Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Discuss everything else: politics, society, culture, science, philosophy, ideas, etc.
User avatar
Hairblues
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 913
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1608
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Topical minoxidil and finasteride

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by Hairblues » 4 days ago

Pat wrote:
4 days ago
Yes, anyone who's mistreated or discriminated by society gets my sympathy. Especially men who receive no sympathy else where, and instead receive ridicule and hatred.


He's not mentally ill. Everything he said was true. You can even see the smirks of the ladies in the video. They think he's too stupid to see it just because he's short. They see him as inferior, not a real man.

A rational person is able to tell this guy has been through a rough life. Obviously victim of bullying, he has probably never had a girlfriend, and he gets no respect from any gender. The guy who tackled him just saw an already beaten down easy target. Everyone in the crowd just laughs at him. Utterly disgusting behavior reminds me of what animals do to injured or deformed animals.

What's worse is that no one is able to sympathize or even feign sympathy for him to try to deescalate the situation. All he needed was one person to calm him down instead of beating him down further both figuratively and literally.

I'm not sure which other flaws you're referring to and what deserves sympathy, but being an extremely short man is one of the worst flaws i can think of. Not just because of the lack of respect, the lack of sex appeal, but also the fact that people refuse to be honest about how much of a flaw it is.

Added in 5 minutes 39 seconds:

Haven't seen that article and I'm not sure I'd trust it. I've just seen the actual video. Thinking that he would shoot somebody would be hysteria.


No. I sympathize with people who I deem worthy of my sympathy. I don't give a shit about drug addicted homeless beggars, whereas other beggars I sympathize with. I think that's too general.
I read an article that he gave an interview and it says he lives in a van...sounds mentally ill to me.

Also he’s on a video saying he wants an educated, non-materialistic woman ....So is making sure your tinder dates live in an apartment or house now considered materialistic?

Given his current living situation he Kind of sounds irrational to me. Which again points me to he has a mental illness.

Do you know more facts about him/his past than I do that caused him to be living in his van?

He can get a service job unless he has such a bad tempement that he can’t actually hold a job. Which if so, again I point to mental illness.

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1008
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2024
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by That Guy » 3 days ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
4 days ago
Also, any angry man in the United States will be considered a threat by strangers, due to the country's proliferation of gun violence.
Yeah, you want to know something really interesting about that?

Isn't it strange how the only white guys who ever seem to go on shooting rampages in the US are beaten-down beta males? When was the last time Chad went on a shooting spree? I mean, some might say Elliot Roger, but that's a stretch honestly...

There seems to be only two kinds of gun violence: That committed by blacks, the majority of shootings

http://gunmemorial.org/

but mass shootings are usually done by white guys who all seem to be "betas".

Someone should seriously look into that.

I have a theory:

We now live in a time where, as a white man, you are becoming a minority in your own country. Your home doesn't look or feel like home anymore, and maybe you were cursed with inferior genetics. Getting a girlfriend or wife is harder than ever for you now because more and more jobs are taken by either "diverse" individuals or women, and we know that women will not marry men who make less than they do; there's a lot of women making more money than men today. Women are now "liberated" in all manner, especially sexually, which means they're now free to fuck around as much as they want and kill any resulting babies ostensibly on command, and they all believe they deserve nothing less than a prince out of a fairytale, because that's what society has told them they deserve. If the guy DOES manage to get married, it's statistically likely that she'll divorce him, take his children, start fucking some other guy (if she wasn't already) and financially ruin the cuck for the rest of his life. If he's a millennial, he may never even own his own home like his parents and grandparents before him did, despite slaving away at a blue collar job that pays less and less all the time as inflation rises, and his job is threatened with extinction by technocracy a little more each day.

