You cannot carry on a civilized discussion. You already demonstrated your incapacity to do so. I’ve demonstrated my unwillingness to do so… with you. But feel free to have a look at any of my other discussions around here. What you can do is be meek and timid. You can be an egalitarian, a relativist, who respects other people’s right to be evasive. And this is what you normally are, until someone comes along and puts you in your place, and your defensive mechanism that you call “trolling” is triggered.
I’d rather have a defense mechanism of trolling than one of calling people “imbecile”. For example:
You already have an opportunity to do so, you imbecile. By admitting that what you did was wrong we can return to the topic.
Is that really the only way you can bring yourself to get back on topic? To hear an apology from me?
But you don’t want to do this. Instead, you want me to forget about it, nay, you want to convince me that you did nothing wrong.
You cannot talk to someone unless you know that someone is responsible. Hence, the difficulty talking to you. You proved to be irresponsible, therefore, if you want this discussion to move forward, you need to become responsible.
But that’s not what you’re doing. Instead, what you are doing is trying to make me irresponsible myself.
Don’t need any help from me.
You do not want me to think Yes, because that would be dangerous., to process all of my knowledge and experience, in order to predict whether talking to you is worth my time. No, you want me forget everything I know, and simply hope that you are worth my time.
I take it you’re saying you don’t want to get back on topic.
This is what you are doing in the above quote.
You are telling me that I should think that you will be paying attention merely because you say you will be paying attention.
Hey, I have no problem paying attention. What you have to realize is that even when one is paying attention, there’s still a chance for misinterpretation, asking questions, disagreement, etc.
You think that if you have a serious intent to pay attention from now on that I should forget everything you did in the past and simply lay hope in you.
So you’re trying to learn from your mistakes, huh? You’re trying to remember not to mess with gib.
I believe this gives you some sense of superiority, though false of course, because you do not really understand how thinking works.
Intellectually speaking, you are a woman.
Being sexist now, are we?
If I want to drive my car around the town, but the car is making strange sounds, is it me turning the car into the subject or is it my car turning themselves into the subject?
Why do you want to ride me like a car?
What do you think?
Do I want to open my car and fix them just for fun or do I want to do so in order to drive them around the town?
In a sense, I am the one turning them into the subject. Without my decision to turn them into the subject they can never become the subject. Indeed, there is nothing stopping me from driving them around the town except for my concerns.
But does that mean I am the one turning them into the subject?
You just said you were. But in any case, it’s certainly not me turning myself into the subject.
I certainly never wanted them to be broken.
The point is that I am turning them into the subject not because I want them to be the subject but because it is necessary to do so if I want to make sure I can drive them safely.
Yeah, 'cause I’m dangerous. Ride me with caution.
My main goal is to drive the car, not to examine them in order to fix them.
Do you understand this, imbecile?
Yes, anyone who disagree with Anderson is a squeeky wheel that needs to be fixed.
The definition of the word elite was irrelevant. What was relevant is what I meant. ← Definitions, IOW. And what I meant by the word elite is “the ruling ones” ← Another word for “power” or “the ones considered to be the best”. I meant nothing other than what is normally meant. Hardly obscure.
Just a minute ago, you defined it as the “select few”.
My point was that modern elites (= the ruling ones, or the ones considered to be the best) are not powerful.
I know, it was a silly point.
You never really understood what I meant when I said that, but you nonethless proceeded to conclude not only that you know what I mean but also that I am wrong.
Thus betraying your very low level of standard of communication.
Your argument was that elites are by definition powerful.
Yep.
My argument was that modern social groups that are identified by the word elite are not powerful.
Examples?
Noone ever spoke of definitions. Except for you, because you are a retard with an extremely short attention span.
Your obsession with definitions is a mere distraction from the topic.
Point taken. Definitions are irrelevant. So if I define “banana” as a species of fish, I can say “Bananas live in the sea,” and if that doesn’t make sense, too bad! You just have to figure out what I meant without asking for definitions.
