Topic: MAGA claims to love “free speech.”
Anonymous A started this discussion 4 days ago #132,414
But only if it’s their right to lie, insult, provoke, promote conspiracies, deflect, or to engage in Nazi rhetoric and shitposting.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 4 days ago, 18 minutes later[^] [v] #1,413,601
You would never shitpost, right, OP?
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 4 days ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,611
Saying the n word is protected by free speech.
Saying black people are humans at a university? Oh no that’s communism. Remember that? Remember how in the USSR, 100 million people starved to death because what Lenin did, is Lenin said black people aren’t livestock? That’s why the Soviet Union failed, and that’s what the definition of communism is. That’s so dangerous that needs to be censored more than racism does!
Saying black people are humans at a university? Oh no that’s communism. Remember that? Remember how in the USSR, 100 million people starved to death because what Lenin did, is Lenin said black people aren’t livestock? That’s why the Soviet Union failed, and that’s what the definition of communism is. That’s so dangerous that needs to be censored more than racism does!
Anonymous C double-posted this 4 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,612
But for real, I feel like I don’t even know what communism means anymore. I thought it was an economic system, but these days apparently republicans are telling me communism is when you say black people are humans. It’s interesting how that kills people somehow.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 4 days ago, 4 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,638
@1,413,601 (B)
> You would never shitpost, right, OP?
I shitpost playfully. I don’t target people and shit on them or wave the flag of autocracy.
> You would never shitpost, right, OP?
I shitpost playfully. I don’t target people and shit on them or wave the flag of autocracy.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 4 days ago, 1 hour later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,663
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 4 days ago, 50 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,668
What beliefs have the right tried to censor?
@1,413,611 (C)
What right winger said it's communism to call black people humans?
@1,413,611 (C)
What right winger said it's communism to call black people humans?
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 4 days ago, 42 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,670
niggers tongue my anus
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 4 days ago, 11 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,673
@1,413,668 (F)
A lot of conservatives have called pro black movements communist. During apartheid, people who were against democracy would accuse blacks who were opposed to apartheid of being communist, during the 1960s, civil rights activists in the US were accused of being communists, when there was the BLM movement, I heard right wingers saying that was communist, I heard right wingers call Kamala Harris communist. It’s nothing new, and I’m getting tired of hearing right wingers misuse the word communist over and over again.
Also, on the censorship thing, right wingers have definitely censored people before. The Nazis were all for censorship. Unless you’re one of those stupid people who think the Nazis were socialist because they called themselves national socialists and who think North Korea is democratic because it’s official name is the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
A lot of conservatives have called pro black movements communist. During apartheid, people who were against democracy would accuse blacks who were opposed to apartheid of being communist, during the 1960s, civil rights activists in the US were accused of being communists, when there was the BLM movement, I heard right wingers saying that was communist, I heard right wingers call Kamala Harris communist. It’s nothing new, and I’m getting tired of hearing right wingers misuse the word communist over and over again.
Also, on the censorship thing, right wingers have definitely censored people before. The Nazis were all for censorship. Unless you’re one of those stupid people who think the Nazis were socialist because they called themselves national socialists and who think North Korea is democratic because it’s official name is the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Anonymous H double-posted this 4 days ago, 4 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,675
If you want more modern examples from the United States: climate change, "woke ideology," and evolution. People say they don’t want their kids being taught "woke" stuff. The term woke originated in the 1930s as slang that African Americans used to describe being aware of racial injustice. Of course, now right wingers have only modified it slightly to also include people who advocate for gay rights. It’s essentially a way to censor history. There’s no reason why children shouldn’t learn about the history of their own country. Good things happened and bad things happened. Kids are smart enough to reconcile patriotism with knowing that slavery happened and it was bad at the same time, children aren’t idiots.
Anonymous H triple-posted this 4 days ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,676
Also keep in mind that thousands of black people were murdered by the KKK in the 1930s. They would hang black people from trees and set black people on fire. There’s no reason why people should be using the word "woke" negatively given the historical context unless they either don’t support being against what was happening back then or if they think what happened back then is less important than making fun of gay people. Either way it’s bad.
Anonymous H quadruple-posted this 4 days ago, 6 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,678
In the south they also used to have a thing called *n word* BBQs where whites would have community get togethers where they would BBQ black people. Yet there are still people who believe racist colonial era lies created by white settlers to justify imperialism that they were "civilizing" Africa by ending cannibalism that wasn’t widely practiced in the first place, when today anybody can easily look for themselves on the internet and find pictures of burned black people hanging from trees with limbs missing. The right absolutely does want to censor history, and they don’t want people to know just how bad the past actually was so that they can justify continuing economic injustices against ethnic minorities. For example, by spreading fake information and fake statistics claiming that blacks are less intelligent than whites, therefore they must be less wealthy than whites because of a lack of ability. It’s only possible for someone to believe that if they either have no knowledge of history and the origin of these lies, or if they’re genuinely bad people with genuinely bad intentions.
Anonymous H quintuple-posted this 4 days ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,681
And what about complaining about DEI, what about complaining about "woke" media? How come the right always complains when it’s a black person in some form of media, whether it’s a video game or a movie, or a show, or whatever? Nobody on the right ever said anything back when whites were playing Asian roles. There’s a clear and obvious intent to censor certain types of people and to erase their contributions from the record so that a false history can be created.
Anonymous H sextuple-posted this 4 days ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,684
And the problem is, the idea that all of this is something we shouldn’t teach people because it will make white people feel guilty is stupid, because the fact that generation after generation, the United States increasingly became better in regards to human rights and closer to the ideal of "all men are created equal" is actually the realization of the most powerful optimism of the ideal our nation was founded on.
Anonymous H septuple-posted this 4 days ago, 39 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,699
Or the right wing "black fatigue" meme. Like what? White conservatives think it’s okay to just say they’re tired that a race of people exists? I don’t even want to say that’s censorship, that’s more of a genocidal intent.
Some black guy replied with this 4 days ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,701
i tongue white mens anii
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 4 days ago, 10 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,779
That sounds like disinformation dangerous to our democracy.
Anonymous F replied with this 4 days ago, 1 hour later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,781
@1,413,673 (H)
I'm not responding to everything in your 7-back-to-back walls of text, but they call those movements communist because they often do openly espouse communism or communist ideals.
And the question was "What right winger said it's communism to call black people humans?".
When one group wants their own community for themselves, separate from other cultures that is not the same thing as denying the humanity of the other groups.
Groups that want to redistribute wealth will be called communist. Groups that respect property rights won't.
I'm not responding to everything in your 7-back-to-back walls of text, but they call those movements communist because they often do openly espouse communism or communist ideals.
And the question was "What right winger said it's communism to call black people humans?".
When one group wants their own community for themselves, separate from other cultures that is not the same thing as denying the humanity of the other groups.
Groups that want to redistribute wealth will be called communist. Groups that respect property rights won't.
The blackest guy ever joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,802
@previous (F)
By that logic the United States is communist because eminent domain is in the constitution.
By that logic the United States is communist because eminent domain is in the constitution.
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,803
Fun fact: the word "capitalism" does not appear in the constitution.
The blackest guy ever triple-posted this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,804
If you want to get really technical, the United States isn’t capitalist or socialist, it’s a mixed market economy with elements of both socialism and capitalism. But ideological idealists like to say capitalism is the greatest thing ever when unregulated free markets with no government intervention don’t actually exist anywhere in real life for good reasons.