So what do these white guys do? They turn away from women, and society at large. They grow to resent them and fail to partake in the very meaning of life itself — to interact and create relationships with other people; to have families and continue on the race. They are stonewalled from true, lasting happiness, continuously. They turn instead to video games, comic books, drugs, and whatever else numbs the pain. They spend all these hours in alpha-male sims like God of War or Witcher III to trick their brains into thinking they're fulfilling their masculine duties of being defenders, providers, etc. and what do they get for all of this? Shit on. Those games and movies they escape to need to be "diversified" and "feminized" too because they're "toxic" and "racist", just like those horrible men who play them! Perhaps they also grew up under the parentage of a single mother who coddled them to boot? Perhaps they have porn addiction or have even frequented hookers to make up for the lack of sex life? Fucking losers!

It seems to be that white guys who obviously fall into such a description tend to be the ones who do mass shootings.

I'll bet it's the guns' fault — we should ban them.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1693
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3693
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Adenosin shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by Admin » 3 days ago

That Guy wrote:
3 days ago
I have a theory:
Without having read it (yet), let me guess, it's all the fault of non-white people which through "six degrees of Richard Spencer" thinking (see Gad Saad's tweet below to understand what I mean) ended up making white people snap?



Edit: aaand I guessed right. The beauty of ideologies, the people who espouse them become easily predictable.

You already know my main rebuttal of that one: no one is making anyone do anything. Just because some people have treated you badly on some occasions doesn't give you the right to be horrible yourself.

And I know it's hard, insanely hard not to react, or better, to respond in kind. But yeah, that's ultimately the core of the Christian message, which you won't hesitate to ridicule and it's understandable from where you stand.

The far left: "I'm a victim so I have the right to lash out"

The far right: "I'm a victim so I have the right to lash out"

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1362
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3432
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 3 days ago

Five years ago, it used to be the case that whenever we had a mass shooting in North America, people would joke "I bet that his name is Mohammed." You guys all remember that I'm sure. But that joke is retired, it's been replaced by "I bet that he's an incel."
Admin wrote:
3 days ago


Without having read it (yet), let me guess, it's all the fault of non-white people which through "six degrees of Richard Spencer" thinking (see Gad Saad's tweet below to understand what I mean) ended up making white people snap?



Edit: aaand I guessed right. The beauty of ideologies, the people who espouse them become easily predictable.

You already know my main rebuttal of that one: no one is making anyone do anything. Just because some people have treated you badly on some occasions doesn't give you the right to be horrible yourself.

And I know it's hard, insanely hard not to react, or better, to respond in kind. But yeah, that's ultimately the core of the Christian message, which you won't hesitate to ridicule and it's understandable from where you stand.

The far left: "I'm a victim so I have the right to lash out"

The far right: "I'm a victim so I have the right to lash out"
Saad is not on Chomsky's level, he should show more deference. Further, it's a strange argument, as you can argue nearly anything with six steps. That is a lot if steps.

Anyway, in my opinion, victims have a right to be angry and frustrated, but that stops before the right to attack strangers.

User avatar
Rudiger
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 967
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2568
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Finasteride, Dutasteride, minoxidil, Biotin, Dermarolling, Nizoral

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by Rudiger » 3 days ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
3 days ago
Saad is not on Chomsky's level
Correct, Chomsky is nowhere near as nuanced and complex as Saad.
~get 1k likes and party~ 8-)

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1008
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2024
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by That Guy » 3 days ago

Admin wrote:
3 days ago
You already know my main rebuttal of that one: no one is making anyone do anything.
I could be more amicable to your opposing viewpoints if you didn't have this childish, hypocritical flair added to them.
Admin wrote:
3 days ago
The beauty of ideologies, the people who espouse them become easily predictable.
You should know best of all, every thought that enters your mind was first uttered by Jordan Peterson.
You already know my main rebuttal of that one: no one is making anyone do anything.
"Ideologies make you predictable! Ha! Let me hit you with my MAIN REBUTTAL now!"

This is the most asinine claim you make on the internet. By far.

