They think that certain topics they discuss in a nuanced way among themselves might be used for crude propogandistic purposes by others....like you’re doing right now.
They think that certain topics they discuss in a nuanced way among themselves
Is “nuanced” supposed to be a euphemism for “not corresponding to reality”? Because near as I can tell even when they talk among themselves they avoid mentioning said “unjust” scientific opinions and act lie they believe their own lies.
This is not surprising, as I described here once you start lying to attract people to your cause, your cause will be staffed by people who believe said lies. And if there really is some inner circle which free discusses the truth, how do you know they’re goals are at all related to the goals that attracted you to the movement?
Care to define what you mean by “crude propaganda”, and how calling out people who are lying and advocating lying for their cause counts as propaganda?
It’s not a fact that anyone is lying: thats your interpretation.
Your interpretation is motivated by a POV apparent in almost everything you have posted here. So: propaganda.
You disregard “they interpret differently from me” in favour of “they’re lying!!!!”. So: crude.
You don’t have facts on your side. Instead you have belief that you have facts on your side, which is not asupported by fact checking. For instance, younger had evidence that affirmative action is economically harmful.
It’s not a fact that anyone is lying: thats your interpretation.
Did you look at the links? They’re not exactly trying to hide it.
You disregard “they interpret differently from me” in favour of “they’re lying!!!!”.
Where by “they interpret differently from me” you mean they don’t care whether they’re statements correspond to reality as long as they’re politically convenient.
They think that certain topics they discuss in a nuanced way among themselves might be used for crude propogandistic purposes by others....like you’re doing right now.
Is “nuanced” supposed to be a euphemism for “not corresponding to reality”? Because near as I can tell even when they talk among themselves they avoid mentioning said “unjust” scientific opinions and act lie they believe their own lies.
This is not surprising, as I described here once you start lying to attract people to your cause, your cause will be staffed by people who believe said lies. And if there really is some inner circle which free discusses the truth, how do you know they’re goals are at all related to the goals that attracted you to the movement?
Yep. That was crude propaganda.
Care to define what you mean by “crude propaganda”, and how calling out people who are lying and advocating lying for their cause counts as propaganda?
It’s not a fact that anyone is lying: thats your interpretation.
Your interpretation is motivated by a POV apparent in almost everything you have posted here. So: propaganda.
You disregard “they interpret differently from me” in favour of “they’re lying!!!!”. So: crude.
You don’t have facts on your side. Instead you have belief that you have facts on your side, which is not asupported by fact checking. For instance, younger had evidence that affirmative action is economically harmful.
Did you look at the links? They’re not exactly trying to hide it.
Where by “they interpret differently from me” you mean they don’t care whether they’re statements correspond to reality as long as they’re politically convenient.