this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
1244 points (93.2% liked)

Leftism

2115 readers
1 users here now

Our goal is to be the one stop shop for leftism here at lemmy.world! We welcome anyone with beliefs ranging from SocDemocracy to Anarchism to post, discuss, and interact with our community. We are a democratic community, and as such, welcome metaposts that seek to amend the rules through consensus. Post articles, videos, questions, analysis and more. As long as it's leftist, it's welcome here!

Rules:

Posting Expectations:

Sister Communities:

!abolition@slrpnk.net !antiwork@lemmy.world !antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world !breadtube@lemmy.world !climate@slrpnk.net !fuckcars@lemmy.world !iwwunion@lemmy.ml !leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com !leftymusic@lemmy.world !privacy@lemmy.world !socialistra@midwest.social !solarpunk@slrpnk.net Solarpunk memes !therightcantmeme@midwest.social !thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world !vuvuzelaiphone@lemmy.world !workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world !workreform@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sharing is a general description of a robust, essentially universal, human behavior.

As a general tendency, it also appears within the behavior of many other species.

You have been invoking unconventional terminology, and now have descended essentially into incoherence.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If dictionary terminology is unconventional then yes, we have descended into incoherence.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No.

You're babbling.

You traveled from worker exploitation to amoebas.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Your incapacity to follow a demonstrative metaphore is not an issue of my capacity.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are obstructing the workers' struggle with dishonest obfuscation.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You believe that because your understanding of my position is incomplete and you have chosen this as the point to switch from comprehension to belligerence.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I feel the structure of my engagement was balanced and measured, as you moved from irregular terminology to outright hokem.

What do you wish to achieve, by asserting that private property is ineradicable and also observed in rats?

Who else shares such beliefs or perspective?

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you consider any of my terminology as irregular then I suggest you re-consume my existing comments with a dictionary on hand to assist your comprehension. Until you choose to meet me at a point of comprehension there is no point in further discussion, and asking disingenuous questions born of ignorance won't yield useful answers.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Who else shares such beliefs or perspective?

I consider my statements to be objective fact communicated, to the best of my ability, accurately and specifically using socially agreed upon definitions as per the dictionary, ipso facto, I would argue that everyone who cares to genuinely understand and interpret what I've stated as intended would share this perspective given the capacity to comprehend it. Just as one understands gravity to the extent of their comprehension.