In other words, you don't want to be challenged - live out your life as an ignorant person. You're no better than feminists who refuse to see the other side of the story.
Excellent . I've often suspected a strong Jewish backing for the feminist cult, as america is deeply matriarchal, which is spelt Jew. I'll try 2 avoid the circumcision connection....
Before there can be any ‘challenge’ there has to be agreement on a baseline set of facts, such as whether or not a major historical event occurred. Since that is not possible, there can be no debate. It’s futile.
I saw that. A couple of things. His account would likely test the limits of free speech on this platform. It could also, I would hope, test the old proposition that the answer to bad speech is more or better speech. If that proposition holds, his account should wither and die of its own accord, no censorship required. That would take direct and sustained engagement from people who oppose his beliefs. On the other hand, it might just be a magnet for like-minded folks and thrive. At least then, we'd see the darkness exposed to the light of day.
Hadn't heard that term before, might have thought it a complimentary / complementary counterpoint to 'abstract' thinkers, like imagistic poets or something. But yes, that's a predictable outcome.
I should have listened to myself when I suggested that you not use this thread to make your points. Live and learn.
In other words, you don't want to be challenged - live out your life as an ignorant person. You're no better than feminists who refuse to see the other side of the story.
Excellent . I've often suspected a strong Jewish backing for the feminist cult, as america is deeply matriarchal, which is spelt Jew. I'll try 2 avoid the circumcision connection....
Before there can be any ‘challenge’ there has to be agreement on a baseline set of facts, such as whether or not a major historical event occurred. Since that is not possible, there can be no debate. It’s futile.
I suggested he open his own Substack and take his ideas there.
I saw that. A couple of things. His account would likely test the limits of free speech on this platform. It could also, I would hope, test the old proposition that the answer to bad speech is more or better speech. If that proposition holds, his account should wither and die of its own accord, no censorship required. That would take direct and sustained engagement from people who oppose his beliefs. On the other hand, it might just be a magnet for like-minded folks and thrive. At least then, we'd see the darkness exposed to the light of day.
Have heard of concrete thinkers? No matter what their beliefs are set in concrete and not even a jack hammer will make any difference.
So someone like you?
Hadn't heard that term before, might have thought it a complimentary / complementary counterpoint to 'abstract' thinkers, like imagistic poets or something. But yes, that's a predictable outcome.