finkelstein-lambaste Mr. Whatchamacallit

    • tane2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      6 天前

      Lmao I have no idea why people are seriously engaging this simpleton, he’s either beyond stupid or playing like it (distinction without a difference)

    • vegeta1 [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      6 天前

      Honestly if you want to learn more on the subject, debates are not a good way. It may seem engaging but on a topic with extensive history and sensitivity such as this these its best to seek other means. Especially when it involves that sex pest destiny

      • Vincentmario@feddit.ukBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 天前

        I agree kind of :) They’re absolutely not a replacement for actual research, but I think videos like these can inspire interesting questions which encourage further reading. Most people as well probably aren’t willing to critically and factually research a given subject, so well structured and fact based debates I think could be helpful for helping inform a wider audience maybe

        • vegeta1 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          6 天前

          Tbh very rarely are debates you find on youtube well structured and really fact based. A lot of times its more about arguing semantics or finding logical traps in the others rhethoric more so than spreading knowledge on the subject. And very rarely does it change minds. Maybe it did for you but believe me when I say that is an exception. Generally vast majority of the audience just comes to affirm their believes through a vehicle or a mouthpiece. Its unfortunate but it is what it is.

    • KuroXppi [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      6 天前

      UI didn’t say anything against your educational background, I was explaining what IP正确 meant. Also like, i only half wrote that sentence it shoulda been something like ‘and other materials on the subject’ bit i was making toast and didn’t proofread. I guess you’re right that the debate wasn’t enlightening, I found it a waste of time too, so I’m wondering why you’re saying destiny held his own when you’re capable of seeing that he wasn’t.

      You ain’t ready for that yet

      Because this instance is anti-liberal, but we use the term differently from how you used it. So if I said “we’re also actually anti-liberal” without further context then 99.99% certain you’ll say we’re right-wingers and dismiss us out-of-hand. I say this as a former ‘liberal’ myself. We don’t use liberal as shorthand for ‘democrat’, we understand it in the lockian sense

      that people have rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and property, that have a foundation independent of the laws of any particular society. Stanford encyclopaedia on John locke

      Particularly around the modern capitalist state and defence of private property. On this, both ‘sides’ of politics agree and are in essence liberals.

      We are very prickly, yes. But this thread is relatively tame.

      Edit: rip bozo