• Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    It is funny that you think I am debating you, or that I owe you an answer to any of your questions when you refuse to answer mine.

    Isn’t it just?

    Because someone listing things like that, answering with oneliners, while yelling out “fallacy” to “win” a debate, isn’t “debating”? Sure, buddy, sure.

    Did you ever stop to think that the propaganda you speak of is directly influenced by exactly what steeznson was speaking about?

    Do you know what a rhetorical question is? Are you pretending you’re really looking for a yes or no answer to your rhetorical question? The answer to your RHETORICAL question is “yes.” Happy? (“Rhetorical” doesn’t mean “not waiting for an answer” btw, which I’m sure you think it does.)

    Why do you believe that anti-drug propaganda only began in the 20th century?

    Perhaps read my comments again to know why I haven’t answered a question asking me about a thing I didn’t say? If you want to be petty and childish about taking things literally and not having a reasonable discussion, then really, why would you ask something this stupid?

    Do you know what Religion is, and its impacts on anti-drug mentalities predating the 20th century?

    I’ve answered that several times. Even in a comment of it’s own that had nothing else in it. Why do you keep ignoring my reply?

    If you’re honestly interested, you can find tons of literature.

    And I stand by that and provided you that literature, which you’ve ignored now for several days, because you weren’t asking in good faith. You didn’t actually want to know any, you’re just being a childish c**t who thought asking for “ten books” would be some sort of impossible intellectual criteria you thought I couldn’t manage. Which definitely tells a lot about what you consider to be “a lot of books.” How many books you read in a year? I’m thinking you’re of the generation who doesn’t read books at all, which is why you asked, but now can’t actually discuss the literature which you asked for.

    A strong reader would notice the lack of “?” at the end of that sentence, meaning it wasn’t a “question”.

    It’s honestly getting to be a bit annoying how childish you’re being.

    Did you forget that I said I would be ignoring you moving forward?

    No, but I’ve had this same exact conversation a billion times (yes, that is metaphorical, not literal), and kids like you always get pissy, start trying to “win” by yelling out “fallacy” (not realising that even if logic was fallacious doesn’t mean the conclusion is wrong), ignoring every single idiotic mistake you make, and then going “I’m done, you’re not worth it” while constantly returning to answer and so desperately trying to “get the last word.” That’s exactly who you are. Like I said, kids like you are a dime in a dozen. You need to up your game.

    You literally referenced Opium Wars, thinking they’re the same thing as the war ON drugs. They were wars FOR drugs. Not understanding the difference between “for” and “on” doesn’t suggest strong reading abilities, does it?

    • Arkouda
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I think you are missing the real question here. How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        See before; “you can’t address anything you’ve even said yourself when I actually answer you, but you still have this obsession over ‘getting the last word’.”

        You just have to reply, but you can’t address anything, despite last time anally listing “questions I haven’t answered.” Like I’ve said, I’ve answered you several times. And like you said, people can just scroll to the start of the thread and read it. So I don’t know what the fuck you’re doing by being this childish.