The blackest guy ever quadruple-posted this 3 days ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,805
The Soviet Union had and modern China has a system called state capitalism where the government has partial ownership in corporations.
https://www.intc.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1748/intel-and-trump-administration-reach-historic-agreement-to
Socialism involves collecting money through taxes from people who are more wealthy and redistributing that money to people who are less wealthy.
https://www.ssa.gov/
https://www.intc.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1748/intel-and-trump-administration-reach-historic-agreement-to
Socialism involves collecting money through taxes from people who are more wealthy and redistributing that money to people who are less wealthy.
https://www.ssa.gov/
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 21 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,806
WTF is with the autistic wall of text stream of consciousness poster? Fuck you!
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,807
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 33 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,813
If this is what you people consider too much text, it’s obvious you’ve never read a book.
The blackest guy ever joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,840
@1,413,781 (F)
> When one group wants their own community for themselves, separate from other cultures that is not the same thing as denying the humanity of the other groups.
Read a history book. This has to be one of the most blatantly uneducated takes I’ve heard in a while.
> When one group wants their own community for themselves, separate from other cultures that is not the same thing as denying the humanity of the other groups.
Read a history book. This has to be one of the most blatantly uneducated takes I’ve heard in a while.
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,841
For starters, if white people wanted to enforce racial segregation to "have their own communities for themselves without denying the humanity of others" why the fuck did they do it in Africa? Do you know how insane it is that white supremacists invaded countries, killed the natives, and then acted like they were defending themselves living on foreign land? You’re one of the dumbest people I’ve ever talked to in my entire life.
The blackest guy ever triple-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,842
Where did you even go to school that it’s 2026 and you believe this crap from the 1960s? Were you homeschooled or something? I mean I know public school is bad, but this is inexcusable.
The blackest guy ever quadruple-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,843
Even in the 1960s, there were actually some white people who protested against segregation with the black people who were protesting for it. So even if this was a different time period, it’s still just flat out an unintelligent thing to say.
The blackest guy ever quintuple-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,844
Like okay, for a minute, imagine if I, a black guy, went to Japan, I kicked a Japanese farmer off his land, and I said that Japanese people can’t come on my farm, and I’m only doing business with other black people, the Japanese can’t vote, and only black people can be president in Japan.
You’d call me insane right?
That’s literally what WHITE PEOPLE DID IN AFRICA RETARD!
You’d call me insane right?
That’s literally what WHITE PEOPLE DID IN AFRICA RETARD!
The blackest guy ever sextuple-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,845
Then imagine if I had the audacity to ask why the Japanese guy doesn’t live in a house after I kicked him out of his house. Then imagine if on top of that I had the audacity to ask if Japanese people don’t live in houses because Japanese people are biologically stupid.
Are you actually so dumb you don’t understand this shit?
Are you actually so dumb you don’t understand this shit?
The blackest guy ever septuple-posted this 3 days ago, 54 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,846
Then white people on top of that have the audacity to ask why white farmers get murdered by black people in South Africa.
Like wow, I have NO FUCKING CLUE.
Like wow, I have NO FUCKING CLUE.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 12 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,847
Magafags fall into one of three categories. Which one are you, fora?
1) The marks. Fundamentally retarded people who have bought into the bullshit and genuinely believe every word
2) The opportunists. Bigots who understand that the entire ideology is dumb as fuck, but go along with it because they know that it will hurt the people they don't like. Whether that be the poor, the browns, the gays, women, foreigners, whatever
3) The beneficiaries. The ones at the top or in the know, who care about nothing more than financially exploiting the chaos. Some may hold beliefs that overlap with the previous category, but that's a secondary benefit to the financial gain
1) The marks. Fundamentally retarded people who have bought into the bullshit and genuinely believe every word
2) The opportunists. Bigots who understand that the entire ideology is dumb as fuck, but go along with it because they know that it will hurt the people they don't like. Whether that be the poor, the browns, the gays, women, foreigners, whatever
3) The beneficiaries. The ones at the top or in the know, who care about nothing more than financially exploiting the chaos. Some may hold beliefs that overlap with the previous category, but that's a secondary benefit to the financial gain
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,849
@previous (M)
On point number two: I understand why racism exists because of historical reasons, but sexism is weird. Do guys that hate women hate their own mothers? I wonder about that sometimes…
On point number two: I understand why racism exists because of historical reasons, but sexism is weird. Do guys that hate women hate their own mothers? I wonder about that sometimes…
Anonymous M replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,850
@previous (The blackest guy ever)
It's less about hating them in the same way they hate blacks or gays. It's more about controlling them and keeping them in their place. They don't want to get rid of them, they just want them to stay in their lane, so to speak
It's less about hating them in the same way they hate blacks or gays. It's more about controlling them and keeping them in their place. They don't want to get rid of them, they just want them to stay in their lane, so to speak
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,851
I also don’t get why white supremacists hate monkeys. They think humans evolved from monkeys (we share a common ancestor but we didn’t literally evolve from monkeys). Like they have some kind of disgust at primates, they’re disgusted by chimpanzees or gorillas or whatever.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,853
It’s a mental illness.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
The blackest guy ever triple-posted this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,854
@1,413,850 (M)
Idk, I just think sexism is dumb. I don’t have the energy to boss women around.
Idk, I just think sexism is dumb. I don’t have the energy to boss women around.
(Edited 38 seconds later.)
Anonymous M replied with this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,855
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 10 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,856
The blackest guy ever joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,857
It’s also ironic considering how much DNA humans and chimpanzees share that racists are trying to argue that different types of humans are so horribly different that we’re incompatible somehow, when the majority of human DNA is the same as a chimp’s DNA. And I mean, you can hate a chimp for being violent or whatever, but then if you look at what people have done in history, it is apparent that we’re similar to chimpanzees in a lot of bad ways, as a species (talking about all races).
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,858
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 28 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,859
Yay! The retarded white guy is back impersonating me again!
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,860
FYI, all apes are primates.
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 55 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,861
why cant normal people spam like me! Its fucking scary being alone with the void in my head.
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,862
@previous (The blackest guy ever)
Get help. You probably have schizophrenia. That’s why your hearing monkey noises inside your brain from God telling you to kill your brother or whatever other delusions you have.
Get help. You probably have schizophrenia. That’s why your hearing monkey noises inside your brain from God telling you to kill your brother or whatever other delusions you have.
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,865
@1,413,857 (The blackest guy ever)
If you look into how similar human DNA is between individuals, all the biological determinism and social Darwinism ideas starts looking really stupid.
If you look into how similar human DNA is between individuals, all the biological determinism and social Darwinism ideas starts looking really stupid.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 25 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,867
Once again, multiple rants in a row, so I can't respond to all of that.
South Africa did have good cause to kick out or integrate the whites, because the blacks were there first. It didn't work out for them, life is worse for everyone there since the end of apartheid, but they had cause to defend their land.
When whites want a whites-only community in their native lands, they are called racist and the blacks try to force integration. That is offensive, it's not being dehumanized for people to want separate, sovereign communities.
No one has said it's "communist" for blacks to be called human, they've called redistribution efforts communist because it's an apt label for that behavior.
South Africa did have good cause to kick out or integrate the whites, because the blacks were there first. It didn't work out for them, life is worse for everyone there since the end of apartheid, but they had cause to defend their land.
When whites want a whites-only community in their native lands, they are called racist and the blacks try to force integration. That is offensive, it's not being dehumanized for people to want separate, sovereign communities.
No one has said it's "communist" for blacks to be called human, they've called redistribution efforts communist because it's an apt label for that behavior.
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,868
@previous (F)
Everything is worse for everyone after the end of apartheid?
What are you trying to say there? Do you just think I’m an idiot and I’m going to fall for that?
Everything is worse for everyone after the end of apartheid?
What are you trying to say there? Do you just think I’m an idiot and I’m going to fall for that?
Anonymous G replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,869
@previous (The blackest guy ever)
> Do you just think I’m an idiot
Doughnut be silly, nobody thinks your an idiot.
