Why I Prefer Dating Women Who Are Martial Artists

he is very skilled at being charming and deceptive. I anticipate a lot of people underestimate how much effect of having experience in those skills can have.

 

But what point will many of his "followers" realise their Kermit daddy is one of the bad guys?

 

Never bought into Peterson but his bit about ancient images of intertwined snakes being some sort of folk memory of the structure of DNA should be enough to put anyone off that wackaloon.
I also find it really bizarre that a weedy looking, high voiced "intellectual" is some sort of poster boy for people that unironically refer to themselves and others as "alpha" and "beta" males.

 

For me it was appealing during a period of economic uncertainty.

A lot of it is a rabbit hole, it starts with some stuff about cleaning your room and self responsibility and how you can improve your circumstances.
Then it moves to blaming certain historically oppressed groups when the self responsibility fails.
You eventually get pulled into the wilder stuff as its pseudo intellectual and gives you a sense of direction.

Its exactly the red skull thing.

 

The first thing I'd read about Peterson was him basing an entire worldview for humans on some poor quality lobster (which are very far away from us evolutionary speaking) biology, and then trying to use that as evidence of god?

Then his daughter came on the scene with her all meat diet, And it was at that point I wondered how anyone was taken in him.

But the trust in the process, sort out your bedroom floor, and God has a plan for you certainly can be a seductive one.

 

Lets not forget this classic:

 

Keep up man, it's all about the sigma males now.

 

Classic "this is just a guess, and I could be wrong". The guy always provides a million qualifiers around any statement, unless it is some dodgy evo-psych "research", then he declares it settled scientific fact.

 

I simply stated that there is already taxation without representation.

Of course, this will be dependent on how we classify representation. Is representation that the representatives vote for policies in their constituents' best interests? What about those that did not vote for that representative (minorities in the area), are they not being both taxed and not represented? If someone does not vote, are they represented? If they are not allowed to vote, is the representative now not acting in their best interest? Could a representative act against the interest of the constituents who voted for him? If so, are they being taxed without representation?

 

Marx is my favorite antisemitic Ashkenazim.

Some of his most interesting works are:
1) The Communist Manifesto (1848)
2) On the Jewish Question (1844)
3) A series of letters to Engels he wrote. The one in 1862 stands out.

 

And your arguing in favour of the extention of that state?

Didn't that make you unamerican?

Anyway that's old news now, we've switched subjects a few times since!

 

I should probably report your post but you need to explain - tone and sarcasm does not come across in text.

You have just said you have a favourite anti semite.

Additionally you have ignored all other points made and clung to the mention of "jew" which is horrible suspect in connection to having a favourite anti semite.

Honestly I doubt youd pass a suffrage test of your own devising.

 

Maybe he was, but he never argued for the disenfranchisement of them.

You also forgot the italics for number 2). It is On The Jewish Question. It is a counter argument to Bauer's 'The Jewish Question'. Marx speaks very highly of the US in it.

But I guess you knew this already. It's not like you would just read some out of context quotes in a right wing propaganda piece and regurgitate them without actually reading the full texts, right?!

 

I'm not sure I did argue for an extension. Perhaps. I guess it would again depend on how we are defining representation. It could be possible that a well-formed voting base could elect officials that provided policies that were of better interest to the citizens than otherwise. And then we must also be sure to determine what we mean by being in the best interest.

I don't know. Did it make me un-American? If so, then it might be argued that I am anti-Western (as I believe any European/Western country favors (at least in concept) the idea a representative democracy being for all the people), though I am not arguing for anything such as drastic as the anti-democratic government of a colonized Hong Kong.

Favorite anti-semitic *Jew.

Since I am already suspect, and accusations of [racism][sexism][anti-semitism] seem to be some second-nature trend these days, I wouldn't want to become your favorite anti-semitic Jew. So don't worry, I won't comment further.

 

Nah mate, nah, you dont get to walk away from this nonsense.
People can hate their own ethnic group and still be racist or anti semitic.

You've said you have a favourite anti semite, explain yourself.

 

Very well, since it bothers you so..

Karl Marx was an Ashkenazi Jew who wrote antisemitic texts. To me, that is quite a funny oddity. If you must know, I harbor no hate towards any group based on their ancestry. I am also not a crusader for political correction/newspeak, so I am no stranger to an internet stranger labeling me an anti-semitic Jew based on little to no evidence of it.

 

You realise this is the internet right?
Things you say are taken at face value as sarcasm does not translate well in a short post. Additionally its not like we have context of your post history as you've hidden it.

Get off your little troll horse with this "I am being persecuted for not being politically correct and deviating from acceptable speech".

I literally just asked you to explain a weird thing you said, you gave little to no context t other than "my favourite anti semite ".
The burden is on you to clarify it was in jest.

 

You can't even name your favourite anti-semite on a public forum without being given the third degree by the loony left anymore. It's political correctness gone mad.

 

"Antisemitic texts" is a bit of a stretch. Using racial epithets to describe someone's character was something everyone did in the 19th Century. By your standard, all European Jewish writers of that time were antisemitic, including the founders of Zionism.

 

I've heard they'll throw you in jail, just for saying your English now!

The loony left are just crybaby soyboys, who are both to be pitied because they are so very weak, and also we should be very afraid off, at the same time.