@Nisse_Hult
[I was OBVIOUSLY talking about the fact that you said that democratic rules don't apply everywhere.
In any reasonable persons mind that statement from you is the chocking one that's worth discussing.]
Because they don't. You are approaching the realm of 'objectivity' and 'subjectivity'. The only thing you have is that I wish that democratic rules would always apply, but I admit that with reality by my side that they obviously don't. So I have given you my intent, a character description of mine. But you have willfully twisted it into saying I am against democracy.
Who is being a child now? ;)
[But it just once again prove you don't even have a basic respect for democratic values when you think that it's completely fine that people hear that you don't believe democratic rules apply everywhere - but you think it's an insult when I say "you're apparently prime for a Trump-style candidate".]
It's not an insult, it is just factually incorrect. A baseless accusation that is detached from reality.
[Well guess what - this only proves that you are prime for a Trump-style candidate!]
No it does not. If I considered it an insult, how does that prove I am for a Trump-style candidate?
[Normal voters don't support candidates that attack the very foundations of democracy and they don't cheer such a president on.
Trump-voters do, because they - just like you - don't understand that respect for democratic rules and values must be absolute in every single instance.]
Anything that has "absolute in every single instance" sounds like autocracy to me. Everything can be twisted in order to fit a narrative or an agenda and it can go from being something that was democratic in the beginning, to something undemocratic, but is still masqueraded as democracy.
[They - just like you and tulpoeid - think it's no problem if others democratic rights - like freedom of speech - are suppressed.
And they - like you - don't have a problem with people knowing it, because they think there is nothing wrong with being undemocratic.]
And another baseless accusation you can't back and refuse to back. If there is anybody suppressing freedom of speech with their own opinion and feedback, it is you yourself according to your own definition.
[So yes - you clearly have the potential to vote for an undemocratic candidate like Trump - because you don't understand that democratic values must be absolute.]
So do you. Anybody has the 'potential', Nisse. I believe in democratic values. But for someone who studies sociology, Political Science and anthropology, I know that feeling is not shared everywhere and I acknowledge this. Sorry if I am not willing to go on a murderous crusade against anybody who does not conform. (You will get some assumption and baseless accusation back ;))
[You can't prove that much more clearly then you already have here - short of actually admitting it. But apparently that's where you draw the line.
You'll admit to believing that democratic values are not absolute - but you won't admit you could ever support a politician that actually practices what you preach.
That you consider an insult.]
There are other candidates and people that I can always support. Every single politician will practice at least one thing that you yourself preach for, but that does not mean that you will cast your support behind them. You will cast your support behind the one you think is best fit. I don't have to admit anything here as it is irrelevant to the discussion that you have so twisted and derailed.
For your own knowledge, I supported Bernie Sanders.
Your argument goes more and more down the toilet.
[But whether you ever do vote for an undemocratic politician or not is any way completely beside the point. ]
Oh really? Seemed like you have built your entire argument on this. Do go on.
[Which instead is that you don't believe that democratic rules apply everywhere - so obliviously you have no problem with seeing Humons freedom of speech questioned here. In fact you don't even see the pressure that tulpoeid puts on it - because you don't really think democratic rules apply online anyway, as you said earlier.]
Their freedom of speech is not being questioned here. That is a fallacy. Their choice of topic is being questioned. You are now building your whole argument on Humon not being able to handle criticism. I can't believe that you have such low expectations of Humon. How dare you?!!!!
[You're operating from a world view that's clearly undemocratic, where shutting people up that says things you don't like to hear is just fine if you can do it - because democratic rules don't really matter anyway.]
Actually... you are the one who has been operating from a world view that is undemocratic. I have not shut you up, I have just criticized and trashed your way of criticizing others. You are completely free of criticizing others. But if you are going to be an asshole while at it, expect fair criticism.
"where shutting people up that says things you don't like to hear is just fine if you can do it " this is you right here.
I'm apparently a fascist, a Trumpist, that I am against democracy, that I am against freedom of speech and apparently just an ignorant child who knows nothing of the world! This is your own argument, you have been continuously been digging your own grave here. The level of filled ad hominems is your own doing and you think you really have some moral high ground?
Try again.
[You probably don't realize it yet, but you're a result of the 4chan-isation of the world: naive young boys like you learn fascist ideals from a bunch of middle aged bitter men who failed at life and spend their time on line hating everything and everyone and carving out hollow little "victories" by harassing decent people.]
Every single person I know and I take away from is someone who has seen both success and failure, but has ended successfully and none of them even know what 4chan is.
