Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > General Community > Off Topic

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #231  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:38 PM
Seducio Seducio is offline
Banned


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The extreme right needs conspiracy theories to be true.
Too bad most of them have been challenged and is a big reason the MAGA movement is losing so much tread going into 2024.

It is just a shame it took this long to take the bad soapbox actors down. The court system can be slow for justice.
I like facts. Weirdly I've noticed folks on the extremes don't like facts when their narrative is interrupted by those facts. It's interesting to me how Botten is actually very similar to an extreme right winger, but simply on the other side. The similar behavior in defending an extreme belief system is still there.

The extreme left needs emotional truth to be right in the same way the extreme right like their conspiracies theories. The thing about emotional truth is that it is about feelings. Good luck using logic and evidence to get someone to change their feelings. It doesn't work like that.

The extreme right has similar issues getting the heads out of their ass. Where are the politicians that are trying to make USA better for the 80% or 90% of folks that are not on the extremes. They aren't around because the concepts of bipartisanship and working with the other side in a positive manner toward solutions that help us all get shot down at the primary level in both major parties.
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:40 PM
Origen Origen is offline
Banned


Join Date: Jun 2023
Posts: 1,312
Default

Billionaire simping is depressing, but MAGA people have mental illness so I forgive you all. I will pray that you find the courage to think for yourselves.
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:41 PM
Botten Botten is offline
Planar Protector

Botten's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,975
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seducio [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Read On Liberty.

You regressive censorious extreme lefty.
Did you see the two links given. Even the non-baise news agency of today call X (formally known as blue bird forums an extremist hate filled site.)

APnews and Reuters are consider first and second most unbaise news according to GlobalWebIndex News Consumption Report

Oh and...

You really need to get off this "Read On Liberty" kick. A book written from the 1800s isn't exactly progressing [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The book has its problems:

1. The book is rooted in utilitarian ethics, where the value of individual liberty is largely justified based on its contribution to overall happiness. Critics argue that this utilitarian approach can sometimes prioritize the majority's happiness over individual rights, potentially leading to the suppression of minority voices.

2. Mill's harm principle argues that the only legitimate reason to curtail an individual's freedom is to prevent harm to others. Critics contend that defining harm can be subjective and that Mill does not sufficiently address what constitutes harm, leading to ambiguity in its application.

3. The text tends to focus on political and intellectual freedom while paying less attention to social and economic factors that can also restrict liberty. Critics argue that this narrow focus limits the scope of the analysis.

4. The book was written in the 19th century, and some argue that it does not sufficiently consider cultural and historical contexts that may shape the understanding of liberty and individual rights, especially in non-Western societies.

5. While Mill discusses the dangers of government tyranny, he may not give sufficient attention to the potential tyranny of the majority. Critics suggest that there should be a more nuanced discussion of how majority opinions can suppress minority voices.

6. Mill's work primarily addresses individual liberty from a male, Eurocentric perspective. It does not adequately consider the unique challenges faced by women, people of color, and other marginalized groups. Modern critics argue that a more intersectional approach is needed to address these disparities.

7. The text does not delve deeply into the potential abuse of economic power to limit individual liberty. In modern times, issues related to corporate power and inequality have become more prominent, and some feel that the book could benefit from addressing these concerns.

8. Mill's emphasis on individualism and self-development may reflect certain cultural biases of his time. Critics suggest that a more balanced approach should consider collectivist cultural perspectives.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:41 PM
Seducio Seducio is offline
Banned


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,343
Default

Origen you have zero credibility, anti-semite.
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:42 PM
Seducio Seducio is offline
Banned


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Did you see the two links given. Even the non-baise news agency of today call X (formally known as blue bird forums an extremist hate filled site.)

APnews and Reuters are consider first and second most unbaise news according to GlobalWebIndex News Consumption Report

Oh and...

You really need to get off this "Read On Liberty" kick. A book written from the 1800s isn't exactly progressing [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The book has its problems:

1. The book is rooted in utilitarian ethics, where the value of individual liberty is largely justified based on its contribution to overall happiness. Critics argue that this utilitarian approach can sometimes prioritize the majority's happiness over individual rights, potentially leading to the suppression of minority voices.

2. Mill's harm principle argues that the only legitimate reason to curtail an individual's freedom is to prevent harm to others. Critics contend that defining harm can be subjective and that Mill does not sufficiently address what constitutes harm, leading to ambiguity in its application.

3. The text tends to focus on political and intellectual freedom while paying less attention to social and economic factors that can also restrict liberty. Critics argue that this narrow focus limits the scope of the analysis.

4. The book was written in the 19th century, and some argue that it does not sufficiently consider cultural and historical contexts that may shape the understanding of liberty and individual rights, especially in non-Western societies.

5. While Mill discusses the dangers of government tyranny, he may not give sufficient attention to the potential tyranny of the majority. Critics suggest that there should be a more nuanced discussion of how majority opinions can suppress minority voices.

6. Mill's work primarily addresses individual liberty from a male, Eurocentric perspective. It does not adequately consider the unique challenges faced by women, people of color, and other marginalized groups. Modern critics argue that a more intersectional approach is needed to address these disparities.

7. The text does not delve deeply into the potential abuse of economic power to limit individual liberty. In modern times, issues related to corporate power and inequality have become more prominent, and some feel that the book could benefit from addressing these concerns.

8. Mill's emphasis on individualism and self-development may reflect certain cultural biases of his time. Critics suggest that a more balanced approach should consider collectivist cultural perspectives.
You didn't write that. Cite your sources you lying thief.
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:43 PM
Seducio Seducio is offline
Banned


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,343
Default

If you attack On Liberty then you are revealing a wicked belief system that deserves to get attacked by a liberal such as myself.
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:45 PM
Botten Botten is offline
Planar Protector

Botten's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,975
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seducio [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I like facts. Weirdly I've noticed folks on the extremes don't like facts when their narrative is interrupted by those facts. It's interesting to me how Botten is actually very similar to an extreme right winger, but simply on the other side.
Actually it is you who needs this. Too bad your narrative to show both sides are the same is falling apart.

Sorry the right isn't getting another Tea party, Maverick, MAGA do over anytime soon with the independent voters by again screaming - "Well both sides do it."

Like I said before your centrist left mask is slipping.
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:45 PM
Botten Botten is offline
Planar Protector

Botten's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,975
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seducio [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
You didn't write that. Cite your sources you lying thief.
Verified - your walls are crumbling. You are no liberal or centrist. Maybe a DINO.
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:46 PM
Seducio Seducio is offline
Banned


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,343
Default

No guy. You are an extreme lefty idiot. Which means my liberalism is to the right of you. Doesn't make me a right winger. I have talked shit about MAGA.

You appear to suck at understanding political spectrums.
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 11-02-2023, 01:47 PM
Seducio Seducio is offline
Banned


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Verified - your walls crumbling
You didn't write that. Nice try liar. When are you going to post more Free Palestine propaganda you anti-semite?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.