Look, I get it, you’re one of the standard issue online leftists who saw that one retarded comic strip about Popper and think that justifies your resentful desire to punch a nazi or whatever. The whole motte and bailey of “well umm actually by dehumanize I just mean detaining violent ideologues who refuse to engage in argument, and I guess maybe also shooting Charlie Kirk for expressing opinions different to my own cause words are violence or whatever” is incredibly tiresome. If you had ever read The Open Society and its Enemies (or anything beyond forum posts and microblogs) you would know that you are that irrational, violent voice that cannot be tolerated according to Popper.
rofl! You are a pathetic mess. Seriously, you are a joke.
If you cannot understand the difference between killing a violent extremist who ACTIVELY called for the harm of others, and someone who merely recognizes that rhetoric as harmful to the very human condition, then you are nothing more than the most useful idiot vile beings could ever ask for.
Why do you want to be such a pathetic useful idiot? You are DANGEROUSLY close to being one of those pathetic fools unprepared to meet others on the field of rational argument…
Either CLEARLY state your claims of rational thought, or go down in history as a fucking tool unable to think your way out of a fucking paper bag.
What do you think, “But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force” means? Because thus far, you’ve proven to be too stupid to understand the very things you attempt to quote… NOWHERE have I said that we should dismiss vile people as humans. The debate on who deserves “humanity” comes down to whether or not you consider basic name-calling as “dehumanizing”.
For the record, if you think basic name-calling is “dehumanizing”, you’re nothing but a useful tool for censorship.
Do you know what “depending on what they mean” means?
Look, I get it, you’re one of the standard issue online leftists who saw that one retarded comic strip about Popper and think that justifies your resentful desire to punch a nazi or whatever. The whole motte and bailey of “well umm actually by dehumanize I just mean detaining violent ideologues who refuse to engage in argument, and I guess maybe also shooting Charlie Kirk for expressing opinions different to my own cause words are violence or whatever” is incredibly tiresome. If you had ever read The Open Society and its Enemies (or anything beyond forum posts and microblogs) you would know that you are that irrational, violent voice that cannot be tolerated according to Popper.
rofl! You are a pathetic mess. Seriously, you are a joke.
If you cannot understand the difference between killing a violent extremist who ACTIVELY called for the harm of others, and someone who merely recognizes that rhetoric as harmful to the very human condition, then you are nothing more than the most useful idiot vile beings could ever ask for.
Why do you want to be such a pathetic useful idiot? You are DANGEROUSLY close to being one of those pathetic fools unprepared to meet others on the field of rational argument…
Either CLEARLY state your claims of rational thought, or go down in history as a fucking tool unable to think your way out of a fucking paper bag.
What do you think, “But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force” means? Because thus far, you’ve proven to be too stupid to understand the very things you attempt to quote… NOWHERE have I said that we should dismiss vile people as humans. The debate on who deserves “humanity” comes down to whether or not you consider basic name-calling as “dehumanizing”.
For the record, if you think basic name-calling is “dehumanizing”, you’re nothing but a useful tool for censorship.