They KNOW it.
> Do you just think I’m an idiot
Doughnut be silly, nobody thinks your an idiot.
They KNOW it.
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,870
You can’t simultaneously claim that everyone should be separate from each other and have sovereignty over their own communities while suggesting that blacks were better off living under an authoritarian dictatorship led by a white minority. Both things can’t be true at the same time, and you bet your ass I’m smart enough to know which half of that was the lie.
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,871
Also, your argument about sovereignty doesn’t make any rational sense. Groups of people don’t exist. You aren’t the same person as another white person, you’re two separate people. You have exactly the same amount of autonomy in a community of white people as you would if you were living in a community where everybody except you was black. If a room has 10 people in it, it doesn’t matter what race the other people are, you’re always 1 out of 10.
The blackest guy ever triple-posted this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,872
If you really want to experience what it feels like to be 100% of the population, walk into an empty room and close the door. 100% of the population of that room is 100% you. Now what? That doesn’t accomplish anything.
The blackest guy ever quadruple-posted this 3 days ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,877
It also brings into question of, if you don’t want to be around other people, nobody is stopping you from doing that, that’s fine. But what right do you have to tell other people where they can’t be? That’s different. How are you going to tell other people where they can and can’t buy a house because they were born a certain way? That’s inherently discriminatory in an unfair way because there’s nothing someone can do to earn merit. That’s how you get parasitic social phenomena like nepotism that degrade the quality of leadership.
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,878
Power hungry liars, they are.
The blackest guy ever replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,882
The thing is, the most successful countries are the most racially diverse. White supremacists talk about Japan, Japan has had economic stagnation for decades. You know why Europe hasn’t? Because unlike Japan Europe is diverse. The United States has a bigger economy than China, but we have 1/4th the population. China isn’t 13% black.
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,885
When you make more money as a country, people stop having children. When people stop having children, your economy stops working. If you’re a diverse tolerant country, people want to move there, your population can grow while people are having fewer than two children, so the economy keeps working. If Europe stops immigration, Africa doesn’t need immigration, they have a growing native population. Europe and the United States will get smaller without immigration. People have these stupid ideas about white replacement, but being against foreigners will actually accelerate this process not slow it down.
Anonymous O triple-posted this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,886
And of course you can be like blah blah white man technology we have a superior military blah blah blah. Eventually what’s going to happen is Europe isn’t going to have enough 18 year old boys for technology to make a difference. Google the average age of an African vs a European, google what it will be in 2100. Their demographics are so different they’re still going to be younger 74 years from now.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 days ago, 39 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,890
its weird how teh nigguhs have so much to say, despite having nothing valuable to say.
The blackest guy ever joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,891
The blackest guy ever double-posted this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,892
It’s also depressing how short sighted people are. It’s obvious what’s going to happen.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 days ago, 24 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,894
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,912
@1,413,870 (The blackest guy ever)
People can voluntarily choose to live as subjects among another people, or choose to live in land controlled by their own people.
People can voluntarily choose to live as subjects among another people, or choose to live in land controlled by their own people.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 45 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,913
White people deserve a place they have sovereignty, just like every other race.
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,915
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,916
White people don’t deserve anything. A race can’t deserve something.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 43 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,917
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 52 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,919
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 50 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,920
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 58 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,921
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,924
The fact is, Europe never won against Africa. This is an infinite game, there are no winners. Either you survive or you don’t, and currently, Africa has a higher population than Europe. Africa is the only continent which has a birth rate above replacement while Europe is below replacement.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,925
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,927
@previous (F)
You’re one of those people who play games because you’re not confident so you’d rather distract from the conversation.
You’re one of those people who play games because you’re not confident so you’d rather distract from the conversation.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,929
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
The conversation was focused until you made your joke about it literally being carved up.
Are you ready to get back to the subject?
The conversation was focused until you made your joke about it literally being carved up.
Are you ready to get back to the subject?
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 54 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,930
Fundamentally, tell me where I’m wrong. You think that whites are superior because whites colonized Africa. What I think, is the British Empire does not exist and the French Empire does not exist. So how did you win? We’re all still here.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,932
Some people never realize certain things.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous G replied with this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,933
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,934
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 57 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,935
re·al·ize
/ˈrē(ə)ˌlīz/
verb
2. cause (something desired or anticipated) to happen.
/ˈrē(ə)ˌlīz/
verb
2. cause (something desired or anticipated) to happen.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 30 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,942
@1,413,930 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
The British Empire was replaced by the US/NATO. Whites still control an empire, but it's institutions have changed over time.
The French still have an empire in Africa, although they lost a couple countries recently.
The British Empire was replaced by the US/NATO. Whites still control an empire, but it's institutions have changed over time.
The French still have an empire in Africa, although they lost a couple countries recently.
(Edited 22 seconds later.)
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,945
@previous (F)
The United States and NATO you say? How’s that going?
https://youtu.be/xlTwsG_c4QE
The United States and NATO you say? How’s that going?
https://youtu.be/xlTwsG_c4QE
(Edited 36 seconds later.)
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,946
Anonymous P replied with this 3 days ago, 11 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,947
Irrational people are unpredictable like The Joker
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,951
@1,413,946 (F)
Okay. And so what? What are they doing with that power? Making shallow holes in the sand in the middle of nowhere?
https://youtu.be/dO4emcu5YOE?t=20s
Okay. And so what? What are they doing with that power? Making shallow holes in the sand in the middle of nowhere?
https://youtu.be/dO4emcu5YOE?t=20s
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,952
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Controlling the global economy, and countering rival empires that would otherwise subjugate the west.
Controlling the global economy, and countering rival empires that would otherwise subjugate the west.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 29 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,953
Even if white people controlled everything, which they obviously don’t, what does that do for you exactly? I’m still here. How are you winning? I’m completely unconvinced of your greatness.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 47 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,954
@1,413,952 (F)
What percentage of the global economy does the United States control? Would you say it’s more than 50% or less than 50%?
What percentage of the global economy does the United States control? Would you say it’s more than 50% or less than 50%?
AfricanusAmericusXIV triple-posted this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,956
Or, put it this way: what percentage of the world economy do you think Asia is vs Europe vs the United States? I can tell you this now if you won’t answer it.
AfricanusAmericusXIV quadruple-posted this 3 days ago, 46 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,957
Asia makes up about 50% of the global economy, Europe is 15% of the global economy, and the US is 25%.
AfricanusAmericusXIV quintuple-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,959
Or in terms of population. What percentage of the population do you think the United States vs Africa, vs Europe vs Asia is?
Asia is 60% of the population, Africa is 18%, Europe is 9%, the United States is 4%.
Asia is 60% of the population, Africa is 18%, Europe is 9%, the United States is 4%.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,960
thats alot of wordsalad
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 28 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,961
@1,413,954 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
It's hard to quantify because you can't just look at US GDP over global GDP.
The US has global reserve currency status that allows them to export inflation. They can capture foreign leaders and take the country's oil without worrying about anyone relatiating. The US can pressure allies into one-sided deals that force them to buy energy, services, military equipment and pay for US bases in their country.
It's hard to put a dollar value being able to take whatever you want and print the money everyone uses.
And we haven't even gone into the other white allies that are in NATO, and what their economies and powers look like.
It's hard to quantify because you can't just look at US GDP over global GDP.
The US has global reserve currency status that allows them to export inflation. They can capture foreign leaders and take the country's oil without worrying about anyone relatiating. The US can pressure allies into one-sided deals that force them to buy energy, services, military equipment and pay for US bases in their country.
It's hard to put a dollar value being able to take whatever you want and print the money everyone uses.
