I'll lay down yet another layer of ownage here though:
gn - it never ends with you. you're completely full of shit and you are a filthy debater. I tried man. I tried to read your post. And yeah, I knew it would be full of twists and lies
Can you point out the specific "twists" and lies" contained in the post? I don't think I actually did these things, but I am willing to entertain the notion that I am mistaken if you have evidence to back this statement up. Do you?
Also, if you refer to something like characterizing your arguments as apologia for the rich as a "lie" or "twisting your argument," I ask that you please respond to my explanation for why I characterized your argument this way and explain why its wrong. If you are unable or unwilling to do this you should acknowledge you are not equipped to participate in a good faith discussion on this topic.
- you always switch your own argument in the slightest ways AND the change the oppositions whenever you see it beneficial to you. It's pathetic, and you do it ever so discreetly.
Where did I do this exactly? Or did I use my secret filthy debating powers to do it so "discreetly" that you nor anyone else can point to it?
it's always the same with you, i have to go back and review your original points and mine because just to get the real story
Yes, that's part of participating in a debate or a discussion. I often go back and review previous posts I made and previous posts you made to make sure I am not making inaccurate statements, or to review the context of the discussion, or any number of other reasons. If this is too mentally challenging for you maybe you should play Angry Birds in your free time instead.
But here's the issue as it pertains to ur first sentence
your argument went from
"Morons like Swift are completely incapable of thinking of these issues on a global scale so everything this retard says is framed around THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS lol."
This is not a provable point, on either side. I denied it, and stated that I am considering a global perspective when I say CEO's work harder than the average worker and for you to suggest otherwise is an inkling of suspicion and nothing more. At the end of the day, the only thing I am denying is the accusation that i don't think of such on a global scale.
Yes, and I laid out my reasons for why you do not seem to think of such things on a global scale, and how your arguments fail to acknowledge a global perspective. You have yet to respond to these reasons, you simply just say "actually, I do have a global perspective," without actually pointing out how my statements on this topic are incorrect specifically. You can respond to them now if you like.
Once again, it is not based on an "inkling of suspicion" that you don't acknowledge a global perspective in your arguments. I read your arguments and evaluated them from a global perspective, and found them completely lacking, and explained why. That is not "suspicion," that is an objective evaluation of your statements and arguments, that they lack a global perspective for the reasons I already articulated. Again, you are free to respond to those reasons now, if you like.
But you wouldn't let it go, so you change your argument ever so slightly (as always) to
"your position fails to acknowledge a global perspective"
First you're straight up accusing me of being unable to think of things on a global scale, from oh "well he's just not acknowledging it"
I'm sure the rest of your post is filled with slight variations of your arguments, random additions to mine made by you, and tons and tons of gray throughout your wordage to prevent people from ever truly pinning you down. i'm done with you
Lol, really Swift? I said you are not able to understand these issues on a global perspective. My evidence and backing for this assertion? The fact that your arguments, as presented, lack a global perspective. It is not a huge leap of logic to presume you yourself lack that perspective if your arguments also do, because if you yourself had that perspective, why would you omit it from your argument or position? Would it also be unfair for me to say a person who claims the sun revolves around the Earth lacks a scientific perspective? Should I instead assume that actually they do not lack that perspective, but deliberately ignored it or omitted it from their statement about the Earth's solar rotation for some strange, arcane reason? That doesn't make a lot of sense Swift. I think it actually makes more sense that if someone articulates a position that shows a stunning lack of knowledge or perspective on a given subject to assume that they lack that knowledge and/or perspective, rather than assume that they do not but are pretending that they do for...what reason, exactly?
Your statement basically boils down to "it is not fair to assume I lack a global perspective on capitalism just because my sincere and earnest arguments about capitalism lack that perspective." Well, I disagree. Assuming you are arguing in good faith I think that is a fair assumption to make. I think if you did have that perspective it would actually be incorporated into your arguments. I suppose it is
possible you are deliberately making dumb arguments that you don't believe or support, but it does not seem likely.
And just to make a pre-reply to whatever bullshit twist you'll pull out of your ass again:
Huh? I thought you were done with me?
If in your original post you said "your position fails to acknowledge a global perspective" then yeah, I would have agreed. i absolutely didn't use third worlder type examples or put a post-it disclaimer on my forehead "Please be advised, I take things into a global perspective not just a national one"
But that's not what you said, you claimed im incapable of thinking of these issues on a global scale - and that's what I was arguing, not ur shift in argument
filthy debater
Wait...so your defense actually is that you do have a global perspective, but just omit it from your arguments and positions for some reason? Lol. I actually wrote that out before I read this, I can't believe you're this desperate to score points. No, sorry, if your arguments lack a global perspective and you are arguing in sincerity it is perfectly reasonable to assume you lack that perspective yourself. I could be wrong about that, and have given you several opportunities to articulate your position in a way that does acknowledge a global perspective, but you have failed to do so, and with each failure to do so I become more and more confident in my original assumption that you do not understand these issues from such a perspective. Get owned bitch!!!
perfect. thanks for posting this perfect example of how you shape and shift peoples arguments into something they aren't.
You're welcome. And, again, nice meltdown.
