The Sage Garden

[TNF]

Capitalism is on balance far more immoral than homophobia.

Capitalism oppresses 99% of society, which is a much higher percentage than homophobia oppresses.

Homophobia and its assorted other prejudices are actually probably even more oppressive than Capitalism, regardless of the metric you use.

You called yourself a "socialist", no?

There are oppressive things other than capitalism, o comrade.

Obviously, but to argue that capitalism is in fact less oppressive than homophobia is just as off base as arguing that capitalism is more oppressive than homophobia. Both are forms of unjust domination that are equally worthy of destruction.

[TNF]

With Snowstalker on hiatus, this once flourishing garden will soon wither away.

Good riddance. This thread largely serves as a means by which liberals and assorted 'lefties' attack actual lefties and people who dare to have an ideological preference or consistency beyond 'muh Democrats'

[TNF]

With Snowstalker on hiatus, this once flourishing garden will soon wither away.

Good riddance. This thread largely serves as a means by which liberals and assorted 'lefties' attack actual lefties and people who dare to have an ideological preference or consistency beyond 'muh Democrats'

Well, at least you posted directly into the garden this time. TNF, you seem to be trying to fill the Snowstalker void yourself.

I have no qualms about my posts being posted here, given that this thread seems to be little more than a liberal circlejerk self-congratulating itself on how 'reasonable' they are compared to us unwashed lefties, who actually believe in something other than 'muh barack obama' and 'muh hillary clinton'. You seem to be attempting to try and make yourself into something other than a generic red avatar sh**tposter, and doing a fairly awful job at it, if I may say so. I'd recommend just not posting altogether, given that it would literally have the same affect on this forum as the rest of your 'contributions' here.

[TNF]

With Snowstalker on hiatus, this once flourishing garden will soon wither away.

Good riddance. This thread largely serves as a means by which liberals and assorted 'lefties' attack actual lefties and people who dare to have an ideological preference or consistency beyond 'muh Democrats'

Are you implying anyone who is a Democrat or Republican has no ideology?

What I am implying is that this thread exists to attack people who dare to have actual principles, which they do not subsequently subsume to the needs of 'muh democrats' and 'muh republicans'. The fact that there's almost uniform agreement among red avatars (even the supposed progressive ones) that the worst slimy, disgusting turd of a corporate Democrat is better than supporting a principled left-winger answers your question in an of itself. Republicans and Democrats on Atlas are certainly ideological, but only in the sense that the ideology they subscribe to is 'Republicanism' or 'Democratism'.

[TNF]

Guntaker, calling TNF sage is ridiculous and misses the point entirely. Someone who has actually studied and sincerely believes in Marxist principles as opposed to simply regurgitating something they found on Wikipedia is not a sage scholar. It's unfortunate that this thread has been misappropriated in such a manner.

I'm not totally aware of the definition of "sage," or who exactly qualifies as sagacious.  But, as far as I can tell, TNF doesn't really have much of an intellectual foundation or an analytical mind.  He just sort of parrots slogans.  I would actually be surprised if he had studied Marxism at an academic or broad-based level.  I actually respect people who try out different perspectives on politics more than people who adopt a fixed, totalistic ideology and shout people down with slogans like a Maoist fanatic. 

This is hilarious, given that you subscribe to the fixed, totalistic ideologies of American hegemony, Zionism, and liberalism.

[TNF]

Guntaker, calling TNF sage is ridiculous and misses the point entirely. Someone who has actually studied and sincerely believes in Marxist principles as opposed to simply regurgitating something they found on Wikipedia is not a sage scholar. It's unfortunate that this thread has been misappropriated in such a manner.

I'm not totally aware of the definition of "sage," or who exactly qualifies as sagacious.  But, as far as I can tell, TNF doesn't really have much of an intellectual foundation or an analytical mind.  He just sort of parrots slogans.  I would actually be surprised if he had studied Marxism at an academic or broad-based level.  I actually respect people who try out different perspectives on politics more than people who adopt a fixed, totalistic ideology and shout people down with slogans like a Maoist fanatic. 

This is hilarious, given that you subscribe to the fixed, totalistic ideologies of American hegemony, Zionism, and liberalism.

Thanks for proving my point.

And thank you for ignoring mine. It's all well and good to call whatever I subscribe to 'totalistic' once you admit that your own systems of belief fall into that very category.