And we haven't even gone into the other white allies that are in NATO, and what their economies and powers look like.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 40 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,962
Anonymous G replied with this 3 days ago, 37 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,964
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,967
@1,413,961 (F)
You have the thought process of an insecure 13 year old boy. Why do you think that stealing oil is impressive in the 21st century? China right now produces more cars than the US and Japan combined and most of those vehicles are electric. Do you really think that all those countries in Africa want to be bossed around by the United States? Canada recently lowered their tariffs on Chinese EVs.
You have the thought process of an insecure 13 year old boy. Why do you think that stealing oil is impressive in the 21st century? China right now produces more cars than the US and Japan combined and most of those vehicles are electric. Do you really think that all those countries in Africa want to be bossed around by the United States? Canada recently lowered their tariffs on Chinese EVs.
(Edited 21 seconds later.)
Anonymous I replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,968
Walmart Republic. Thanks.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 48 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,970
Anonymous G replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,972
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,974
Why do you want to prove to me that white people are so great anyway? I’m never going to agree with you. If your entire ideology is based around me suffering the consequences of you doing whatever the hell you want so that you can enjoy it, obviously I’m never going to see you as anything other than an existential enemy. I’m just polite about it.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 41 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,975
@1,413,967 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
> You have the thought process of an insecure 13 year old boy. Why do you think that stealing oil is impressive in the 21st century?
If we are talking about control over the economy, being able to take over a country with your military and seize their natural resources is very relevant.
> China right now produces more cars than the US and Japan combined and most of those vehicles are electric.
That is impressive, and it's why China is #2 economically.
> Do you really think that all those countries in Africa want to be bossed around by the United States?
I didn't claim they want it, I claimed the US controlled many countries with its military.
Do you ignore the parts of the economy that you don't like when you calculate the impact the US has?
> You have the thought process of an insecure 13 year old boy. Why do you think that stealing oil is impressive in the 21st century?
If we are talking about control over the economy, being able to take over a country with your military and seize their natural resources is very relevant.
> China right now produces more cars than the US and Japan combined and most of those vehicles are electric.
That is impressive, and it's why China is #2 economically.
> Do you really think that all those countries in Africa want to be bossed around by the United States?
I didn't claim they want it, I claimed the US controlled many countries with its military.
Do you ignore the parts of the economy that you don't like when you calculate the impact the US has?
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,977
@1,413,974 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
You don't have to accept it, but it's good to show anyone reading your mistakes.
You don't have to accept it, but it's good to show anyone reading your mistakes.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 7 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,978
@1,413,975 (F)
I’m American. I just don’t understand why you’re so insecure that you feel the need to use the United States to prove to me, a black American, that you, a white American are superior to me, when we’re both from the same country.
I’m American. I just don’t understand why you’re so insecure that you feel the need to use the United States to prove to me, a black American, that you, a white American are superior to me, when we’re both from the same country.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 37 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,979
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 19 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,980
@1,413,978 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Being from the same country doesn't mean you're equal.
There are great and lowly people in most countries.
Being from the same country doesn't mean you're equal.
There are great and lowly people in most countries.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 59 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,981
I’m actually part white, but I haven’t told you, because I don’t want your validation. I’ve never wanted to be white, because of people like you. I think you’re disgusting.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 2 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,982
@1,413,979 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
No one should expect a reliable survey from an anonymous chan site.
No one should expect a reliable survey from an anonymous chan site.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 17 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,983
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 11 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,984
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 36 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,985
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 29 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,986
@1,413,983 (F)
Well, no. I think individuals can be good or bad, and I think you’re a bad individual and I don’t like you.
Well, no. I think individuals can be good or bad, and I think you’re a bad individual and I don’t like you.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 36 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,987
AfricanusAmericusXIV triple-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,991
You completely misinterpreted what I was saying. I don’t have any problem with being white or with my heritage. I just don’t want to be validated for being white, because I empathize more with black people. I’m not a sadistic person, I care about other people.
AfricanusAmericusXIV quadruple-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,995
If I told you I was white, I’d be telling the truth, instead I always chose to tell you that I’m black, because I want you to hate me, because I don’t deem you as worthy of judging me.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 39 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,996
@1,413,987 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
A minority that can capture the leaders of non-white countries and average more wealth per person than non-whites.
A minority that can capture the leaders of non-white countries and average more wealth per person than non-whites.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 15 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,997
You don’t understand, I never was arguing with you because I ever wanted you to like me, it was always the opposite reason.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 51 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,999
@1,413,996 (F)
Bragging about being a criminal doesn’t make you any less of a criminal. I just find it embarrassing really that you think that’s something worthy of bragging about.
Bragging about being a criminal doesn’t make you any less of a criminal. I just find it embarrassing really that you think that’s something worthy of bragging about.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 15 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,000
@1,413,995 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
It doesn't matter either way.
Even if you're an Asian-Navajo mulatto, black IQs are lower than white, and the military and economic system of the world serves whites.
It doesn't matter either way.
Even if you're an Asian-Navajo mulatto, black IQs are lower than white, and the military and economic system of the world serves whites.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 32 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,002
@1,413,999 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
We were talking about who has more economic control, remember?
That's a relevant detail.
We were talking about who has more economic control, remember?
That's a relevant detail.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,003
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 41 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,004
How do you explain how highly educated Nigerian immigrants are compared with other immigrant groups?
AfricanusAmericusXIV triple-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,006
You know, the way the argument usually goes is that Asians do well in university because Asians must genetically have high IQs and there aren’t as many blacks in university so it must either be they have bad genetics or a bad culture. Except, Nigerians perform as well as East Asians in American universities, and African Americans are ethnically Nigerian.
AfricanusAmericusXIV quadruple-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,007
It would be a bit weird if somehow African Americans and Nigerians both have the exact same genetics yet somehow African Americans are biologically determined to a different outcome than Nigerian immigrants. You know, almost like American society is rigged against black people or something.
You know, you’ve been talking a lot about white people forcing other people to benefit white people. Why would I believe that someone like you wouldn’t rig the system against someone like me unfairly? Why should I believe you if you say that white people did an IQ test and found that blacks have the lowest IQ scores. If you fundamentally believe that your purpose in this world is to oppress me, why should I trust you not to do exactly that?
You know, you’ve been talking a lot about white people forcing other people to benefit white people. Why would I believe that someone like you wouldn’t rig the system against someone like me unfairly? Why should I believe you if you say that white people did an IQ test and found that blacks have the lowest IQ scores. If you fundamentally believe that your purpose in this world is to oppress me, why should I trust you not to do exactly that?
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 59 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,008
@1,414,003 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
If you are black, that doesn't tell me your IQ, because that's not how averages work.
On average black IQs are lower. Someone manically typing rants on an obscure message board every day is probably not representative of the population at large.
There's many black people that never talk on online forums except for their personal social media. Many of them can barely string a sentence together.
@1,414,004 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
The US gets the cream of the crop because people are trying hard to get in.
India sends a lot of unusually smart people too, because of H1-B, but that doesn't mean the hundreds of millions of illiterate people doing nothing all day don't exist- those people just don't even fill out the forms to apply and have no money for a plane ticket.
If you are black, that doesn't tell me your IQ, because that's not how averages work.
On average black IQs are lower. Someone manically typing rants on an obscure message board every day is probably not representative of the population at large.
There's many black people that never talk on online forums except for their personal social media. Many of them can barely string a sentence together.
@1,414,004 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
The US gets the cream of the crop because people are trying hard to get in.
India sends a lot of unusually smart people too, because of H1-B, but that doesn't mean the hundreds of millions of illiterate people doing nothing all day don't exist- those people just don't even fill out the forms to apply and have no money for a plane ticket.
(Edited 12 seconds later.)