I am apparently harassing someone and to add to that, someone who is decent! Well, I guess 'disagreeing' is a way of harassing nowadays. But oh well.
[At this point it doesn't matter if you've actually visited 4chan or not - you can get this "education" anywhere.]
Oh really? Where can I do so? Point me to a direction, because I have never been to 4chan or any place similar. You seem to be an expert on that field, which must mean they have any relevancy to this whole debate
[That's why you speak in buzzwords and think a discussion is about who's "da Boss" instead of actually understanding the issue.]
So "You da Boss" has become a buzzword? A quote that is taken out of a video game called "Warcraft 2: Tides of Darkness"? If that is the case, then http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/behold-the-field-in-which-i-grow-my-fucks.jpg
I guess this would be considered like one of those 4chanish things they do there? But in any case, not my problem that to one person, "You da Boss" is an insult to them.
But hey, what would a mere 20 year old guy know about any issue?
[You don't care if you advocate for fascism - just as long as you can get that hollow little "victory" in your mind and feel like "da Boss" for a short time.]
I don't care for what you call fascism. You clearly are in no position to define what fascism even is. Considering how you are willing to fling it around so easily, you actually diminish the seriousness behind it and influence people to just no longer care. But hey, I am totally not trying to help you in the long run to actually construct a better argument and *I* am the one, nobody else, who is trying to gain a little 'victory' out of this ;)
[You've adopted the values of middle aged social misfits who's only consolation prize in life is trying to feel big by being fascist assholes online. And you're only 20! It's all just very sad.]
More baseless accusations. Even Trump is better than you at it xD.
So you have so far assumed that I love middle aged fascist and that they are my inspiration.
[As I said - let's hope you grow wiser as you grow older, but at this point it's a waste of time to debate anything else with you since you're world view is so fundamentally different from the democratic majority's.]
You don't understand the core principle of democracy nor do you understand people. You might understand more if you perhaps undergo anthropology and Political Science, that democracy takes many forms and no democratic nation is exactly the same. One thing you said was
"democratic rights - like freedom of speech" which is not exactly true. Free speech can and has been and even is suppressed in it's many ways and forms in democratic countries. I think you meant "Human Right, like freedom speech".
20
@Nisse_Hult
[I was OBVIOUSLY talking about the fact that you said that democratic rules don't apply everywhere.
In any reasonable persons mind that statement from you is the chocking one that's worth discussing.]
Because they don't. You are approaching the realm of 'objectivity' and 'subjectivity'. The only thing you have is that I wish that democratic rules would always apply, but I admit that with reality by my side that they obviously don't. So I have given you my intent, a character description of mine. But you have willfully twisted it into saying I am against democracy.
Who is being a child now? ;)
[But it just once again prove you don't even have a basic respect for democratic values when you think that it's completely fine that people hear that you don't believe democratic rules apply everywhere - but you think it's an insult when I say "you're apparently prime for a Trump-style candidate".]
It's not an insult, it is just factually incorrect. A baseless accusation that is detached from reality.
[Well guess what - this only proves that you are prime for a Trump-style candidate!]
No it does not. If I considered it an insult, how does that prove I am for a Trump-style candidate?
[Normal voters don't support candidates that attack the very foundations of democracy and they don't cheer such a president on.
Trump-voters do, because they - just like you - don't understand that respect for democratic rules and values must be absolute in every single instance.]
Anything that has "absolute in every single instance" sounds like autocracy to me. Everything can be twisted in order to fit a narrative or an agenda and it can go from being something that was democratic in the beginning, to something undemocratic, but is still masqueraded as democracy.
[They - just like you and tulpoeid - think it's no problem if others democratic rights - like freedom of speech - are suppressed.
And they - like you - don't have a problem with people knowing it, because they think there is nothing wrong with being undemocratic.]
And another baseless accusation you can't back and refuse to back. If there is anybody suppressing freedom of speech with their own opinion and feedback, it is you yourself according to your own definition.
[So yes - you clearly have the potential to vote for an undemocratic candidate like Trump - because you don't understand that democratic values must be absolute.]
So do you. Anybody has the 'potential', Nisse. I believe in democratic values. But for someone who studies sociology, Political Science and anthropology, I know that feeling is not shared everywhere and I acknowledge this. Sorry if I am not willing to go on a murderous crusade against anybody who does not conform. (You will get some assumption and baseless accusation back ;))
[You can't prove that much more clearly then you already have here - short of actually admitting it. But apparently that's where you draw the line.