Guntaker, calling TNF sage is ridiculous and misses the point entirely. Someone who has actually studied and sincerely believes in Marxist principles as opposed to simply regurgitating something they found on Wikipedia is not a sage scholar. It's unfortunate that this thread has been misappropriated in such a manner.

I'm not totally aware of the definition of "sage," or who exactly qualifies as sagacious.  But, as far as I can tell, TNF doesn't really have much of an intellectual foundation or an analytical mind.  He just sort of parrots slogans.  I would actually be surprised if he had studied Marxism at an academic or broad-based level.  I actually respect people who try out different perspectives on politics more than people who adopt a fixed, totalistic ideology and shout people down with slogans like a Maoist fanatic. 

This is hilarious, given that you subscribe to the fixed, totalistic ideologies of American hegemony, Zionism, and liberalism.

Now, this most definitely qualifies as sage.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread.

With Snowstalker on hiatus, this once flourishing garden will soon wither away.

Good riddance. This thread largely serves as a means by which liberals and assorted 'lefties' attack actual lefties and people who dare to have an ideological preference or consistency beyond 'muh Democrats'

Are you implying anyone who is a Democrat or Republican has no ideology?

What I am implying is that this thread exists to attack people who dare to have actual principles, which they do not subsequently subsume to the needs of 'muh democrats' and 'muh republicans'. The fact that there's almost uniform agreement among red avatars (even the supposed progressive ones) that the worst slimy, disgusting turd of a corporate Democrat is better than supporting a principled left-winger answers your question in an of itself. Republicans and Democrats on Atlas are certainly ideological, but only in the sense that the ideology they subscribe to is 'Republicanism' or 'Democratism'.

Or it's just that people have an ideology, then pick the party which best fits it that actually has a chance of winning. That's kind of how it works in a first past the post two-party system, otherwise you marginalize yourself and actually end up helping the people you're diametrically opposed to.

If you accept the need to participate in electoral politics, perhaps. Fortunately once you realize that the entire game is rigged and that change cannot be produced from within the system, you can stop caring about petty squabbles within the ruling elite and focus on building alternatives that are both viable and participatory, which can act as actual ways for working people and their allies to exercise power in ways wholly apart from the sham that is liberal electoralism.

[TNF]

Am I somehow wrong?

You aren't, but again, the whole point of this thread is to condemn those of us who don't buy into the nonsensical liberal consensus of this forum.

[TNF]

I mean maybe it's not a big deal to you that someone else decided it was a good idea to lop off part of your genitalia without your consent, but I tend to think that decisions about my body are best made by me, not other people. If I want to have the procedure done when I'm 18 years old, that's great. But no one should make that decision for me when I'm not old enough to protest it.

[TNF]

There are medical reasons to get rid of foreskin, all of you are overreacting to something that isn't remotely important.

[citation needed]

I, for one, am glad I was circumcised. Who would not want to be circumcised is what I want to know.

I mean maybe it's not a big deal to you that someone else decided it was a good idea to lop off part of your genitalia without your consent, but I tend to think that decisions about my body are best made by me, not other people. If I want to have the procedure done when I'm 18 years old, that's great. But no one should make that decision for me when I'm not old enough to protest it.

I agree with you in the sense that almost every non-essential (and most essential) operations should of course be consented to by the patient, but why make the point over something as minor as circumcision?

Minor though it may be, is it not something that the person effected should have a choice in? The entire "eh, it's okay" side of this debate seems to justify it in that the person affected doesn't remember it happening to them and/or doesn't remember the pain that (possibly) comes with the procedure. I don't think that's a satisfying argument. It's not a satisfying argument for any other kind of invasive medical procedure, so why should it be for circumcision? Because someone believes that lopping off foreskin is a covenant with God or some such nonsense? I'm sorry, but there are plenty of other archaic passages from the Bible or whatever holy book you subscribe to that modern humanity doesn't take seriously, and I don't think that this is obviously one that we should make an exception for.

[TNF]

The worst is that Snowstalker is making some pro-ISIS posts that would qualify that are getting ignored.

There's nothing wrong in being a fan of Egyptian deities. I'm pro-Isis and pro-Osiris, though my favourite goddess is Bastet because I adore cats.

>2014
>not being pro-Anubis