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 55 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,010
You know, unlike you, I don’t like playing stupid. I’ll answer my own question here: I don’t believe you, and I don’t trust you, because there’s absolutely no reason why I should. I don’t brag about my IQ score, but when I was in grade school they gave me an IQ test, I know that I have a high IQ.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 53 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,012
@1,414,008 (F)
How many black people have you actually met? Because I’ve been black my entire life and I’ve never met a black person who can’t speak. That sounds like something you made up.
How many black people have you actually met? Because I’ve been black my entire life and I’ve never met a black person who can’t speak. That sounds like something you made up.
AfricanusAmericusXIV triple-posted this 3 days ago, 51 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,014
@1,414,008 (F)
> On average black IQs are lower. Someone manically typing rants on an obscure message board every day is probably not representative of the population at large.
Have you heard of this website called Reddit?
> On average black IQs are lower. Someone manically typing rants on an obscure message board every day is probably not representative of the population at large.
Have you heard of this website called Reddit?
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 56 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,016
@1,414,007 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
> It would be a bit weird if somehow African Americans and Nigerians both have the exact same genetics yet somehow African Americans are biologically determined to a different outcome than Nigerian immigrants. You know, almost like American society is rigged against black people or something.
They don't have the same genetics, African-American populations have a significant share of British DNA.
And the tiny minority of Nigerians that make it to the US are not representative of the majority of the country for many reasons.
>
> You know, you’ve been talking a lot about white people forcing other people to benefit white people. Why would I believe that someone like you wouldn’t rig the system against someone like me unfairly? Why should I believe you if you say that white people did an IQ test and found that blacks have the lowest IQ scores. If you fundamentally believe that your purpose in this world is to oppress me, why should I trust you not to do exactly that?
You don't have to, you could move to Africa since you believe they have it better and African Americans are oppressed in the US. You would never do that, because it's obviously a downgrade.
> It would be a bit weird if somehow African Americans and Nigerians both have the exact same genetics yet somehow African Americans are biologically determined to a different outcome than Nigerian immigrants. You know, almost like American society is rigged against black people or something.
They don't have the same genetics, African-American populations have a significant share of British DNA.
And the tiny minority of Nigerians that make it to the US are not representative of the majority of the country for many reasons.
>
> You know, you’ve been talking a lot about white people forcing other people to benefit white people. Why would I believe that someone like you wouldn’t rig the system against someone like me unfairly? Why should I believe you if you say that white people did an IQ test and found that blacks have the lowest IQ scores. If you fundamentally believe that your purpose in this world is to oppress me, why should I trust you not to do exactly that?
You don't have to, you could move to Africa since you believe they have it better and African Americans are oppressed in the US. You would never do that, because it's obviously a downgrade.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 56 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,017
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,018
@1,414,014 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Reddit is not representative of most people, and about 9% of visitors ever comment on the site.
Most people are not adding to the discussion. If you select just for that group, you're likely talking about a uniquely literate group with more free time on their hands than usual.
Reddit is not representative of most people, and about 9% of visitors ever comment on the site.
Most people are not adding to the discussion. If you select just for that group, you're likely talking about a uniquely literate group with more free time on their hands than usual.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 41 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,020
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,021
Honestly, I just want to understand why you feel so insecure that you need to prove that someone else is beneath you to feel good about yourself. I’ve never felt that way before. I can’t relate to it, and honestly it bothers me when people are like that.
AfricanusAmericusXIV triple-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,023
For me, personally, I don’t brag. But if I want to market myself, I always point to my strengths and what I’ve accomplished. I don’t compare myself to other people or put other people down to make myself look better in comparison. Could you just tell me why you feel the need to do that? I don’t actually care very deeply about what you believe I just want to know why you have that desire.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 9 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,024
@1,414,017 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
> Idk, I’d be fine with going to South Africa honestly.
Incomes are 13x lower in South Africa, and crime is 6x higher.
> Idk, I’d be fine with going to South Africa honestly.
Incomes are 13x lower in South Africa, and crime is 6x higher.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 50 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,025
@1,414,021 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
It sounds like you can only understand saying things based on power dynamics, rather than saying the truth for the truth's sake.
It sounds like you can only understand saying things based on power dynamics, rather than saying the truth for the truth's sake.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 43 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,026
@1,414,024 (F)
Which means my money would go father over there and I could live in a bigger house. 🤷♂️
Which means my money would go father over there and I could live in a bigger house. 🤷♂️
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 16 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,027
@1,414,023 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Some people will lie to make everyone feel happy, some people will tell the truth no matter how many passive aggressive comments they get.
Some people will lie to make everyone feel happy, some people will tell the truth no matter how many passive aggressive comments they get.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 48 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,028
@1,414,026 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Only the money you brought with you. When that runs out it will take you a year to earn what you made in a month in the US.
That crime rate could mean you run out sooner than you think.
Only the money you brought with you. When that runs out it will take you a year to earn what you made in a month in the US.
That crime rate could mean you run out sooner than you think.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 18 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,029
@1,414,025 (F)
So, don’t take this the wrong way, but how likely do you think it is that you’re actually so lucky that the truth always benefits you 100% of the time?
So, don’t take this the wrong way, but how likely do you think it is that you’re actually so lucky that the truth always benefits you 100% of the time?
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,030
Like I get you’re saying that you don’t care if the truth hurts other people’s feelings, I’ve never heard you talk about any truths that work against you. If you’re really so honest, can you name something that’s true that’s not to your advantage?
AfricanusAmericusXIV triple-posted this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,033
Or I guess, since it seems like you’re not answering, if you really do genuinely believe that everything in the universe is such that it benefits you as an individual more than it benefits everybody else for some reason, what is that reason? Do you believe in God? Do you think that God cares more about you than God cares about everybody else so God rigged everything in the universe to benefit you?
AfricanusAmericusXIV quadruple-posted this 3 days ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,035
Because, for example, the IQ thing. You say it’s the truth that black people have low IQs on average. Isn’t that just a little bit too convenient? IQ is just a way of scoring how well somebody did on a test compared to other people. If you’re walking around and you see a black person, you haven’t ever given them an IQ test or know if they’ve ever even taken one, but you can just judge them as stupid and dismiss anything they say you disagree with with because you believe that blacks are stupid. That seems just a little bit self serving. It seems like something that’s more likely to be a lie that you tell yourself to avoid criticism rather than something that you actually genuinely believe in for no underlying emotional reason.
AfricanusAmericusXIV quintuple-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,036
Or, okay, for example. When you were just trying to convince me how great you were - you never talked about yourself. You always said something like "Europe is great because Europe controls somebody else" or "white people are great because white people are wealthier than somebody else" but you can never say you’re great by talking about yourself without comparing yourself to somebody else. Why? That doesn’t make sense to me. If you’re really great, you should be really great when you’re alone by yourself. Why do you have to bring up black people at all to say how great white people are? It’s weird.
AfricanusAmericusXIV sextuple-posted this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,037
Or even talking about white people, you’re a person who is white. You’re not white people, you’re not Europe, you’re not the United States. You’re just you, an individual. But to feel great you have to attach your identity to a larger collective and brag about things other people have done. And on top of that, you have to brag about what other people have done in relation to other other people. That’s weird. How come you need multiple layers of abstraction between your physical person and what you’re talking about in order to prove you’re so great? Why can’t you say, "Oh I founded a company, oh I invented this, oh I invented that, oh I made this much money?" You can’t say that. But you’re so sure of yourself. Are you really so sure of yourself? Or is it all just a facade to distract from the absence you can’t talk about. You can’t talk about all the things you didn’t do, didn’t invent, all the money you didn’t make.
To me at least, it seems obvious what you are. And I’m not impressed by it. And I don’t think you tell the truth. I think you’re a pathological liar who’s deeply insecure. I also think that you’re a vulnerable narcissist not a grandiose narcissist because you’re constantly seeking my approval while trying to convince me that I’m inferior to you. But if you really think I’m inferior, why do you care so much what I think about you?
