Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Vlaara, Jun 18, 2020.
arrowdick reporting for duty
UN getting involved is going to go over well in conservative circles: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57646933
I wonder if this actually reduces the likelihood of ever doing reparations.
*thing happens that isn't someone being racist, sexist, classist, any negative ist*
conservatives aren't gonna be happy about this
strangely enough this manifests most strongly in a foreign boomer but /shrug
Yes, it's fascinating how the original conversation was "pfft it's not that bad, you can't really point to anything concrete" and now it's become "pfft it's not that bad because I don't care about it."
he's a utilitarian tho and
the real question is has Velox fucked a horse or naw? and if he did, will he do the right thing by her if she got pregnant?
I know, I thought about asking him what year he was born before I posted it.
I've read this three times and I still don't understand what the fuck that means.
I didnt recognize the brand so it wasnt my first choice. But man look how adorable the character is .
I'm not sure if this is referring to me or not, but I literally have no idea what you are talking about.
Hey, don't shoot the messenger. Is there anything factually wrong with what I posted? Republicans really dislike when the UN butts in, and I'm honestly curious if this will help or hurt the probability of reparations passing.
Words are simple abstractions of the real world. You can change the meaning of a word simply by widespread usage (repetition). By shifting the meaning of a good or bad word to include some more specific thing you want to shill for or against, you can also shift public perceptions of that thing. It can be as dishonest as Trump's strategy of repeatedly calling Hillary a crook though. Both political extremes like to use this. Influencing the masses by twisting language has a long history in both practice and fiction (e.g. 1984). The most common examples on the far-right atm is probably branding anybody who disagrees with Trump a RINO (even though Trumpism is very different from classical republicanism), Marxist, etc. The most common example on the far-left is probably expanding the notion of "racism" in creative ways to include any kind of disagreement. (NOTE: I'm not saying there isn't racism, but to certain elements on the far-left it's such a convenient hammer that everything starts looking like a nail)
It still doesn't hold up under closer inspection, because words have no inherent worth, they are only useful as far as they reflect reality. If a word now sometimes means several very different things, to effectively reason about them you now need to use more words to separate these. That doesn't stop it from being superficially very persuasive for the average person though.
Separate names with a comma.