me replying “third strike bud. youve had more than enough chances to answer basic socratic questions. keep silent” followed by four straight muted replies
bad bootlicker! timeout!
WEDNESDAY. The day you flumpty-foo! And you think boopty-bop and zippity-zoom but the truth is, razza frazza wuzza wooza. What I'm trying to say is, maybe your brain isn't working either, but that's OK, because you're great. PS you need a firmware upgrade in the form of "coffee."
thanks but ill take iran’s word over the american government
third strike bud. youve had more than enough chances to answer basic socratic questions. keep silent
still working on why the chinese civil war happened? until you get an answer please keep it down
🥱
a middle finger
shut the fuck up about people you are angry at for two seconds dipshit. what do you believe? why do you think it happened?
if all violence is the same to you, do us all a favor: be a pacifist offline while the adults with actual coherent worldviews talk amongst thenselves without you
let me put this as simply as possible for you: there are children who have a more functional understanding of politics than you. you compare china’s situation with taiwan, a nation created by people defeated in a civil war, to israel genociding people. you dont understand the most basic concepts
you really like doing everything except answering the basic questions asked of you. why did the chinese civil war occur? what did the communists want?
but you clearly decided to come into my pins to whine at me since you couldnt arhue against anything i said to you. bye!
incorrect. this is a statement by engels about the proletariat. communism is a dictatorship of the proletariat
what was the civil war in china about? we have to go back to the socratic method because you havent read a history book
the difference is you are gish galloping as a distraction and i am asking you a straightforward question you refuse to answer. if you dont want to learn anything about how ignorant you are then i can simply mute you
they want self-determination to continue to oppress people. again, something you have already agreed with me should not be tolerated
rubes who will believe anything fascists tell them
and of course, you did not answer the question. for a second time: should the confederacy have been allowed their own land and nation after the civil war to continue practicing slavery?
you are being willfully obtuse. the confederacy was a movement by exploiters. the ccp, again, were only “authoritarian” in the sense of stopping exploiters, which you have already agreed with me is a valid point
they can do whatever, im never setting foot in there again and will judge anyone who does
do you believe the confederacy should have been alowed their own land and independent nation after the civil war to continue the slave trade?
i didnt ask how you feel or what you think. i do not care about your vibes. i want an educated answer from you about why the ccp does not respect taiwan’s existence, based on evidence
why doesnt the ccp want taiwan to exist?
no i am saying your kneejerk assessment of china not valuing human rights because taiwan exists is too ignorant, bigoted and bad faith to even argue with. again, you accept what i say about authoritarianism but pretend a specific situation in china is unique to communism. it is childish
like we get it. you hate the chinese. again, why should anyone take a bad faith sinophobic argument like that seriously?
those groups of people have long-standing disputes over their land and culture with china. you would like to boil that down to “communism doesnt value human rights” which is both a gross oversimplification and an incorrect assessment of china as representative of all communism
like you have no coherent ideology to espouse on your timeline. you have no principles. all you do is react to communists. you are lower than a content mill
buddy you dont even know what the word tankie means or why it is in usage
and i am sure you would argue that is not your argument, but that is exactly what the “communism is authoritarian” argument is. it is a pathetic defense of the right to exploit and oppress