You'll admit to believing that democratic values are not absolute - but you won't admit you could ever support a politician that actually practices what you preach.
That you consider an insult.]
There are other candidates and people that I can always support. Every single politician will practice at least one thing that you yourself preach for, but that does not mean that you will cast your support behind them. You will cast your support behind the one you think is best fit. I don't have to admit anything here as it is irrelevant to the discussion that you have so twisted and derailed.
For your own knowledge, I supported Bernie Sanders.
Your argument goes more and more down the toilet.
[But whether you ever do vote for an undemocratic politician or not is any way completely beside the point. ]
Oh really? Seemed like you have built your entire argument on this. Do go on.
[Which instead is that you don't believe that democratic rules apply everywhere - so obliviously you have no problem with seeing Humons freedom of speech questioned here. In fact you don't even see the pressure that tulpoeid puts on it - because you don't really think democratic rules apply online anyway, as you said earlier.]
Their freedom of speech is not being questioned here. That is a fallacy. Their choice of topic is being questioned. You are now building your whole argument on Humon not being able to handle criticism. I can't believe that you have such low expectations of Humon. How dare you?!!!!
[You're operating from a world view that's clearly undemocratic, where shutting people up that says things you don't like to hear is just fine if you can do it - because democratic rules don't really matter anyway.]
Actually... you are the one who has been operating from a world view that is undemocratic. I have not shut you up, I have just criticized and trashed your way of criticizing others. You are completely free of criticizing others. But if you are going to be an asshole while at it, expect fair criticism.
"where shutting people up that says things you don't like to hear is just fine if you can do it " this is you right here.
I'm apparently a fascist, a Trumpist, that I am against democracy, that I am against freedom of speech and apparently just an ignorant child who knows nothing of the world! This is your own argument, you have been continuously been digging your own grave here. The level of filled ad hominems is your own doing and you think you really have some moral high ground?
Try again.
[You probably don't realize it yet, but you're a result of the 4chan-isation of the world: naive young boys like you learn fascist ideals from a bunch of middle aged bitter men who failed at life and spend their time on line hating everything and everyone and carving out hollow little "victories" by harassing decent people.]
Every single person I know and I take away from is someone who has seen both success and failure, but has ended successfully and none of them even know what 4chan is.
I am apparently harassing someone and to add to that, someone who is decent! Well, I guess 'disagreeing' is a way of harassing nowadays. But oh well.
[At this point it doesn't matter if you've actually visited 4chan or not - you can get this "education" anywhere.]
Oh really? Where can I do so? Point me to a direction, because I have never been to 4chan or any place similar. You seem to be an expert on that field, which must mean they have any relevancy to this whole debate
[That's why you speak in buzzwords and think a discussion is about who's "da Boss" instead of actually understanding the issue.]
So "You da Boss" has become a buzzword? A quote that is taken out of a video game called "Warcraft 2: Tides of Darkness"? If that is the case, then http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/behold-the-field-in-which-i-grow-my-fucks.jpg
I guess this would be considered like one of those 4chanish things they do there? But in any case, not my problem that to one person, "You da Boss" is an insult to them.
But hey, what would a mere 20 year old guy know about any issue?
[You don't care if you advocate for fascism - just as long as you can get that hollow little "victory" in your mind and feel like "da Boss" for a short time.]
I don't care for what you call fascism. You clearly are in no position to define what fascism even is. Considering how you are willing to fling it around so easily, you actually diminish the seriousness behind it and influence people to just no longer care. But hey, I am totally not trying to help you in the long run to actually construct a better argument and *I* am the one, nobody else, who is trying to gain a little 'victory' out of this ;)
[You've adopted the values of middle aged social misfits who's only consolation prize in life is trying to feel big by being fascist assholes online. And you're only 20! It's all just very sad.]
More baseless accusations. Even Trump is better than you at it xD.
So you have so far assumed that I love middle aged fascist and that they are my inspiration.
[As I said - let's hope you grow wiser as you grow older, but at this point it's a waste of time to debate anything else with you since you're world view is so fundamentally different from the democratic majority's.]
You don't understand the core principle of democracy nor do you understand people. You might understand more if you perhaps undergo anthropology and Political Science, that democracy takes many forms and no democratic nation is exactly the same. One thing you said was
"democratic rights - like freedom of speech" which is not exactly true. Free speech can and has been and even is suppressed in it's many ways and forms in democratic countries. I think you meant "Human Right, like freedom speech".
Feel the Bern!