Topic: The Fascists That Surround You - page 8. (Read 9740 times)

He did answer your question. Just because he preceded the answer with a 'Yes, that is my argument' does not mean he did not provide a sufficient answer to your question in the sentence after it.


And millions of sociopaths also live their lives in relative anonymity too, creating personal hell for their spouses, children and acquaintances. And conversely, non-sociopaths seek political office as well.

Sociopaths also will exist in AnCap, and render their personal brand of hell in all their ways within such a society as well. What is your point again?

My apologies, it should have read  "No one ever claimed that, except..."

Yes, actually, it is. The relationship of sociopaths to fascism is the same as the relationship of roses to a garden.

Are you dense? You have not answered my question. Which is your argument?

That sociopaths do not want power?

That government does not provide a position of power?

I never claimed that government departments offer jobs exclusively to sociopaths (though an argument could be made for military positions, they cater more to psychopaths, than sociopaths), I simply claimed that sociopaths are uniquely suited to achieving government office, and that they would seek government office, because of the power such a position offers.

No one ever did what?
 

That is not a relationship.

Yes, that is my argument, how many times I have to repeat to you understand? Sociopaths are individuals with a PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDER, not individuals conspiring to overthrow a POLITICAL REGIMES. Moreover, there is no government departments offering jobs EXCLUSIVELY for sociopaths. If there is, feel free to provide the evidence.

I am surprised how regularly this sabotage tactic is used here. Many people use it, consciously or not. It is a very simple task to join a discussion on any subject and endlessly deconstruct it until the discussion is derailed. It doesn't take much intelligence, just a really hard head, and true belief in the infallible correctness of your own ideology. So they want to discuss the relation between sociopaths and fascism. No one ever demanded that you believe it, or declared themselves an expert on the topic. No one OWES you an explanation that satisfies your demands. Now stop acting like a child knocking down the discussion other people built, and in which you have clearly expressed your lack of interest in. It is pretty sad that you need to seek out people you disagree with in order to feed your ego by endlessly deconstructing conversations. We get it, you can analyze things, poorly... now get a life and let the adults talk.

My apologies, I misread what you typed there.

No, When someone who was expounding on a point suddenly stops, then I assume they must not know what they're talking about. I assume they're smart enough to determine that they've stuck their foot in their mouth, and have decided to stop chewing. Any time you want to start chewing again, though, feel free. You know where to do it.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/07/the-startling-accuracy-of-referring-to-politicians-as-psychopaths/260517/  politicians are psycopaths.

Close your eyes. Close your ears. You can't take accurate descriptions of your behavior. And your post here demonstrates another failing of your rebuttals. You get caught up in believing that calling out people on minor syntactical twists of words are some how worthy as refutation. Again, that only speaks negatively against you.

I stopped reading here, since yes, you have to know what you're talking about, or else you're just bullshitting.

Shovel some more, I won't be listening.

And... what?

Just because Einstein was quoted as saying something, possibly out of context, does not make it so. Rather, some things require background knowledge, and a slow building up, case by case. As it turns out, anyone familiar with Einstein, and who has common sense, knows that Einstein and his contemporaries wrestled their whole lives with subjects that could not be explained simply.

If you want respect, then don't ever expect a single quote to defend your position. Only the worst kind of forum participants think they've won an argument by doing so.


Ah, I see. Doing just what I recently accused you and your lot of. Expecting your opponents to write whole treatises on the subject. I told you once and for all, don't demand that I educate you. I pointed out some excellent sources. And yes, I did get bored of being responsible for your education. Furthermore, if you're implying that perhaps I had no idea what I was talking about, as you seem to be doing, then it's clear you weren't interested in listening to me anyway. Thus the book recommendations.

Furthermore, I have never seen you able to refute anything I said with regard to the linked post and similar posts on the same topic. You should quit while you're ahead, because you keep failing to demonstrate anything here except the following:

- You refuse to educate yourself
- You think a book recommendation is an advertisement
- You like to demand that others educate you
- You claim that when others do educate you, they must not know what they're talking about
- You think a single quote is an effective refutation

Additionally, your whole belief system is based on what you know, which isn't a tenth of what you should know. You're unable to refute what I said in those educational posts. You're unable to parse it into your own belief system. Instead, you deflect, with claims that further education is only in the form of advertisements, by demanding that you require further posts of explanation until weighing in your opinion, etc.

What that precisely tells me is the information is inconvenient for you, and you don't want to hear more. Precisely. You're truly an Internet forum gas bag hiding in a community that favors you. If you had any balls, and any further knowledge outside of your fringe set of sources, you would actually be arguing your points to your opponents, which exist in droves outside this forum.

Do you remember the part where he talks about how sociopaths respond to being unmasked?

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it." - Albert Einstein

You were off to a good start there, for a second, but then I guess you got bored, or realized you had no idea what you were talking about, or something.

That's because they constitute a lot of content written by leaders in their fields. They're called books. You buy them, borrow them, or find them at university libraries or public libraries. And then you read them. One of the books has so much material in that it would take hundreds and hundreds of wikipedia pages. You can choose willful ignorance, or you can proactively prevent it. You chose the former, citing my recommendations as advertisements. I cannot help you as long as you choose to wear blinders.

You claim I pointed you to Amazon links. Next time, I'll point you to university database catalog entries, so you won't use such a childish and pathetic excuse to defend your own decision to remain ignorant.

Yes, I recommended books. I also pointed out articles, and linked to Wikipedia pages that explained the concepts I was putting across. I also put out the effort to explain it myself. You? Amazon links.

You recommended books. I did the same. Just because you couldn't find a method to freely consume them or were not motivated enough to learn science by going to the library does not mean they were advertisements. What a piece of shit attitude you have. What kind of person argues that suggested reading regarding science constitutes advertisements? How far off base are you with regard to more normal thought patterns anyway?

You've instructed us to buy books. I don't know if that counts as academic argument where you come from, but in my book, that's just advertisements.

As if a gang of group-thinkers patting each other on the shoulder means anything at all.

Very well said.

And yes, indeed, he is an asshat.  Grade A asshat.

I have an obligation to present ideas here? I can't just point out existing research, science and share such things? Gee, I didn't know. So I'm an asshat, because when I do such things, and the thugs here demand that I then write whole treatises on the subject, and when I don't comply, all that I've written is then deemed untrue and unsubstantiated, and then when that gets me riled, in the end, I'm just an asshat?

By the way, you're one of them, in a most guilty way. You demanded that I continue to educate you on ecology. You demanded like a petty childish brat.

This is the politics section of an alternative currency board. Bitcoin is bigger than libertarianism. There are some shared goals, and at least Neal Stephenson thinks Bitcoin-like currency spells the end of the State (Diamond Age), but anarchists are hardly the only ones interested in Bitcoin. Thus the fairly lively discussions when they're not ruined by asshats like yourself, who seek only to tear down others' ideas, rather than presenting your own.

Sometimes the fascists that surround you actually do surround you.