By 'real world' I mean the actual physical real world and all its hardships. Not someone saying your hair looks like a mop in the comments of your latest insipid selfie.
Not once have you come into this discussion with a shred of an argument in good faith. You mock my values and beliefs, and you act as though you're superior for it. Have you ever stood for a damn thing in your life?
Your philosophies are not enlightenment. They're a weakness of your character.
Not once have you come into this discussion with a shred of an argument in good faith. You mock my values and beliefs, and you act as though you're superior for it. Have you ever stood for a damn thing in your life?
Your philosophies are not enlightenment. They're a weakness of your character.
Based on that, my beliefs revolve around you. I assure you that they don't.
Or do you mean that my beliefs simply revolve around not believing in vigilantism as a means to an end?
Or is there something else?
Trust that I am curious to know the answer about my so-called beliefs.
Your attitude. Your word choice. What you've zeroed in on about what I've said. You either put a lot of blind faith into the judicial system or you just don't like the idea of people circumventing control and taking matters into their own hands.
Why does it sound like I'm putting blind faith into the judicial system? Before you say that's an interesting thing to cast a light on, bear in mind that I'm truly curious as to how that came off that way.
But I suppose questioning your conclusions about me means that I loathe vigilantism.
You were advocating for a career in politics and encouraging change from the inside not too long ago, weren't you? As if that's something that is even remotely feasible when the world's this far gone.
I'm going off by what you've said to me, how you've said it, if I'm wrong then go ahead dand correct me. I'm not in the mood to keep playing this stupid game with you.
That's to say that you're absolutely wrong, and quite unimaginative.
Wouldn't it be rather egotistical to think that entering politics now would change things tomorrow? Unless, of course, we deployed our abilities in the process. I do believe I mentioned that.
Though I suppose it's all one way or another for someone like you.
[He debates his next bit.]
I'll give you a clue: it's rather idealistic to think you can change anything from the inside, especially if that same person is criticizing someone for thinking he can do it from the outside.
What difference is made in a world if you fail to see the system for what it is?
no subject
no subject
It sounds as if you're asking a philosophical question. One person was already confused.
What's the point of this, if not to recruit?
no subject
There's nothing to recruit to yet.
You'll know when I'm looking.
no subject
Making a "difference" is rather broad, after all. It's something that can be defined as both good and bad.
no subject
That's cute.
I bet teachers called you "gifted" in school for all your insightful little essays.
no subject
But then, so is a question without any discernible point behind it.
no subject
no subject
Care to try it?
no subject
no subject
Surely you're far more clever than that!
no subject
Not someone saying your hair looks like a mop in the comments of your latest insipid selfie.
Social media isn't reality, it's propaganda.
no subject
"Family" itself being a rather interesting notion, by the way. Especially when it comes to the two of us.
no subject
It really isn't.
no subject
And tried to discount my salient point and parallel because you didn't want to be wrong.
I hope you aren't terribly eager to lead anyone anytime soon. Admitting your failings is the first step to success.
no subject
Not once have you come into this discussion with a shred of an argument in good faith. You mock my values and beliefs, and you act as though you're superior for it. Have you ever stood for a damn thing in your life?
Your philosophies are not enlightenment. They're a weakness of your character.
no subject
Criticism is only taken in bad faith if someone assumes that I'm doing this without cause.
I have my reasons. But—as you've noticed, albeit in a very shallow way—I've been rather elusive about them.
Here, at least. Is it possible that I've said my intentions elsewhere?
no subject
no subject
Or do you mean that my beliefs simply revolve around not believing in vigilantism as a means to an end?
Or is there something else?
Trust that I am curious to know the answer about my so-called beliefs.
no subject
You either put a lot of blind faith into the judicial system or you just don't like the idea of people circumventing control and taking matters into their own hands.
no subject
Why does it sound like I'm putting blind faith into the judicial system? Before you say that's an interesting thing to cast a light on, bear in mind that I'm truly curious as to how that came off that way.
But I suppose questioning your conclusions about me means that I loathe vigilantism.
no subject
I'm going off by what you've said to me, how you've said it, if I'm wrong then go ahead dand correct me. I'm not in the mood to keep playing this stupid game with you.
no subject
That's to say that you're absolutely wrong, and quite unimaginative.
Wouldn't it be rather egotistical to think that entering politics now would change things tomorrow? Unless, of course, we deployed our abilities in the process. I do believe I mentioned that.
Though I suppose it's all one way or another for someone like you.
[He debates his next bit.]
I'll give you a clue: it's rather idealistic to think you can change anything from the inside, especially if that same person is criticizing someone for thinking he can do it from the outside.
What difference is made in a world if you fail to see the system for what it is?
Or is that too much of a game?
no subject
no subject