you highlight everything except the most relevant portion and pretend that ignoring that makes it go away.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society. you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
the roman republic was still an oligarchic slave state and you’re still just romanticizing tyranny
I didn’t realize having a murder-boner was gendered. I’m sure plenty of Zionists will be delighted to hear this.
your second sentence makes no sense. i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that. with the way you seem to consider consent i can see why you fetishize the roman slave state.
Maybe don’t bootlick for genocidal states and you won’t be accused of getting off on it? Just a thought.
blaming me for your harassment, classic darvodog.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
‘my sexual harassment was just idiom! anyway you deserved it for disagreeing with me and you’re a prude for not liking it’ - pughitler
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
I’m sorry you find hating a fascist state so offensive, but I understand that fascism is dear to your heart.
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
It’s astounding that you can say shit like this when you were literally quoted
and anarchists are still one of the leftist tendencies present in the DPRK to this day.
but fascists don’t believe that words need to have meaning when it’s inconvenient for them.
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
My argument was that Roman law-enforcement was based on roughly non-hierarchical enforcement of peers, and therefore demonstrates that enforcement of law is not dependent on hierarchical policing forces, yes.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society.
No one fucking said Roman society was non-hierarchical as a whole, dipshit, it’s the third fucking sentence in the explanation which you didn’t read, or couldn’t understand.
An unusual point of unity between an ancient polity noted for its sense of hierarchy, and hierarchy-averse modern anarchist ideology!
you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
You got anything to say about your previous bullshit denial, by the way, or are you trying to ignore that blatant contradiction the way you’ve tried to ignore every other piece of information inconvenient to your bootlicking?
i didn’t say that ’no state can have horizontal practices’, you even quoted me saying that. that’s not at odds with all states having hierarchy.
a hierarchical slave state can’t demonstrate non-hierarchical anything.
i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that.
No, what you said is that it was a sexist comment, and I can quote you on that as well, not that quoting you seems to matter much. Reality is inconvenient, and so discarded by good little fascists like you.
In any case, I’ll do my best to remember to refrain from any comparisons that reference genitalia even in the abstract, if you feel that strongly about it. But fuck your assertion that it’s ‘sexist’.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society. you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
the roman republic was still an oligarchic slave state and you’re still just romanticizing tyranny
your second sentence makes no sense. i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that. with the way you seem to consider consent i can see why you fetishize the roman slave state.
blaming me for your harassment, classic darvodog.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
‘my sexual harassment was just idiom! anyway you deserved it for disagreeing with me and you’re a prude for not liking it’ - pughitler
I’m sorry you find hating a fascist state so offensive, but I understand that fascism is dear to your heart.
It’s astounding that you can say shit like this when you were literally quoted
but fascists don’t believe that words need to have meaning when it’s inconvenient for them.
My argument was that Roman law-enforcement was based on roughly non-hierarchical enforcement of peers, and therefore demonstrates that enforcement of law is not dependent on hierarchical policing forces, yes.
No one fucking said Roman society was non-hierarchical as a whole, dipshit, it’s the third fucking sentence in the explanation which you didn’t read, or couldn’t understand.
You got anything to say about your previous bullshit denial, by the way, or are you trying to ignore that blatant contradiction the way you’ve tried to ignore every other piece of information inconvenient to your bootlicking?
No, what you said is that it was a sexist comment, and I can quote you on that as well, not that quoting you seems to matter much. Reality is inconvenient, and so discarded by good little fascists like you.
In any case, I’ll do my best to remember to refrain from any comparisons that reference genitalia even in the abstract, if you feel that strongly about it. But fuck your assertion that it’s ‘sexist’.
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.