You have bought so deeply into this idea that "we're all just individuals" that you don't realize that by believing so, you should be totally apolitical. You should identify yourself as a libertarian or an anarcho-capitalist and leave it at that.

Because your thinking here is "It is literally impossible for anything ever to have any effect on society whatsoever."

Serious people do not believe this. You will not find any reputable scientist, social or otherwise, you will not find police or military strategists, you will not governments, media, etc. who believe this nonsense you espouse.

Why are you concerned about "the radical left" and feminists, then? Why are you concerned about Islam at all? Why are you concerned about Neo Nazis? Why do any of these ideas and presences bother you at all if they have no effect on anyone else's thinking? Surely, they're all totally harmless if no one can be made to do anything.

Suicide bombers? They all totally decided to do it on their own. There was no encouragement ever and there is no way they can inspire anyone else.

Propaganda? Doesn't work. "Fake news" is harmless.

All the Yellow Vests? They're just a random occurrence; nothing spurred them on. That's impossible.

This is not hyperbole: This is the sheer stupidity of what you actually claim to believe.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1362
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3432
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 3 days ago

Rudiger wrote:
3 days ago
Correct, Chomsky is nowhere near as nuanced and complex as Saad.
Funny retort. In practice, Chomsky is one of the greatest intellectuals of the past fifty years. His writings and his analysis have been transformative in several different fields, he is widely read, widely informed, widely recognized in spite of being politically incorrect, and non-inevitable.

No disprespect to Gad Saad, but he's not on his level. It'd be equivalent to me thumbing my nose at Juan Maldacena or Yoshizumi Ishino -- punching up in that manner just doesn't work at all.

Added in 9 minutes 51 seconds:
That Guy wrote:
3 days ago
about "the radical left" and feminists, then? Why are you concerned about Islam at all? Why are you concerned about Neo Nazis? Why do any of these ideas and presences bother you at all if they have no effect on anyone else's thinking? Surely, they're all totally harmless if no one can be made to do anything.
Everybody has an ideology or ideologies. It's a necessary adaptation for the limited human mind to deal with a complex world. Somebody just having an ideology or being said to have an ideology is not in itself a valid criticism, in my opinion. Where it can become a valid criticism, is if the ideology is demonstrably too simplistic, if it is reliant on a false worldview, or if an individual is not aware of where his ideology might have limitations and thus not be applicable.

On this particular point, I don't find individualism versus collectivism to be particularly insightful, as both are true. Dismissing humans as individuals is reductionist and false. We're not just social animals, we're the most social animals on the planet. Recent human evolution is largely driven by the needs of humans to work in groups and bands. Speaking of humans without referring to culture is nonsense.

As for your defense of bagel man, had he been born in Munich in 1924, I think that it is more likely than not that brezel man would have not gotten much attention from women. There is a small caveat due to the fact that most victims of war were male, which could have changed dating dynamics.

User avatar
Hairblues
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 913
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1608
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Topical minoxidil and finasteride

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by Hairblues » 3 days ago

In addition to the reported fact he lives in a van, here is more information that leads me to double down on assuming he’smentally ill.

Stable minded people, regardless of life history, don’t have a history of confronting strangers in stores and having Physical altercations with them.
He has a YouTube channel (before this happened) where he self documented altercations with strangers. It looks like he provokes them for the self for filling image of the victim. Kind of manipulative and obsessive if you ask me.

So this is not a one-off case of the poor victim whose fed up and defending himself. It’s a pattern of behavior from someone who is most likely unemployed, homeless. Probably living on welfare or mental disability.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.tmz.co ... ontations/

nameless
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 330
Joined: 8 months ago
Reputation: 67
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by nameless » 3 days ago

Admin wrote:
6 days ago
Of course short men are oppressed, they get paid less, told they have Napoleon syndrome if they show anger and have miserable dating prospects.

Does it mean we need equity policies to put an end to their oppression?

