• InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      26·
      23 days ago

      I bet Axelrod could speak for ~10 minutes straight on the topic of “What should be done to address hunger and homelessness?” Then his entire meandering neoliberal spiel could be reduced down 99% to a few seconds because ghouls like him always say roughly the same thing: “Improving the economy would help them.”

  • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
    37·
    23 days ago

    I really hate people like Axelrod. We make jokes about the worst liberals wanting to have a discourse even when they are being lead to the camps. With Axelrod - I think he would literally do that. His worldview is so rigid, so self-righteous, and so ridiculous that to his last breath he’ll still believe that winning arguments is one of the most important things in the world. Even if the win only occurs in his own head.

  • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
    35·
    23 days ago

    GOP: “We want to tell you about our desire for fascism and an ethnostate.”

    Axelrod: “Oh! A different, even disturbing view! I shall engage and argue, learning from you, maybe letting you change my mind, without giving an inch of ground to democracy’s erosion.”

    GOP: “Uh-huh. First, we kill…”

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      14·
      23 days ago

      I know libs can be untethered to reality but It’s still kind of mind boggling to me that even now powerful dems like Axelrod didn’t change their POV even an iota. The GOP used their savage cuts to Medicaid, etc. to create ginormous money funnel to make it rain money on the rich by sucking away healthcare and money away from the poor and the needy. And in a non-spoiler the people afflicted by the GOP will suffer, get sick, and sometimes die.

      The dems will forever ignore the ugly reality on the ground. They’ll seek common ground with the GOP but they’ll never seek the truth.

  • WhatDoYouMeanPodcast [comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    28·
    22 days ago

    Okay, how about this: I’ve never heard someone make a cogent argument about how communism actually leads to more poverty. It’s just something about being less efficient than the market. But I’ve seen markets over and over fuck people over our of home, health, and community. More empty homes than homeless people. Meanwhile “I put the homeless person in a home now they’re not homeless” has worked wonders.

    I’ve never seen a better litmus a tolerant society than not tolerating intolerant views. Separating inheritance from actions seems perfectly good and I’ve never seen someone say something convincing otherwise.

    I’ve seen the dumbest fucking arguments about science, vaccines, and nutrition and now that shit is getting enforced at the end of a barrel. In fact a fuck load of that shit (philosophy, bad data gathering, fallacious rhetoric, just being fucking WRONG) gets to just hang around for no good reason besides having a bigger stick. By definition that’s not been persuasive to me.

    What’s up with that?

  • Angel [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    22·
    23 days ago

    Wow, these people sure do love debating. I’m sure some would even say that they’re master debaters.

  • underisk [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
    17·
    23 days ago

    For the sake of democracy you must seek out the opinions of those diametrically opposed to democracy and incorporate their beliefs into your own but do it without becoming anti democracy, somehow. Very wise.

  • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
    16·
    23 days ago

    There can be no debate between a person who wants to use state violence to destroy people and those who do not want to be destroyed. You can’t have peaceful conversation about this.

    Debate is not and never can be self defence against violence. Only violence can be self defence against violence.