RE: Why Language Matters; Control Language and You'll Control the World

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Why Language Matters; Control Language and You'll Control the World

in language •  7 years ago 

Socialism = theft from production via governments

Socialists = A person scared of competition. Of life. The natural order of things.

(and explains why they want to disrupt the natural order of everything - through weak pseudo intellectual masturbation)

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Exactly.

Because their experience consists of repeatedly coming up short in a meritocracy, they instead choose to gang up on the successful using greater numbers to overpower the successful, telling themselves that the successful got that way solely through graft and abuse of power, and thus that they are merely righting a wrong when they themselves use the power of numbers to force the scales in their own direction, and thus count themselves as heroic and righteous for doing the same thing they castigate others for doing.

It's a giant mind f_ck.

Wow.

Yeah, or maybe it's that we understand how things actually work.

You want to compare net worth? Because I'm not exactly going to come up short in that game. Or how about Warren Buffet or Bill Gates, both of whom are among the richest in the world but advocate various liberal policies?

Equating progressives with socialism and socialism with "weakness" tells me everything I need to know about you.

Buffet and Gates are perfect examples of people who aren't progressives -- they are the opposite. They made all their money by not being progressive, by luck and one really brilliant choice (retaining right to sell DOS on IBM clones) on the part of Gates, and through fairly cutthroat, somewhat underhanded behind the scenes manipulation on the part of Buffet. Now they prance around talking about doing good to put a bow on lives spent doing the opposite of everything they advocate. Which of course is slurped up by those who salivate at the prospect of living off of someone else's work. Which is why Progressives always trot out these two trained ponies whenever they get the chance.

Odd thing is -- Buffet and Gates always talk about how they would support everyone giving more. Yet both still sit on massive fortunes. With absolutely nothing except the desire to actually give it away blocking them from doing so.

One rule for thee and another for me, no?

Perfect examples of Progressive double speak. Thanks for bringing it up.

I might do more of a reply later, but you're kidding right? Bill Gates has done more charity work than anyone I can think of and Warren has pledged to give away half his fortune!

Key word is "pledged."

What is stopping him from doing it now?

  ·  7 years ago (edited)

Who knows? Let's turn that around: Why doesn't anyone in their wealth category give away half their fortune? They could certainly do so without affecting their actual standing in life in any way whatsoever.

And you're ignoring Bill's charity work I guess?

Now it's interesting that Bill made his fortune "by luck" and Warren by "being underhanded" in your opinion.

Doesn't that undercut the idea of meritocracy in the first place?

EDIT: Oh, and wow... you caught me! Good job on the Straw Man there. Let's go back and remember your claim was that people are only progressive because they fear competition. I brought up Bill/Warren because they've beaten all the competition and still espouse several progressive ideas.

So good distraction, but some day maybe you'll need to face the fact that Bill and Warren advocate these ideas because they think those ideas are good... rather than trying to Ad Hominem them and Effigy progressives.