I’m not communist and my comment has nothing to do with communism.
I’m anti-authoritarian 🤣
I’m a privacy and FLOSS advocate, you think I’d side with organizations, partys or countrys that seek to build a surveillance state? Foolish.
You realize there’s more partys than liberals/democrats and conservatives/republicans right? Newsflash I’m not either liberal nor conservative.
Always making assumptions…
You carefully avoided any mention of your actual politics, whilst telling me off for not knowing yours. I don’t know how you think in supposed to know.
I don’t hate liberals you clown
You have a funny way of showing it, and I’m no clown, thank you very much, I’m just pissed off that so many people BoTh SidEs stuff where there are real differences.
But if you don’t hate liberals, there’s even less need to dive in with your false equivalence between the two American parties over homosexuality, one of the few issues where they do differ substantially. If you have a brain, use it.
Apologies for not researching your whole post history, but I don’t see how that’s relevant anyway. If its no big deal, why the fuck are you spending so much time and effort defending it, arguing with people who pointed out your error?
Not actually spending that much time.
There’s no error, again, many are overthinking this whole damn thing.
It’s not about “equivalency”. Like I’ve already said, it’s not as deep as you think it is.
Just think of a party, insert it in the given place, and the statement most likely still works in one way or another. It’s that simple.
E.g. If socialists were capable of using logic, they wouldn’t be socialists. It’s just a versatile statement. Even works with libertarianism which is closet to my own position, as in the context of libertarian partys unfortunate tendencies to perpetuate racism; e.g., inconsistencies between ideals like individual rights and how some actors/coalitions actually behave.
If you were capable of logic you wouldn’t be trying to argue you were right when it was pointed out to you that in this context, on this issue, you are wrong.
Also, libertarianism is really really really stupid, so there’s that.
You carefully avoided any mention of your actual politics, whilst telling me off for not knowing yours. I don’t know how you think in supposed to know.
You have a funny way of showing it, and I’m no clown, thank you very much, I’m just pissed off that so many people BoTh SidEs stuff where there are real differences.
But if you don’t hate liberals, there’s even less need to dive in with your false equivalence between the two American parties over homosexuality, one of the few issues where they do differ substantially. If you have a brain, use it.
Bruh
Apologies for not researching your whole post history, but I don’t see how that’s relevant anyway. If its no big deal, why the fuck are you spending so much time and effort defending it, arguing with people who pointed out your error?
Not actually spending that much time.
There’s no error, again, many are overthinking this whole damn thing.
It’s not about “equivalency”. Like I’ve already said, it’s not as deep as you think it is. Just think of a party, insert it in the given place, and the statement most likely still works in one way or another. It’s that simple. E.g. If socialists were capable of using logic, they wouldn’t be socialists. It’s just a versatile statement. Even works with libertarianism which is closet to my own position, as in the context of libertarian partys unfortunate tendencies to perpetuate racism; e.g., inconsistencies between ideals like individual rights and how some actors/coalitions actually behave.
If you were capable of logic you wouldn’t be trying to argue you were right when it was pointed out to you that in this context, on this issue, you are wrong.
Also, libertarianism is really really really stupid, so there’s that.