Rationalskepticism,lol part III.

[Jason]

Says the guy who made personal attacks on me (while I wasn't even here to defend myself). You couldn't make this shit up.

It wasn't an attack Mr. Sensitivepants. Even if it was, laugh it off. That was the point - to make you think.

[Jason]

I've tried that before. He's not really interested.

Sure I am. I'm taking the time to let you know what I think.

[pErvinalia]

Says the guy who made personal attacks on me (while I wasn't even here to defend myself). You couldn't make this shit up.

It wasn't an attack Mr. Sensitivepants. Even if it was, laugh it off. That was the point - to make you think.

Oh, so when you're aggressive, it's a joke. And when I'm aggressive it's DESTROYING THE KOMMUNITY!!1!

Ok.

[Jason]

Good. I see we understand one another. It is OK when I do it but not you.

[pErvinalia]

What a fruitful conversation. So glad I went through that.

[Jason]

Me too. Hugs?

You're so cute when you're sulking.

[Sean Hayden]

[Forty Two]

How can people who claim to be rational and skeptical believe an idea and ideology can never be questioned, that is just seriously fucked up.

Because they are moronic, mindless Marxist idiots who aren't even all that useful to Marxism, that's how.

Ah yes.. it always comes back to the "Marxists" doesn't it?

Unfortunately ,much of modern "progressive" thought these days is decidedly Marxist in character. Class. Identity Politics. Oppression. You see various turns of phrase, like "nothing to lose but our chains" bandied about quite readily, and a massively anti-capitalist and authoritarian bent.

[Jason]

So?

[Jason]

"It's not about my ego, I know I'm a genius - Siva. Yes, he really did say that without realising the irony.

That's quoted completely out of context. Typical rEv. Backhanded, underhanded, any which way but straight.

[Seth]

I'm depressed as all fuck. And I'm utterly alone in the world. Kind find any enthusiasm to put myself through another 30 or 40 years of this.

I'm sorry to hear that rEv. I hope you'll keep posting.

Thanks, Sean. I wasn't really tempted to. Just really wanted to ask Samsa a psychology question. But I've got nothing much better to do, so until he shows up (if he shows up) I'll probably keep having the same brain numbing interactions with the likes of MisterMack, DaveDodo, Scot Ductchy and Strontium Dog as I did before. What's that an indication of? Insanity? Yeah,, sounds about right for me...

What about ME!

[Seth]

I care about the community here

Dafukyoudoo.

and I see your kind of attitude as poisonous to it.

Pot, kettle, black.

No one wants to engage in discussion when the mode is aggression.

Speak for yourself, asshat.

I'll fence with rEv anytime.

[Jason]

I'll fence with rEv anytime.

Go to it. I give it a week before you're tossing names back and forth and a moderator has to step in.

[Seth]

How can people who claim to be rational and skeptical believe an idea and ideology can never be questioned, that is just seriously fucked up.

Because they are moronic, mindless Marxist idiots who aren't even all that useful to Marxism, that's how.

Ah yes.. it always comes back to the "Marxists" doesn't it?

Unfortunately ,much of modern "progressive" thought these days is decidedly Marxist in character. Class. Identity Politics. Oppression. You see various turns of phrase, like "nothing to lose but our chains" bandied about quite readily, and a massively anti-capitalist and authoritarian bent.

This is because Progressives are Marxists Lite. Really they are more useful idiots of Marxism who like enough of the doctrine to adopt some of the not-quite-so-radical aspects in order to forward their own Progressive agenda, whose basic premise is that the proletariat is simply too stupid to know what's good for it and therefore the elite must rule them for their own good in a "scientific" manner using legions of unelected bureaucrats as their minions. If Woodrow Wilson and every Democrat since then had their way the President would pretty much be King and he would appoint ministers and bureaucrats to make and enforce laws without any required input or participation from Congress, which would become nothing more than a debating society that would argue about the President's dictates and "advise" him, but would have no ability or authority to check the President from doing just exactly whatever the fuck he wants to do with the Supreme Court as his sycophants to ratify his commands.

People really do not understand what Progressivism really is, which is unfortunate because if they did, they would recoil in horror at the very idea. One should read Pestritto's 'Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Liberalism" for the details, along with his other book, "American Progressivism: A Reader."

[Seth]

I'll fence with rEv anytime.

Go to it. I give it a week before you're tossing names back and forth and a moderator has to step in.

We've been doing that for a decade now, and your comment is the epitome of the pot calling the kettle black, numbnutz.