The left: of course not, it means xD .
My politics lean left and I would support the idea of equity policies for short people.

And before you say that I'm just saying that because I'm short, I'm 5'9" which is neither short nor tall.

Added in 31 minutes 22 seconds:
Afro_Vacancy wrote:
4 days ago
He was spontaneously shouting at and insulting strangers. Within that context, he does not deserve sympathy. There was also no way that he does not pose a threat as any maniac can get access to a gun.

Edited to add: And as you know, lots of women treat me like shit all of the time. If I actually liked booze I'd be an alcoholic for sure. But for various reasons, I don't attack strangers.

And yes, life is fucking unfair.

But he did NOT have a gun. Although he was walking right up to people and getting in their faces and shouting and yelling right up in their faces.

It was predictable that the way he was behaving would lead to violence from someone - either by him or someone defending himself against him. I actually thought violence would break out sooner than it did. I was expecting violence to start at any moment. All that having been said, I do think that to some degree the big guy got violent with the smaller guy because he knew the small guy would be easy to overcome. Like they say, discretion is the better part of valor.

I used to drink alcohol to help myself sleep. As that situation worsened it spilled over into the day as I would drink to kill the hangovers. But I never once initiated violence with anyone. I've been in 3 fights in my whole life and I tried to de-escalate those situations. I'm especially not into big violence one bit. Big violence is disgusting. Sometimes I think someone maybe deserves a smack or two but even small violence is more risky than it would seem. If someone (me, for example) were to get into it a little bit with some deserving guy I could get more than I bargain for. I read in the news media where someone ends up with severe physical injuries or even dead as a result of a common fight. You never know how capable of fighting someone else is. Some guys just have the know-how for pummeling other guys and a guy like that can do a lot of damage quickly. And then there's the issue that you never know what (weapon) some guy might have in his pocket. That doesn't mean I won't hit if a fight is becoming inevitable. I know from past experience that I will definitely hit but that's definitely not what I want. It's just too risky. If I knew I would just punch some deserving guy a couple times and he would just punch me a couple times then I might have gotten into a few more fights but there's just no telling where fights are going to end up. I view virtually all fights as potential life and death situations. Even that small skirmish in the bagel shop where the big guy tackled the smaller guy; I think even that small skirmish could have ended with someone going to the hospital or getting killed.

The world is becoming increasingly violent. The smart play is to stay out of these situations, to never be the cause of these situations, and maybe own a gun.
Last edited by nameless 3 days ago, edited 22 times in total.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1693
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3693
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Adenosin shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by Admin » 3 days ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
3 days ago
Funny retort. In practice, Chomsky is one of the greatest intellectuals of the past fifty years. His writings and his analysis have been transformative in several different fields, he is widely read, widely informed, widely recognized in spite of being politically incorrect, and non-inevitable.

No disrespect to Gad Saad, but he's not on his level. It'd be equivalent to me thumbing my nose at Juan Maldacena or Yoshizumi Ishino -- punching up in that manner just doesn't work at all. It's more comical than anything else.
Noam Chomsky has never done it for me, it's like Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, all thinkers who don't espouse a metaphysical framework, which is unfortunately the vast majority of them these days. To me they're on the same level as a good BBC documentary narrated by David Attenborough or the Cosmos series by Carl Sagan/Neil deGrasse Tyson, minus the amazing visuals.

Despite shitting on religion at any chance he gets, Gad Saad has this great sense of humor and this ability to go right to what actually matters in a situation. Anyway, they play in different categories, but we can already see who's been gaining the "popular vote" since the advent of YouTube. The common man will be way more interested to hear a Gad Saad than a Noam Chomsky.

Now one can either be elitist about that fact or recognize that some intellectuals have this gift that allows them to get a deeper and more meaningful insight into reality, possibly at the expense of specialization which you'd be more likely to find in Noam Chomsky's body of work. But even then, despite his analysis being accurate well-research, I just think they ultimately don't matter that much.

