That pricing. It’s like someone challenged him to count to 8.

It’s quite clear to me that almost no one in the US—or those “educated” by US politics on social media—has any fucking idea what a “liberal” fundamentally is and always has been. It’s going to become another one of those great terms ruined by a takeover of idiots—not that I’m directly calling your mom an idiot.

But ffs, when the French gifted that statue, it wasn’t because they were pro-capitalism, burning books, fucking off women’s rights, and bringing the legal system into every facet of society.

Ah, that makes much more sense. TIL

True. It ain’t cheap. I got all the gear for it and thought about doing that recently because it’s geographically much closer than the Eurasia Alps.

Nope.

That boat from Australia is VERY expensive. Without expedition sponsorship or a science grant, not happening.

Not wrong. For me, Grey is a colour, Gray is an American surname.

Except for Grey’s Anatomy. The Americans had to concede with that one because of the book, but I’m sure Americans thought it was exotic. That’s why they called the other show House and not Condo. Marketability.

PEGI and many other groups are private groups. They’re not an authority of any form. They’re not associated with government, public regulation, or public election. They’re a group of people that create their own standards outside of the ISO or any actual regulation representing the public.

Some countries do have actual public systems, but many just have these private groups that know best.

The same Canaanites from Noah’s son because after everyone was killed by a flood, God deemed Canaan’s blood the good people worth saving?

He sure seemed to fuck it up and have to wipe out humans quite a few times. But that’s what you get for putting a tree in Eden for no other reason but to introduce sin to the innocent and trick humans into thinking Lucifer was the evil one.

And now he loves America. Just don’t tell the Italians.

Starting to see a pattern of bad outcomes for whoever makes a deal with this guy at the time…

A pet store franchise in Australia recently just rebranded themselves at “Pet-O”.

With the Australian accent, it’s “pedo”.

So I wonder things like this got past that many people without someone saying, “Maybe Fat Balls isn’t a smart choice.”

There needs to be a term for someone that ignores everything like a sieve, but manages to catch the smallest of morsels off which to launch a fallacious diatribe, as though nothing else happened.

They’re not.a.troll; they’re something quite different. A mix of insecurity, hyperfocusing, a tendency to exercise many argument fallacies, a resolve that can deny itself, no clear purpose in its behaviour beyond either “winning” or perhaps just seeking social interaction.

I’d go with “Teflon” because nothing sticks, but it doesn’t cover their wannabe polemicist nature.

And that’s how disinformation killed the Information Age.

Edit: Come on. You lot shouldn’t need my help finding a verifiable source yourselves. If there’s so many articles on it, I’m sure you can find at least one verifying the source without my help. Or you can subscribe to an ad populum fallacy and believe a mass of articles presenting no actual evidence. You’ll find the answers to the questions you ask me with your own initiative. I believe in you!

This is why she’s been spending a heap of time over at her friend’s house these past 9 months, Jo.

That’s like having sympathy to the fall of Eagle’s Nest. Your humanity has ironically lost its way, lest you are in support of thousands murdered technically unfortunately dead with no recourse or solution to stop the killings.

I thought this image had already been vehemently claimed as not the guy, in order to stop putting this guy at risk.

Internet must stop chasing updoots as a priority over chasing the right information.

Gross

Meme?

I don’t get it.

Well someone’s never had their Jimmy in a duck’s mouth. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but I think you’ve made that clear lol

Haha, I can. Thats the beauty of it. I can express an opinion. I’m well used to this place fallaciously assuming that a single opinion against the grain must mean an all out attack against the tree.

It’s a funny little tree that thinks itself the centre of the forest.

The paradox part of the paradox is that the tolerant are the intolerant.

This is what a paradox is.

a situation or statement that seems impossible or is difficult to understand because it contains two opposite facts or characteristics:

i.e. the tolerant (A) are the intolerant (B); the tolerant cannot be intolerant. A = B while A≠ B, yet both appear true. A paradox.

The result is a cascade that divides further and shifts power based on which tolerant group becomes the most intolerant of other’s ideas the most at the time; the ideologies meaning nothing in the end. The philosophy that the intolerant tend to have power.

In your cartoon, which starts with a question that immediately abandons any explanation of the paradox and then ironically just guides you on how to be participant in it, you eould see the paradox in effect if you go back just one step. Mein Kompf literally states how he was liberal and tolerant but had to cease that in order to stop the perceived intolerant for German nationalism. Is this a ideology you disagree with? Probably. But it doesn’t matter in the paradox.

Then becoming the intolerant himself, we know what happened next; power. Then the tolerant no longer tolerating him—EU and friends; power shifts to them. That’s the paradox. The intolerant is always the majority at the time; ideologies be damned. It’s a repetitive cycle conflicting itself—a paradox.

If you are coming from the perspective of an opposing ideology, you will of course not tolerate it. But that’s not the philosophical point. Subsequently, the red hats quote the exact same paradox inappropriately as well.

To approach it philosophically, as intended, you must first ask; what is currently considered intolerant in this society? You cannot have personal opinions influence it, else you have already missed the point.

That’s exactly my point.

It gets thrown around like any flavour of the year amongst American blues, but I am starting to realise most people have no idea what a paradox fundamentally is. Rather they think it’s some sort of guiding idea because everyone keeps saying it and something about a philosopher—the entire premise whooshing over the heads of whichever tribalists “gotcha bombs” it entirely out of context.

Two comments of it here and I imagine at least one of you have never comprehended what it is and where they fit into it. Someone’s the chicken; someone’s the egg. A true idiot thinks they know the solution to that.