this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
419 points (92.0% liked)
Memes
45180 readers
2717 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
if you want to use the sentiment expressed in this post as an argument for marxism being good, which seems pretty transparent in this case, then that same sentiment being used to justify eugenics isn't a good thing for said argument
i'm not that concerned with the precise definition of "opposite", but i am concerned with whether or not the post's logic is sound
Except that doesn't follow logically, but it's pretty clear that you're determined to work hard not to understand that.
logic seems pretty clear and laid out to me but you do you, pal
multiple people are working hard to explain the obvious holes in it to you in this very thread pal 😂
i wouldn't say you're working particularly hard given that all you've done is issue a blanket "no", and cowbee seems to be coming at the problem from the angle that i'm secretly the ghost of joseph mccarthy
i've given you two examples where i think most people would agree with the concepts of eugenics before being told it's eugenics, and so far nobody's disagreed with them? what's your issue? that you don't think most people would agree with them, or that you don't think that that fact draws enough of a parallel between eugenics and the post?
As I've said earlier, if you genuinely believe that most people are into eugenics, then you're likely a fascist and there's not point trying to have a discussion with you. Bye.
wow you did the thing well done
you made a bad argument, it's okay
if your argument was good you wouldn't be working so hard to avoid defending it like you are
I just love how you don't know when to stop digging. 😂
this is what projection looks like
actual brainrot
also, people willingly vote for fascism all the time so long as it isn't called "fascism" so this post supports fascism too good job
yeah we know you have actual brain rot since you think most people support eugenics, really says a lot about you as a person
literally deploying the "i'm rubber you're glue" defense to protect your pro-fascism, pro-eugenics meme
Says the fash who thinks that most people support eugenics. What an utter clown you shown yourself to be here. The best part is that you don't even know you're a clown.
buddy i'm not the one making posts in support of fascism
You literally are, but you lack self awareness to realize it. You're the only person in this thread who think that most people would support eugenics because you're the only fascist here.
don't make me tap the sign
on the other hand, your post advocates for fascism and eugenics
My post does no such thing. You made a false argument premised on the idea that most people would support the mechanics of eugenics. You believe this to be true because you are a fascist who believes in eugenics, and you're projecting your depraved views onto others. Everyone can see through you. Go home little fash.
*taps the sign*
Donald Trump, a fascist, is currently polling about equally with his opponent, who is not a fascist, because while his policies are fascist, he isn't describing them as such. People are willingly voting for them because they think they're a good idea.
If he campaigned on "I am a fascist", he would not be polling equally with his opponent.
Please explain how these two ideas put together aren't an example of what you advocate for in your post.
You'll also notice that me referencing polling figures doesn't mean that I agree with the outcome of polling. Absolutely shocking that I need to make this clarification, but there we go, I suppose.
Or, you know, continue desperately avoiding making an actual argument because of how obvious it is that you accidentally made a pro-fascism, pro-eugenics post and for some reason can't accept that fact.
That's because US is and always has been a fascist state. Only difference with Trump is that he's open about what burgerland truly stands for. Thanks for proving my point.
have you forgotten what your point was? because a minute ago it was that you could trust the average person's gut impulse when it came to political philosophy. now it's that you can't? are you feeling okay?
I have not, I'm just pointing out that people are a product of their environment. And you live in a fascist nations, which is what shapes your fucked up views.
can you trust a gut reaction or not? i'm getting mixed messages here
you're getting mixed messages because you have low reading comprehension, I'll let you wallow in your confusion.
my guy it's actually comical how shit your comebacks are getting
can you trust it? yes or no? it's a pretty simple question
Where do you think your gut reaction comes from genius? Absolutely hilarious that you can't understand that it's shaped by your conditions. You just continue to highlight the quality of your intellect here. 😂
oh my god is that the point you were trying to make? i kind of assumed it wasn't because it actually doesn't help your argument in any way
like, okay, you're shaped by your surroundings. so? so you can't trust your gut because your surroundings could have shaped you to have the wrong gut reaction?
incredible that you're actually arguing against yourself now
Yup, I'm arguing against myself here, you're very intelligent. 😂
excuse me buddy i think you need to work on your
reading comprehension
let's try again
can you trust a person's gut reaction? yes or no?
Depends on what that gut reaction is born out of obviously, which is something you appear to be unable to comprehend. Somebody, like yourself, growing up in a fascist environment, naturally has fascist gut reactions. That's why my original point wasn't about discussing gut reactions, which are meaningless, but reasoning about the actual mechanics, and thinking through their implications, something that's clearly beyond your cognitive abilities as you've shown here time and again.
oh my god it was beautiful
it was nearly an argument and then it just crashed and burned so quickly, and it was so clearly meant to be some kind of coup de grâce
okay so if a person grows up in the wrong environment, and so they reason about the actual mechanics, and think through the implications in a way that you don't like, it's bad
but when they do it and get an answer that you do like, it's good
the only difference between the two scenarios is your personal opinion on their conclusion
Growing up in a fascist environment does not preclude critical thinking, being an imbecile does however.
ah and thus we arrive at the final stop of our journey
"the right answer is right because i say it is right", confirming that, at no stage did you have anything resembling a good point to make in its defense
i'm glad we could all reach this together i'm so happy for us
And thus we arrive at the final stop of our journey where you are unable to distinguish between the beliefs people internalize through their conditioning and rational thinking. I’m glad we could all reach this together. I’m so happy for us.
it's hilarious that you think that has anything to do with your post
it's even more hilarious that you can't understand that it does 🤡
dropping the emojis again i love it
your post boils down to "marxism good because i say", which is a shit argument for marxism
there's really nothing more to it than that, and it's pretty obvious that you've realised it at this point
hence how pointedly you're avoiding actually engaging with anything i say and i'm here for it every step of the way
I, as well as numerous other people did engage with what you said, and explained to you the fallacy of your argument in detail. You just ignored that and continued to double down on it. I absolutely love how your method of argument is basically to just repeat nonsense like a broken record hoping that the other side will get tired and you get the last word. That presumably constitutes winning the argument in your head. Enjoy having the last word being the child that you are.