To me at least, it seems obvious what you are. And I’m not impressed by it. And I don’t think you tell the truth. I think you’re a pathological liar who’s deeply insecure. I also think that you’re a vulnerable narcissist not a grandiose narcissist because you’re constantly seeking my approval while trying to convince me that I’m inferior to you. But if you really think I’m inferior, why do you care so much what I think about you?
(Edited 40 seconds later.)
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,038
@1,414,029 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
If I can explain my beliefs and answer questions about them calmly, while you get emotional and go on tirades insulting me then it's a safe bet.
If you're right, you could stay on topic, avoid strawman arguments, control your emotions, define your terms, and take accountability when you get facts wrong.
When you're wrong you have to change the subject, refuse to explain beliefs, and switch to personal attacks.
It's not a matter of faith, there's a clear system for telling who can't defend their beliefs.
If I can explain my beliefs and answer questions about them calmly, while you get emotional and go on tirades insulting me then it's a safe bet.
If you're right, you could stay on topic, avoid strawman arguments, control your emotions, define your terms, and take accountability when you get facts wrong.
When you're wrong you have to change the subject, refuse to explain beliefs, and switch to personal attacks.
It's not a matter of faith, there's a clear system for telling who can't defend their beliefs.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,043
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,046
Since you’re claiming to not be motivated by emotions and only by logic, I figured you’d be interested in a math problem. Guess not.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 12 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,047
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,048
@1,414,046 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Logic is a lot more than math. You should be using it when you talk about social issues.
Logic is a lot more than math. You should be using it when you talk about social issues.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 37 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,049
Really I just think it’s funny that you said this:
@1,414,038 (F)
> If I can explain my beliefs and answer questions about them calmly, while you get emotional and go on tirades insulting me then it's a safe bet.
>
> If you're right, you could stay on topic, avoid strawman arguments, control your emotions, define your terms, and take accountability when you get facts wrong.
>
> When you're wrong you have to change the subject, refuse to explain beliefs, and switch to personal attacks.
>
> It's not a matter of faith, there's a clear system for telling who can't defend their beliefs.
In response to this:
@1,414,029 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
> So, don’t take this the wrong way, but how likely do you think it is that you’re actually so lucky that the truth always benefits you 100% of the time?
"It’s not a matter of faith."
It’s not a matter of faith that the truth always benefits you 100% of the time, and clearly I’m wrong because I’m emotional and you’re not emotional?
I don’t know why you can’t just be honest with yourself and what’s holding you back, but that’s sad. You can’t even admit that literally everything in the universe doesn’t always go your way. That’s just sad man.
@1,414,038 (F)
> If I can explain my beliefs and answer questions about them calmly, while you get emotional and go on tirades insulting me then it's a safe bet.
>
> If you're right, you could stay on topic, avoid strawman arguments, control your emotions, define your terms, and take accountability when you get facts wrong.
>
> When you're wrong you have to change the subject, refuse to explain beliefs, and switch to personal attacks.
>
> It's not a matter of faith, there's a clear system for telling who can't defend their beliefs.
In response to this:
@1,414,029 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
> So, don’t take this the wrong way, but how likely do you think it is that you’re actually so lucky that the truth always benefits you 100% of the time?
"It’s not a matter of faith."
It’s not a matter of faith that the truth always benefits you 100% of the time, and clearly I’m wrong because I’m emotional and you’re not emotional?
I don’t know why you can’t just be honest with yourself and what’s holding you back, but that’s sad. You can’t even admit that literally everything in the universe doesn’t always go your way. That’s just sad man.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 45 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,050
@1,414,048 (F)
> Logic is a lot more than math. You should be using it when you talk about social issues.
Well, it’s actually not a lot more than math. All logic can be done using math.
> Logic is a lot more than math. You should be using it when you talk about social issues.
Well, it’s actually not a lot more than math. All logic can be done using math.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,053
@1,414,049 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Anyone can choose to only say things they can back up with a source and a sound line of logic.
If one person does and another person doesn't, it's not a coincidence one will always be correct when they disagree.
Anyone can choose to only say things they can back up with a source and a sound line of logic.
If one person does and another person doesn't, it's not a coincidence one will always be correct when they disagree.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 9 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,054
So since you’re so logical, I’m going to assume you know what a truth table is, what logical connectives are, what logical statements are, and I’m going to assume you know what functional completeness is. Okay?
NAND has functional completeness. NAND is the negation of an and.
Logic operates on true and false values, correct? Use 1 for true and 0 for false. "a and b" is equivalent to "a * b" and "not a" is equivalent to "1 - a." Since NAND is functionally complete "a NAND b" is equivalent to "1-ab."
Now since I assume you know what functional completeness means, I’m sure you understand the consequence of what I just told you, which is…
NAND has functional completeness. NAND is the negation of an and.
Logic operates on true and false values, correct? Use 1 for true and 0 for false. "a and b" is equivalent to "a * b" and "not a" is equivalent to "1 - a." Since NAND is functionally complete "a NAND b" is equivalent to "1-ab."
Now since I assume you know what functional completeness means, I’m sure you understand the consequence of what I just told you, which is…
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 22 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,055
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,056
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 3 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,057
@1,414,054 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
You're rattling off computational logic in a conversation about social dynamics.
Instead of shoehorning in your compsci101 factoids, try using logical concepts that relate to what we're actually talking about.
You're rattling off computational logic in a conversation about social dynamics.
Instead of shoehorning in your compsci101 factoids, try using logical concepts that relate to what we're actually talking about.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,058
@previous (F)
You said logic is a lot more than math when logic and arithmetic are equivalent, which is the reason why computers exist.
You said logic is a lot more than math when logic and arithmetic are equivalent, which is the reason why computers exist.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 9 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,059
@1,414,056 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
The argument you are about to make would also support the idea that logic is biology because a brain can analyze a syllogism.
The argument you are about to make would also support the idea that logic is biology because a brain can analyze a syllogism.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 23 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,061
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 38 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,062
@1,414,059 (F)
Well, a brain is made of atoms, is it not? And all those atoms obey physical laws, and physical laws can be defined mathematically.
Well, a brain is made of atoms, is it not? And all those atoms obey physical laws, and physical laws can be defined mathematically.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,063
What do you think a perceptron is based off of?
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 38 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,064
@1,414,062 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
You're confused about ontological heirarchies.
Math is a way of generalizing phenomena, it doesn't study something more fundamental than physics.
Physics is at the bottom. Math is used in physics, like chemistry, biology, sociology. But those all study physical things, math does not study a physical thing more fundamental than the subject matter of physics.
You're confused about ontological heirarchies.
Math is a way of generalizing phenomena, it doesn't study something more fundamental than physics.
Physics is at the bottom. Math is used in physics, like chemistry, biology, sociology. But those all study physical things, math does not study a physical thing more fundamental than the subject matter of physics.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 46 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,065
@1,414,063 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
"based of" is too vague to give an answer.
A machine implementing a perception is built on electrical components.
"based of" is too vague to give an answer.
A machine implementing a perception is built on electrical components.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 7 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,066
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 54 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,067
@1,414,065 (F)
It’s not too vague to give an answer. If you know what a perceptron is the answer should be completely obvious to you.
It’s not too vague to give an answer. If you know what a perceptron is the answer should be completely obvious to you.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,068
@1,414,066 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
If it was then the objects in physics would be composed of objects studied by math.
Just as language isn't more fundamental than. physics, just because we use language in physics.
If it was then the objects in physics would be composed of objects studied by math.
