the electoral college.

lumpen

stop trolling, hexbear radical

Let’s be honest here: None of us are going rogue. We aren’t going to grab a gun and start killing the worst of the worst, the people who have destroyed our lives and or the lives of millions, the people who have benefitted from the creation of a soulless society, the people who ruined our lives. We are cowards. We can’t do it, I certainly know I can’t. It’s best not to kid ourselves here.

You want confirmation that everyone else is as weak to make yourself feel better. It’s typical neoliberal nonsense.

I’m reminded of children in grade school who “I know what that means, I’m just not going to explain it to you.”

Yes. In this endeavor you’re beginning to understand the means I’ve chosen for the majority.

With well-reasoned and nuanced principles supported by vast experience.