Here's an example with a quick YouTube search, one of the first videos is this one, "The interview that exposes the West":



I didn't know that much about Chomsky but this is not surprising. What is wrong with the West? Not much, compared to the rest of the world today or any point in history. So it's a given his focus will be something that doesn't matter much.

Gad Saad also insists on the power individuals have to change the world. While in Chomsky's worldview, it seems you're mostly a pawn of the system of course, how convenient. It's also where the strictly materialistic worldview inevitably leads: you're a speck of dust being moved by the cruel forces of a meaningless universe.

To reply to @That Guy, I believe the redemption of the world resides in the individual, and no, Jordan Peterson didn't come up with this idea, Christianity did. A radical idea which is still resisted by a lot of people to this day, and no wonder. That doesn't mean the collective doesn't play a role but you can't put it in the driver's seat, you should not see yourself as a pawn of the system that will only free himself by oppressing and massacring the people you perceive to be his ennemies.

User avatar
JLBB
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 574
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1163
Norwood: NW1
Regimen: 0.25mg Finasteride

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by JLBB » 3 days ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
3 days ago
Funny retort. In practice, Chomsky is one of the greatest intellectuals of the past fifty years. His writings and his analysis have been transformative in several different fields, he is widely read, widely informed, widely recognized in spite of being politically incorrect, and non-inevitable.

No disprespect to Gad Saad, but he's not on his level. It'd be equivalent to me thumbing my nose at Juan Maldacena or Yoshizumi Ishino -- punching up in that manner just doesn't work at all.

Added in 9 minutes 51 seconds:


Everybody has an ideology or ideologies. It's a necessary adaptation for the limited human mind to deal with a complex world. Somebody just having an ideology or being said to have an ideology is not in itself a valid criticism, in my opinion. Where it can become a valid criticism, is if the ideology is demonstrably too simplistic, if it is reliant on a false worldview, or if an individual is not aware of where his ideology might have limitations and thus not be applicable.

On this particular point, I don't find individualism versus collectivism to be particularly insightful, as both are true. Dismissing humans as individuals is reductionist and false. We're not just social animals, we're the most social animals on the planet. Recent human evolution is largely driven by the needs of humans to work in groups and bands. Speaking of humans without referring to culture is nonsense.

As for your defense of bagel man, had he been born in Munich in 1924, I think that it is more likely than not that brezel man would have not gotten much attention from women. There is a small caveat due to the fact that most victims of war were male, which could have changed dating dynamics.
Chomsky lacks basic understanding of introductory level philosophy when he argues on a regular basis. He is consistently fallacious in his reasoning, makes constant appeal to authority fallacies in his arguments (climate change, economics, energy policy for example) and ultimately many of his more extreme claims are based on singular sources without broader understanding of the topic, and complete ignorance of the other side. Classic fascistic retort of asking for deference to a man that speaks so often on topics like economics and finance, quite literally espousing the opposite view of the ENTIRE working community in that industry. For a man that speaks so often against heirachy, authority and domination, its utterly hilarious that the only argument from leftists to back him up relates to his authority as an academic. On top of that his disdain and lack of trust for authority particularly the US government, but unquestioning trust in leftist academia, economics and government funded climate change advocacy for no apparent reason or thought.

Of course your response like most leftists will be of his "greatness" and being "widely read" "widely cited" etc, its pointless to argue with a leftist that Chomsky ever says something inaccurate or fallacious because they'll simply fall back on an appeal to authority fallacy.

"“It's not radical Islam that worries the US -- it's independence”"

For real, how the fuck can one argue against an army of pseudo-intellectuals that think a man that says something like this is the premier philosopher and academic of the left? Even if we are to pretend that oil is the issue at play, the US is hardly vying for control of Canada or Saudi Arabia, some of the most oil rich nations in the world. The other idiotic argument I see that his disciples make is that the US didn't want to allow the prosperous socialism of Venezuala because they didn't want the people of the US to see how brilliant it is. As if the US is considering behind close doors invading Denmark because they're afraid of people supporting Democratic socialism. What a joke.

