3 ms·
Except I haven't devolved from anything. It's entirely consistent, and the whole chain confirms that it isn't possible to coherently debate this with people who
by remarkEon 1mo ago
Except I haven't devolved from anything. It's entirely consistent, and the whole chain confirms that it isn't possible to coherently debate this with people whose starting position is insane, like yours. At it is insane to assert that "trivially every other country has a better rack record" than the US does, and it is insane to claim that the US was founded with the express intention of killing off the indigenous inhabitants of North America. These are insane positions to hold, and yet ... here you are.
- vrganj 1mo agoAppreciate you continuing to explore. Note how you're still doing it, by clinging on to an already-invalidated definition of purpose instead of precondition and still refusing to actually face the track record you introduced. It's been lovely, but I think this exploration of ideology has run its course, there's not really more to see from here. We've already gone from claiming to want debate all the way down to expressing pure nationalist xenophobia and expressly stating to be closed to any argument. We now even had confession that that was the consistent position all along, revealing the call for rational debate was never the true position - it had been an ideological device all along. We've already witnessed so many levels of fetishistic disavowal. There's nothing new left to look at, we've fully looped around to just restating the original thesis. Thank you again for sharing!