Just as language isn't more fundamental than. physics, just because we use language in physics.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 36 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,069
If you don’t believe me that math is more fundamental than physics, try doing physics without math and let me know how that goes.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 12 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,070
@1,414,067 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Make your point if you want, but "based on" is needlessly vague.
The structure was meant to emulate a neuron, the machine runs on electronics.
Make your point if you want, but "based on" is needlessly vague.
The structure was meant to emulate a neuron, the machine runs on electronics.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 24 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,071
@1,414,069 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
If you don't believe language is more fundamental than physics try doing physics without language, and see how that goes.
If you don't believe language is more fundamental than physics try doing physics without language, and see how that goes.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 8 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,072
@1,414,068 (F)
> If it was then the objects in physics would be composed of objects studied by math.
They are.
> If it was then the objects in physics would be composed of objects studied by math.
They are.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 45 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,073
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 15 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,074
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,075
Idk why you thought that was going to be hard lol
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 34 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,076
@1,414,074 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
EM waves are studied in physics.
Waves, in math, are generalizations used to make problems in other fields simpler to analyze.
EM waves are studied in physics.
Waves, in math, are generalizations used to make problems in other fields simpler to analyze.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 32 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,077
@1,414,075 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Waves, in math, are not even objects. You still haven't given an example of something that the objects in physics are composed of.
Waves, in math, are not even objects. You still haven't given an example of something that the objects in physics are composed of.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 32 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,078
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 39 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,079
Particles are waves.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 56 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,080
@1,414,078 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
There are waves in quantum fields, but that is withing the realm of physics. waves are not made up of mathematical objects.
There are waves in quantum fields, but that is withing the realm of physics. waves are not made up of mathematical objects.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 30 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,081
@1,414,079 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
And waves are physical phenomena, movements of charged areas in a field. Waves are not made up of mathematical objects.
And waves are physical phenomena, movements of charged areas in a field. Waves are not made up of mathematical objects.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 8 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,082
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,083
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Are you claiming that movements of charged areas in a field is math?
Or are you claiming those waves are made of a mathematical object you haven't yet named?
Are you claiming that movements of charged areas in a field is math?
Or are you claiming those waves are made of a mathematical object you haven't yet named?
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 55 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,084
Math is the study of all things that are countable. To say that something is beyond math is sort of meaningless.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,085
Quantum physics is discrete, so if you’re claiming that some physics isn’t math, when math is the study of countable things and quantum physics is discrete, I’m not seeing where any of that makes sense.
(Edited 16 seconds later.)
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 37 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,086
@1,414,084 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
I didn't say something was beyond math, I said Physics was the most fundamental level of the ontological heirarchy.
Physics -> Chemistry -> Biology -> Etc.
To say math is more fundamental because it's used in physics is the same as saying language is more fundamental. It would be an engineer making tools for physicists saying his craft is more fundamental than physics.
The most fundamental levels of the universe is studied in Physics.
I didn't say something was beyond math, I said Physics was the most fundamental level of the ontological heirarchy.
Physics -> Chemistry -> Biology -> Etc.
To say math is more fundamental because it's used in physics is the same as saying language is more fundamental. It would be an engineer making tools for physicists saying his craft is more fundamental than physics.
The most fundamental levels of the universe is studied in Physics.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,087
@1,414,085 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Using math to understand physics isn't the same thing as math being more fundamental.
Once again, that argument you are using would mean language is more fundamental than physics. Do you believe that? Or will you ignore this point again?
Using math to understand physics isn't the same thing as math being more fundamental.
Once again, that argument you are using would mean language is more fundamental than physics. Do you believe that? Or will you ignore this point again?
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 51 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,088
@1,414,086 (F)
That is false. Physics is not the most fundamental aspect of the universe. Information is.
That is false. Physics is not the most fundamental aspect of the universe. Information is.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,089
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Information is not an object, information is a structure objects can have that represents other objects.
Subatomic particles and waves are not made up of structures that represent other objects, so information is not the fundamental level.
Information is not an object, information is a structure objects can have that represents other objects.
Subatomic particles and waves are not made up of structures that represent other objects, so information is not the fundamental level.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,090
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,091
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Again, this argument implies language is more fundamental than math.
Want to ignore this point a 4th time?
Again, this argument implies language is more fundamental than math.
Want to ignore this point a 4th time?
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 30 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,092
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,093
I don’t understand how you’re so full of yourself and say all this bullshit about things you don’t even understand at the most basic level.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 2 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,094
@1,414,092 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
This argument also works if you want to say the engineering fields making necessary tools for physicists is more fundamental than physics.
Is the craft of making a particle emission device the most fundamental field of human knowledge? Or is your argument flawed?
This argument also works if you want to say the engineering fields making necessary tools for physicists is more fundamental than physics.
Is the craft of making a particle emission device the most fundamental field of human knowledge? Or is your argument flawed?
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 27 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,095
@1,414,093 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Again, you resort to insults and you aren't refuting the last point I made.
If you could refute it, why don't you?
Again, you resort to insults and you aren't refuting the last point I made.
If you could refute it, why don't you?
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,096
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 41 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,097
And by the way, I’m calling you stupid because you’re stupid. Stupid is a thing that someone can be.
AfricanusAmericusXIV triple-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,099
I feel like you want me to hold your hand and think for you like you’re incapable of doing any thinking yourself. It’s boring.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 31 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,100
@1,414,096 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
You didn't refute the point, you seemed to concede that language could be and then ignored the part about making devices for physicists.
Your argument would mean either of those was more fundamental.
Language is a layer above biology, and we both know making scientific devices is not more fundamental (which is why you keep avoiding the question).
You didn't refute the point, you seemed to concede that language could be and then ignored the part about making devices for physicists.
Your argument would mean either of those was more fundamental.
Language is a layer above biology, and we both know making scientific devices is not more fundamental (which is why you keep avoiding the question).
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,102
@1,414,099 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
> I feel like you want me to hold your hand and think for you like you’re incapable of doing any thinking yourself. It’s boring.
I'd like you to refute the point I made if you can, but you just keep posting insults and anything else to distract.
If we need electrical and mechanical devices to do physics, does it make those fields of engineering more fundamental? Yes or No?
> I feel like you want me to hold your hand and think for you like you’re incapable of doing any thinking yourself. It’s boring.
I'd like you to refute the point I made if you can, but you just keep posting insults and anything else to distract.
If we need electrical and mechanical devices to do physics, does it make those fields of engineering more fundamental? Yes or No?
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,103
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 59 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,104
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
So you can't answer.
That's how you can tell who's right or wrong. One side always has to resort to this behavior, because they don't know how to refute the last point made.
So you can't answer.
That's how you can tell who's right or wrong. One side always has to resort to this behavior, because they don't know how to refute the last point made.
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,107
@previous (F)
I don’t feel like answering because I’m bored of talking with someone who only says 2 or 3 lines on repeat.
I don’t feel like answering because I’m bored of talking with someone who only says 2 or 3 lines on repeat.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,108
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
> I don’t feel like answering because I’m bored of talking
Funny, for every issue there's always one side that has to say this, and they usually say it at the same point in the conversation.
And there's always one side that somehow can keep going without making excuses.
You might think that either will have some that get tired or bored, and some that don't, but it's not. It's always one side of every issue, no matter what that issue may be.
> says 2 or 3 lines on repeat.
Yes, because my point doesn't change when you try to distract.
The same error I identified before is still a problem, even if you ignore it 3 posts in a row.
> I don’t feel like answering because I’m bored of talking
Funny, for every issue there's always one side that has to say this, and they usually say it at the same point in the conversation.
And there's always one side that somehow can keep going without making excuses.
You might think that either will have some that get tired or bored, and some that don't, but it's not. It's always one side of every issue, no matter what that issue may be.
> says 2 or 3 lines on repeat.
