United States | News & Politics

Not liking my comment doesn’t make me wrong

I think we may need to go to square 1 on discursive thought. I did not say or imply that not liking what you said means you are wrong. You are using an informal fallacy known as a straw man, which is where a person replies to an allegation by staying or implying something that was not said on the other person's behalf because it is easier to contend with.

This is a fancy way of telling you to stop relying on making things up. I have never implied what you alleged. Please do your best to stick to what I actually say instead of using bad faith posturing.

and the “conclusions” you draw are obvious proof that you’re in no position to criticize the “logic” of others

Then deny them. What was I wrong about? What was bad logic?

And I don’t need your permission to comment here.

I didn't imply that you did. That's 2 straw men already in just this comment.

If you’re too scared of your comments being scrutinized, perhaps you should post your comments on the wall of a toilet stall rather than to a public forum.

I would not consider this series of inventions and clichés to be scrutiny. At the moment there is a struggle to get you to respond to what I actually said instead of making things up. I will be excited when I finally get some scrutiny!

That was your point. I summarized.

It was about the same length as my original sentence. The purpose of the misquote was to mock because you'd like to imagine me as like an obstinate child than acknowledge your own fear of even saying the word genocide - as you are complicit in one. No need for you to try explaining, it was obvious.

Again, of you don’t like being scrutinized, don’t post in a public forum.

Yet again you have skipped over the other point I made. Isn't it getting conspicuous!?

It’s cute how you blame others for your own actions, even when you have to make the reasons up by pretending to be psychic and reading my mind.

I don't know what this is referring to. What did I do that I blamed others for?

And I don't need to be a psychic, just aware of tropes and behaviors. Notice that you are already confirming several of them accidentally!

Yet, somehow, you still act like this is a rational position…

What is the position I present as rational? That you should be against genocide? That you should work against genociders? Personally, I thought that would work as a shared baseline. I think the barrier is a set of chauvinistic talking points handed to you by the political class as well as a learned helplessness. And obviously an approach to discourse that is so defensive it permits repeatedly inventing things from whole cloth.