Not to mention his lack of understanding of the practical impossibilities of an anti-hierarchical, non-oxymoronic anarcho-socialism which he's the premier proponent of. Not exactly surprising he has things this backwards, he once described a Serbian concentration camp as a refugee facility. Or compares working for a wage in a capitalist system to slavery. And that the Republican party is the most dangerous organisation IN HUMAN HISTORY because of their lack of a belief in climate change, (spoiler alert, C02 emissions weren't cut under Obama's Democrats and won't be under Biden's) He even said during the GFC that he foresaw a left-wing economic and social revolution in Latin America, another brilliantly moronic prediction. When asked what his biggest mistake as an academic has been in terms of his beliefs and things he has said, he literally can't give a direct answer, saying he wish he acknowledged climate change more, despite already doing this. A fifty year long career and the guy can't acknowledge he's got a single thing wrong. To be expected from the father of the modern left I guess.

Virtually the only thing of intelligence he has said lately is his disdain for the Russia nonsense, it being an excuse for the failing Democrats who can't admit their failings.

Added in 4 minutes 9 seconds:
nameless wrote:
3 days ago
My politics lean left and I would support the idea of equity policies for short people.

And before you say that I'm just saying that because I'm short, I'm 5'9" which is neither short nor tall.

Added in 31 minutes 22 seconds:



But he did NOT have a gun. Although he was walking right up to people and getting in their faces and shouting and yelling right up in their faces.

It was predictable that the way he was behaving would lead to violence from someone - either by him or someone defending himself against him. I actually thought violence would break out sooner than it did. I was expecting violence to start at any moment. All that having been said, I do think that to some degree the big guy got violent with the smaller guy because he knew the small guy would be easy to overcome. Like they say, discretion is the better part of valor.

I used to drink alcohol to help myself sleep. As that situation worsened it spilled over into the day as I would drink to kill the hangovers. But I never once initiated violence with anyone. I've been in 3 fights in my whole life and I tried to de-escalate those situations. I'm especially not into big violence one bit. Big violence is disgusting. Sometimes I think someone maybe deserves a smack or two but even small violence is more risky than it would seem. If someone (me, for example) were to get into it a little bit with some deserving guy I could get more than I bargain for. I read in the news media where someone ends up with severe physical injuries or even dead as a result of a common fight. You never know how capable of fighting someone else is. Some guys just have the know-how for pummeling other guys and a guy like that can do a lot of damage quickly. And then there's the issue that you never know what (weapon) some guy might have in his pocket. That doesn't mean I won't hit if a fight is becoming inevitable. I know from past experience that I will definitely hit but that's definitely not what I want. It's just too risky. If I knew I would just punch some deserving guy a couple times and he would just punch me a couple times then I might have gotten into a few more fights but there's just no telling where fights are going to end up. I view virtually all fights as potential life and death situations. Even that small skirmish in the bagel shop where the big guy tackled the smaller guy; I think even that small skirmish could have ended with someone going to the hospital or getting killed.

The world is becoming increasingly violent. The smart play is to stay out of these situations, to never be the cause of these situations, and maybe own a gun.
You're a fucking midget, probably explains the tiny brain of yours too.
Last edited by JLBB 3 days ago, edited 1 time in total.

nameless
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 330
Joined: 8 months ago
Reputation: 67
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by nameless » 3 days ago

JLBB wrote:
3 days ago
Chomsky lacks basic understanding of introductory level philosophy when he argues on a regular basis. He is consistently fallacious in his reasoning, makes constant appeal to authority fallacies in his arguments (climate change, economics, energy policy for example) and ultimately many of his more extreme claims are based on singular sources without broader understanding of the topic, and complete ignorance of the other side. Classic fascistic retort of asking for deference to a man that speaks so often on topics like economics and finance, quite literally espousing the opposite view of the ENTIRE working community in that industry. For a man that speaks so often against heirachy, authority and domination, its utterly hilarious that the only argument from leftists to back him up relates to his authority as an academic. On top of that his disdain and lack of trust for authority particularly the US government, but unquestioning trust in leftist academia, economics and government funded climate change advocacy for no apparent reason or thought.