The problem is that your argument relies on the idea that "most people support eugenics until you say what it actually is," which is false in my experience while the post is correct.
i've given two examples where i think the average person would come down on the side of "let's do some eugenics" until being told "haha you just agreed to do some eugenics"
the problem with the post is that if you boil it down, it becomes "things that sound good on the surface are automatically good", which doesn't hold
It doesn't say they are automatically good, just that people have a negative connotation to the word Marxism even if the ideas are sound and good.
"people have a negative connotation to the word Marxism" absolutely has baked-in implications, and an argument left unsaid, even in total isolation
if i say to you "people think the word nazi has negative connotations", then even with no other context then obviously you'd conclude that i'm a nazi freak
the post doesn't make any justification for the ideas being sound and good, it says they sound good
i don't think this post's subtext is as simple as the interpretation you're providing
Good thing Nazism isn't sound, nor does it sound good, even without the label.
It does, actually. Marxism is popular and easily understood, yet red scare propaganda and anticommunism has given it a negative connotation. Eugenics and Nazism are not popular, and have bad connotations because they are bad ideas in general, not to mention Nazism being based on pure evil extermination.
You're not cooking here.
it was brought up to explain why "it's just saying it has negative connotations" doesn't make something neutral
you're kind of just imagining a different post at this point?
"it does, actually"? you're going to have to clarify what you mean by "this post makes a justification as to why the concepts behind marxism are sound and good", unless you mean that "people thinking the ideas sound good" is your justification, which you just argued a second ago wasn't what the post was doing, and which is exactly what i'm saying is a junk justification
"Marxism is popular" this post very specifically makes the point that marxism isn't popular, but its ideas are. that's like the whole point of the post
also, "easily understood" what? we haven't even defined what sort of marxism we're talking about here
it says nothing about the reasons for negative connotations; you're adding that yourself
again, i've given two examples where the average person would probably support eugenics-in-description-only
No, it was brought up to draw equivalence to Marxism, don't play coy.
No, Marxism is popular, it's just sold as different names. Big difference.
Is there some other kind we need to worry about here that's hard to understand?
No, you pretended the average person would.
cool ur jets buddy
it wasn't, and doesn't even really make sense when read through that lens
what kind of person comes into a thread and posts a pro-communism video clip and then angrily equates marxism to nazism?
that's describing the same sentiment i just expressed using different words
honestly the term "marxism" is nebulous enough that just deciding on what counts as "in-scope" is kind of non-trivial
are we talking about the economic theory? marxist communism? the whole body of marx's work?
what definition are you using?
i'm fairly confused what you're trying to say here
are you saying that that, for those two concepts, you don't think you could pitch the basic ideas behind them in a way such that the average person would agree?
I dunno, why bring up the Nazis as though they had popular ideas?
What parts of Marxism do you want to chop off? I am referring to the whole of Marxism, ie critique of Capitalism, philosophical grounding in Dialectical and Historical Materialism, and Communism.
Yes, people generally don't agree with the ideas posed by Nazism.
i didn't and i've already clarified that?
i'm not sure what more there is to say on this
if you're referring to everything then that would include stuff like das kapital which i don't think you can reasonably refer to as "easy to understand"
"philosophical grounding in Dialectical and Historical Materialism" also seems like it would be a fairly hard thing for the average person to understand
also, marx didn't invent communism, so to say communism is contained within marxism is incorrect
the opening of the communist manifesto literally references the fact that european powers were already trying to "exorcise" the idea from the continent at the time
nazism proposed pre-natal scanning and graduate family planning stimulus? that's news to me
All of these are fairly straightforward and easy to understand, it just takes a while to get into the nitty gritty. Marx did not invent Communism, but Communism is core to Marxism.
Ah, "the trains ran on time." We both know that's not Nazism.
i feel like everything's "easy to understand" if you assume infinite time to explain it, but for the sake of argument, let's agree that these in fact "easy to understand"
in which case, the ideas behind pre-natal scanning and graduate family stimulus are also easy to understand, so we haven't really moved anywhere.
this post still doesn't make any case for marxist ideals being sound other than "people like them when they hear them without the label". which i'm arguing (via the use of the provided two examples) is also true for eugenics.
and if "people like the ideas when they hear them without the label" is justification for ideas being good, then eugenics must be good, but we know eugenics isn't good, so it's not a good justification
so the post doesn't make a good argument for marxism being good
and we already know the post is attempting to be an argument for why marxism is good, because you already acknowledged it's making the case that "people have a negative connotations about marxism", and combined with the point about nazis from earlier you enjoyed so much, that's sufficient to show that it's attempting to be an argument for why marxism is good
what are you talking about? why are you trying to bring nazis into everything now?
(also, "trains ran on time" is mussolini, who was a fascist, not a nazi)
Actually I think I get what you're saying now and I think you have a point. I am not sure the two can be directly compared that way, though. There are different reasons for why people think each is bad once they hear the name and I don't think the meme is actually saying that this is an argument for or against anything. Just a funny observation.