Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Kwyjibo said:

You still haven't answered my first question.

---

I would say you, based on your non-response to my question.  That could change depending on your answer.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

You still argue, but you won't (can't?) provide an example?  That's defeat my dude.

---

This is why nobody takes you seriously. You are inconsistent and have vastly different standards of evidence from others and yourself.

Your questions are irrelevant, as you...

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

...won't (can't?) provide an example?  That's defeat my dude.

---

Unless, of course, you're (once again) speculating on what's in someone's mind, which is another term for "making shit up on the fly".

Edit: although, to be fair, your argumentative style falls well within the alt-right playbook. Which makes sense.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said (exactly 1343 days ago):
Just dropping in to help illuminate a common tactic used by qman and company.

First, qman makes the incredibly stupid claim that David Frum is alt-left, in what I can only assume was an attempt to shift the overton window further right by redefining neoconservatives as left-wing.

Then, when this claim of his is immediately criticized for its ridiculousness, he does not even bother to defend the position. Qman simply falls silent.

[...]

He is not here to actually debate. He is not putting forth arguments in good faith. The idea is to cultivate an air of respectability, and use this to spread seeds of bullshit to the unwitting.

Unfortunately, it takes less time to post bullshit than to debunk it, and this is something they are aware of. Don't let yourself burn out and let this shit fly uncontested, but also avoid getting drawn into energy draining and time wasting arguments with this type of person.

In the streets you embarass fascists by physically overpowering them. In the online chat realm, you embarass them by clearly showing how truly stupid their ideas are, and refusing to engage them further.

I also remember reading once (I'll try and find the source) about a psychological effect. Basically, you put forth an argument and I respond with criticism, but then you never respond to my criticism. Even if my criticism is sound and your argument was invalid, there is a tendency for humans to perceive things as you, as the initiator, being dominant; and me, as the responder, being submissive - which influences how people will view the arguments. From the region of emotion, rather than logic, but that's how bad faith debate goes.

Here are some other common tactics you may find in use on Internet forums: Read more...

---

shivas.wisdom said:

The complete and willful lack of any logical or consistent approach in these arguments is part of the reason for why I fully support militant antifascist action. Fascists and their sympathizers do not debate in good faith. They obfuscate and deflect until they see an opportunity to seize power, and then they violently put down their opposition - like, for example, passing censorship laws that criminalize minority opinions.

---

Ah, so you are another hypocritical radicalized fool, to the point of embracing violence against the enemies of the western political & financial elite, the type of guy who would blindly follow Soros-funded ideologies into your own oblivion just to throw your life away to kill some freedom loving American rednecks that you hate so much, just like your American antifa counterparts.

I mean we pretty much knew that already, but thanks for verifying

chopstick said:

Ah, so you are another hypocritical radicalized fool, to the point of embracing violence against the enemies of the western political & financial elite, the type of guy who would blindly follow Soros-funded ideologies into your own oblivion just to throw your life away to kill some freedom loving American rednecks that you hate so much, just like your American antifa counterparts.

I mean we pretty much knew that already, but thanks for verifying

---

chopstick said:

shivas.wisdom said:

The complete and willful lack of any logical or consistent approach in these arguments is part of the reason for why I fully support militant antifascist action. Fascists and their sympathizers do not debate in good faith. They obfuscate and deflect until they see an opportunity to seize power, and then they violently put down their opposition - like, for example, passing censorship laws that criminalize minority opinions.

---

Ah, so you are another hypocritical radicalized fool, to the point of embracing violence against the enemies of the western political & financial elite, the type of guy who would blindly follow Soros-funded ideologies into your own oblivion just to throw your life away to kill some freedom loving American rednecks that you hate so much, just like your American antifa counterparts.

I mean we pretty much knew that already, but thanks for verifying

---

Kwyjibo said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Kwyjibo said:

You still haven't answered my first question.

---

I would say you, based on your non-response to my question.  That could change depending on your answer.

---

Nice job avoiding answering yet again, ever going to come up with a name?

---

If you need a name, by "you", I meant "Kwyjibo". 

Kryptos said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

You still argue, but you won't (can't?) provide an example?  That's defeat my dude.

---

This is why nobody takes you seriously. You are inconsistent and have vastly different standards of evidence from others and yourself.

Your questions are irrelevant, as you...

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

...won't (can't?) provide an example?  That's defeat my dude.

---

Unless, of course, you're (once again) speculating on what's in someone's mind, which is another term for "making shit up on the fly".

Edit: although, to be fair, your argumentative style falls well within the alt-right playbook. Which makes sense.

---

undersativaskies said:

I'm asking why you're posting soley on one forum on a website that doesn't seem to have any interest to you other than the political forum. Does that not seem weird to you?

---

Quote:

I'm asking why you're posting soley on one forum on a website that doesn't seem to have any interest to you other than the political forum. Does that not seem weird to you?

---

koods said:

Quote:

I'm asking why you're posting soley on one forum on a website that doesn't seem to have any interest to you other than the political forum. Does that not seem weird to you?

---

Our true enemy; has yet to reveal themselves

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Kwyjibo said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Kwyjibo said:

You still haven't answered my first question.

---

I would say you, based on your non-response to my question.  That could change depending on your answer.

---

Nice job avoiding answering yet again, ever going to come up with a name?

---

If you need a name, by "you", I meant "Kwyjibo". 

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Kryptos said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

You still argue, but you won't (can't?) provide an example?  That's defeat my dude.

---

This is why nobody takes you seriously. You are inconsistent and have vastly different standards of evidence from others and yourself.

Your questions are irrelevant, as you...

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

...won't (can't?) provide an example?  That's defeat my dude.

---

Unless, of course, you're (once again) speculating on what's in someone's mind, which is another term for "making shit up on the fly".

Edit: although, to be fair, your argumentative style falls well within the alt-right playbook. Which makes sense.

---

Still no example?  Alrighty then.

---

shivas.wisdom said:

Everyone knows the real antifascists support Russia's military.

---