if you say “libs” it instantly puts people in the headspace of “own the libs”, “everything i don’t like is woke”… it’s a dog whistle, and thus sets people up to think the rest of what’s being said is tainted
the ideologies in the group are not a cohesive block
Part of the reason to use the word is to expose liberals to the idea that they are not in fact the Left and their policies support capitalism at every turn
I take drive by downvotes as a compliment, the meaning I get from them is, “I don’t like this because it challenged my beliefs in a way I can’t answer.” Great! That’s what I was going for.
Is it unfathomable that someone could see something they think is wrong but doesn’t think starting a long-winded Internet argument wherein neither party will in any scenario whatsoever convince the other of anything is worth their time?
I think it’s representative of intellectual cowardice which is why I made my comment. It is entirely consistent with my experience when commenting on a .world post and calling out Liberalism’s “true face”.
It seems you would rather have this meta argument about posting etiquette then actually address any substantive policy or historical arguments so I’m not sure you are making the point you think you are
Cowards driving by and downvoting without addressing any arguments: where is the lie?
if you say “libs” it instantly puts people in the headspace of “own the libs”, “everything i don’t like is woke”… it’s a dog whistle, and thus sets people up to think the rest of what’s being said is tainted
the ideologies in the group are not a cohesive block
Part of the reason to use the word is to expose liberals to the idea that they are not in fact the Left and their policies support capitalism at every turn
I take drive by downvotes as a compliment, the meaning I get from them is, “I don’t like this because it challenged my beliefs in a way I can’t answer.” Great! That’s what I was going for.
That’s a nice way to think about it, thank you
Is it unfathomable that someone could see something they think is wrong but doesn’t think starting a long-winded Internet argument wherein neither party will in any scenario whatsoever convince the other of anything is worth their time?
I think it’s representative of intellectual cowardice which is why I made my comment. It is entirely consistent with my experience when commenting on a
.worldpost and calling out Liberalism’s “true face”.Pack it up, fellas. Not wanting to start Internet arguments is now “intellectual cowardice”.
It seems you would rather have this meta argument about posting etiquette then actually address any substantive policy or historical arguments so I’m not sure you are making the point you think you are
Nah, I’ve said all I wanted to say have a good day
They’re right, you’ve got nothing and you know it