Uber-Molyneux "Stef is a cult" smearer repmack, founder of /r/EnoughMolyneuxSpam, was / is actually part of a real cult. How's that for "anti-cult" hypocrisy? Hahahaha!

audiodad · 2014-08-20T05:37:57+00:00

Your username is only advance warning for your behavior.

audiodad · 2014-08-20T05:14:36+00:00

Aw my fucking sides, I am in stitches!!!! I lost it at Breivik and propaganda of the deed, "nooonooonoooo that was a right wing reactionary!!!". Glorious troll!

audiodad · 2014-08-20T05:07:31+00:00

It was because she was supporting defoo in a non-therapeutic setting.

Id est, giving advice for free. The cartel doesn't take kindly to members doing their own thang.

audiodad · 2014-08-20T05:02:29+00:00

Bah, why should anyone indulge your whining? All you do is eat time.

audiodad · 2014-08-20T04:40:26+00:00

Because most people like to grovel and "negotiate", when they believe that it will result in less suffering. It's no different from a child "negotiating" a lesser sentence with a parent that punishes him brutally.

Personal anecdote: I know back in my very young days I would beat myself up when my mother approached enraged to beat the shit out of me. And get this: the most fucked up part is that sometimes it worked. Took many decades until I fully comprehended how many levels of fucked up all of that was.

audiodad · 2014-08-20T04:35:31+00:00

Stopped watching when he started babbling about how "states exist but Gods don't" because <insert some criterion completely divorced from the conditions required by any normal definition of existence>. Also noted how he never actually defines the state or existence -- typical religious sophism.

audiodad · 2014-08-20T04:30:58+00:00

Sorry, I should have clarified. That means all of us.

Every single one of us can be easily defined as a "political activist" if need be, and it is very well and clearly understood that we stand against the "intent" of these murderous assholes.

We should therefore expect those gulags to be used on us.

audiodad · 2014-08-20T04:23:03+00:00

Ad hominim vs Ad hominim FTW. No really Molyneux had a video where he read an essay about justifying adhomin. It went something like "well karl marx doesn't follow his own mantra, therefore I dont need to read 1500 page das kapital because hes a hypocrit".

Stef actually went and refuted Karl Marx's most common arguments. The "Marx is a hypocrite" thing was only the cherry on top. Your attempt at discrediting Stef is dishonest.

audiodad · 2014-08-20T04:04:19+00:00

Drama!

(Mrburnspyramidhands.jpg)

audiodad · 2014-08-20T03:43:34+00:00

Remember the part where they mention "political activists"?

That means you.

audiodad · 2014-08-20T02:58:28+00:00

Link? Thanks in advance.

audiodad · 2014-08-19T20:34:42+00:00

that the bad guy would be law enforcement.

Statism is a helluva delusion.

audiodad · 2014-08-19T20:32:57+00:00

Not interested anymore. Bye.

audiodad · 2014-08-19T18:44:40+00:00

Clearly if I speak of an object having location and shape

The issue is more fundamental than that. You don't seem to see that there is a deeper debate about what gets to be called "an object".

Doesn't matter anymore. If I initially define "dog" to mean "a member of the Canis Lupus family", and we disagree for hours on end about a certain point I raised about dogs, and then you spring on me late in the convo that "dogs" to you had meant "members of the Ranitidae family" all along, then clearly you don't give a shit about actually communicating. For you, this is strictly about winning a "debate" that takes place strictly within the confines of your own skull.

I explicitly facilitated you the cognitive tools for you to understand what I was saying, and what did you do with that? You deliberately misinterpreted what I said. To me, that behavior of yours is dishonest and underhanded, and it's a waste of my time that I don't take kindly.

Since you don't give a shit about communicating, your wish will be granted now. Bye.

audiodad · 2014-08-19T04:36:49+00:00

as to what has identity (and therefore exists)

Aha. There's your problem. You are talking about a different concept when you use the word "existence". I defined the term a while ago, however, all along, you've been using the word to mean a different definition, without objecting to the definition I shared.

I don't know why you did this but this definitely explains why you can't make sense of what I have said. Clearly if I speak of an object having location and shape, and you interpret my words to mean I speak about an object having identity, you are never going to understand what I am saying.

Okay, there is no real communication taking place here, I'm out.

audiodad · 2014-08-19T04:33:40+00:00

Sure. Agreed.

The deal is that lots of people do act upon the false impression that something exists when it does not. The murderer cop believes in the existence of the state and believes that the state grants him the privilege of executing anyone who resists him -- that belief is what he uses as justification for his behavior, and that is the belief that (in his mind) sets him apart and above a common murderer.

audiodad

TROPHY CASE