Yes, because my point doesn't change when you try to distract.
The same error I identified before is still a problem, even if you ignore it 3 posts in a row.
(Edited 37 seconds later.)
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,109
@previous (F)
You’re saying you’ve argued with somebody about physics under a post about Donald Trump more that once? 🙄
You’re saying you’ve argued with somebody about physics under a post about Donald Trump more that once? 🙄
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,110
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
No, I said every issue has one side that has to do what you're doing.
Nowhere did I say I had this conversation before, that's something you made up to avoid posting your refutation of the point I made.
No, I said every issue has one side that has to do what you're doing.
Nowhere did I say I had this conversation before, that's something you made up to avoid posting your refutation of the point I made.
AfricanusAmericusXIV replied with this 3 days ago, 8 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,111
You’re such a fucking idiot you claim that I try and change the subject and you’re so smart and rational you can’t be tricked by me into changing the subject, and you haven’t noticed we’re talking about a completely different subject now.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,112
@1,414,110 (F)
I don’t care about your point, I never cared about any of your points. I was upfront saying the only reason I ever talked to you is because I dislike you and I want to understand how people like you think. I never actually genuinely cared about anything you had to say.
I don’t care about your point, I never cared about any of your points. I was upfront saying the only reason I ever talked to you is because I dislike you and I want to understand how people like you think. I never actually genuinely cared about anything you had to say.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,114
@1,414,111 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
If "x is more fundamental than physics, because x is used in physics" is a sound argument, then the design of scientific tools is more fundamental than physics.
If you can come up with a refutation for that, please do, otherwise goodbye you lost 👋
@previous (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
If "x is more fundamental than physics, because x is used in physics" is a sound argument, then the design of scientific tools is more fundamental than physics.
If you can come up with a refutation for that, please do, otherwise goodbye you lost 👋
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,117
@previous (F)
The only thing I wanted to gain from talking to you is understanding what the hell is wrong with you. If you’ve convinced me of anything it’s that you’re an autistic narcissist. I wouldn’t piss down your throat if your heart was on fire.
The only thing I wanted to gain from talking to you is understanding what the hell is wrong with you. If you’ve convinced me of anything it’s that you’re an autistic narcissist. I wouldn’t piss down your throat if your heart was on fire.
Anonymous Z-2 joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,118
@1,414,114 (F)
> If "x is more fundamental than physics, because x is used in physics" is a sound argument, then the design of scientific tools is more fundamental than physics.
That’s such a retarded argument. There’s a difference between physical phenomena and the study of physics. Physics obviously isn’t more fundamental than mathematics.
> If "x is more fundamental than physics, because x is used in physics" is a sound argument, then the design of scientific tools is more fundamental than physics.
That’s such a retarded argument. There’s a difference between physical phenomena and the study of physics. Physics obviously isn’t more fundamental than mathematics.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,120
@previous (Z-2)
> There’s a difference between physical phenomena and the study of physics.
This is it exactly.
Math is used to study physics.
Physical phenomena are not made up of mathematical objects. Waves are physical phenomena, and you cannot name any mathematical objects that make up physical waves.
> There’s a difference between physical phenomena and the study of physics.
This is it exactly.
Math is used to study physics.
Physical phenomena are not made up of mathematical objects. Waves are physical phenomena, and you cannot name any mathematical objects that make up physical waves.
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,122
@previous (F)
Wouldn’t it be crazy if probabilities could be represented using numbers…
I swear this shit is so stupid.
Wouldn’t it be crazy if probabilities could be represented using numbers…
I swear this shit is so stupid.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,124
You can have math without physics, you can’t have physics without math. Why do you think you’re making a genius argument here?
AfricanusAmericusXIV triple-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,125
The only reason you’re even arguing about this is because you’re such a fucking narcissist you can never admit you’re wrong no matter how stupid it makes you sound because you can’t let yourself be embarrassed.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 days ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,126
@1,414,122 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Probabilities are used when studying physics, they are not physical objects.
@1,414,124 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
You can't have math without physics because math is a structure in a brain, or a computer, or an arrangement of ink on paper.
There are no math objects in the universe, math is how we simplify the universe to make it easy enough to understand.
You're confusing a technique with an actual thing that exists.
Read an introductory text on ontology, and then learn some logic outside computational logic.
Probabilities are used when studying physics, they are not physical objects.
@1,414,124 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
You can't have math without physics because math is a structure in a brain, or a computer, or an arrangement of ink on paper.
There are no math objects in the universe, math is how we simplify the universe to make it easy enough to understand.
You're confusing a technique with an actual thing that exists.
Read an introductory text on ontology, and then learn some logic outside computational logic.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 days ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,127
@1,414,125 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
Fields that allow us to study physics are not the same thing as fields more fundamental than physics.
You keep confusing two different things.
If you can't manage to read an entire text on ontology, at least read an article or two on ontological heirarchies.
Fields that allow us to study physics are not the same thing as fields more fundamental than physics.
You keep confusing two different things.
If you can't manage to read an entire text on ontology, at least read an article or two on ontological heirarchies.
AfricanusAmericusXIV joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 19 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,131
I’m going to be honest, I looked into it, and ontology hierarchies seems like highly subjective and vague philosophical bullshit.
AfricanusAmericusXIV double-posted this 3 days ago, 49 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,132
I can see how a mentally ill person could look at that and think they’re a genius though, so that makes sense.
Thunder Balls !saAqdaazn2 joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 45 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,138
Is this thread over 200 replies of Niganon talking to himself?
Anonymous Z-6 joined in and replied with this 3 days ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,140
@previous (Thunder Balls !saAqdaazn2)
> Is this thread over 200 replies of Niganon talking to himself?
Yes. He never even speaks to the topic.
> Is this thread over 200 replies of Niganon talking to himself?
Yes. He never even speaks to the topic.
Anonymous P replied with this 2 days ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,153
What’s going on here?Anonymous Z-7 joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 36 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,154
Anonymous G replied with this 2 days ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,166
Anonymous F replied with this 2 days ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,184
@1,414,131 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
There's nothing vague about it. Some objects are composed of more fundamental objects, and those are composed of other objects and so on.
It's clearly defined and there's nothing subjective about it.
There's nothing vague about it. Some objects are composed of more fundamental objects, and those are composed of other objects and so on.
It's clearly defined and there's nothing subjective about it.
Anonymous F double-posted this 2 days ago, 51 seconds later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,185
@1,414,132 (AfricanusAmericusXIV)
You don't need to be a genius to understand it, it's a very simple and straightforward concept.
It was covered in a 100-level philosophy class and most people in the class understood it quickly.
You don't need to be a genius to understand it, it's a very simple and straightforward concept.
It was covered in a 100-level philosophy class and most people in the class understood it quickly.
Anonymous F triple-posted this 2 days ago, 55 seconds later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,186
@1,414,138 (Thunder Balls !saAqdaazn2)
He's mostly talking to himself, his #1 tactic is either strawmanning the argument or going off on a multi-post tirade that doesn't stay on topic.
He's mostly talking to himself, his #1 tactic is either strawmanning the argument or going off on a multi-post tirade that doesn't stay on topic.
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU replied with this 2 days ago, 6 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,193
shrimple as that replied with this 2 days ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,225
Anonymous Z-8 joined in and replied with this 2 days ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,230
@1,414,193 (Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU)
I think all of you are life unworthy of life. I want you to die, and I want you to suffer while it happens.
I think all of you are life unworthy of life. I want you to die, and I want you to suffer while it happens.
Anonymous Z-8 double-posted this 2 days ago, 6 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,231
There’s no point of even having a world with you in it. I want to get rid of all of you.
Anonymous G replied with this 2 days ago, 9 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,414,234
raping nigguhs i found in my banana hoard