Of course your response like most leftists will be of his "greatness" and being "widely read" "widely cited" etc, its pointless to argue with a leftist that Chomsky ever says something inaccurate or fallacious because they'll simply fall back on an appeal to authority fallacy.

"“It's not radical Islam that worries the US -- it's independence”"

For real, how the fuck can one argue against an army of pseudo-intellectuals that think a man that says something like this is the premier philosopher and academic of the left? Even if we are to pretend that oil is the issue at play, the US is hardly vying for control of Canada or Saudi Arabia, some of the most oil rich nations in the world. The other idiotic argument I see that his disciples make is that the US didn't want to allow the prosperous socialism of Venezuala because they didn't want the people of the US to see how brilliant it is. As if the US is considering behind close doors invading Denmark because they're afraid of people supporting Democratic socialism. What a joke.

Not to mention his lack of understanding of the practical impossibilities of an anti-hierarchical, non-oxymoronic anarcho-socialism which he's the premier proponent of. Not exactly surprising he has things this backwards, he once described a Serbian concentration camp as a refugee facility. Or compares working for a wage in a capitalist system to slavery. And that the Republican party is the most dangerous organisation on earth because of their lack of a belief in climate change, (spoiler alert, C02 emissions weren't cut under Obama's Democrats and won't be under Biden's) He even said during the GFC that he foresaw a left-wing economic and social revolution in Latin America, another brilliantly moronic prediction. When asked what his biggest mistake as an academic has been in terms of his beliefs and things he has said, he literally can't give a direct answer, saying he wish he acknowledged climate change more, despite already doing this. A fifty year long career and the guy can't acknowledge he's got a single thing wrong. To be expected from the father of the modern left I guess.

Virtually the only thing of intelligence he has said lately is his disdain for the Russia nonsense, it being an excuse for the failing Democrats who can't admit their failings.

Added in 4 minutes 9 seconds:


You're a fucking midget, probably explains the tiny brain of yours too.
Thanks for the update. I see your anti-social personality disorder persists.

User avatar
JLBB
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 574
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1163
Norwood: NW1
Regimen: 0.25mg Finasteride

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by JLBB » 3 days ago

Admin wrote:
3 days ago
Noam Chomsky has never done it for me, it's like Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, all thinkers who don't espouse a metaphysical framework, which is unfortunately the vast majority of them these days. To me they're on the same level as a good BBC documentary narrated by David Attenborough or the Cosmos series by Carl Sagan/Neil deGrasse Tyson, minus the amazing visuals.

Despite shitting on religion at any chance he gets, Gad Saad has this great sense of humor and this ability to go right to what actually matters in a situation. Anyway, they play in different categories, but we can already see who's been gaining the "popular vote" since the advent of YouTube. The common man will be way more interested to hear a Gad Saad than a Noam Chomsky.

Now one can either be elitist about that fact or recognize that some intellectuals have this gift that allows them to get a deeper and more meaningful insight into reality, possibly at the expense of specialization which you'd be more likely to find in Noam Chomsky's body of work. But even then, despite his analysis being accurate well-research, I just think they ultimately don't matter that much.

Here's an example with a quick YouTube search, one of the first videos is this one, "The interview that exposes the West":



I didn't know that much about Chomsky but this is not surprising. What is wrong with the West? Not much, compared to the rest of the world today or any point in history. So it's a given his focus will be something that doesn't matter much.

Gad Saad also insists on the power individuals have to change the world. While in Chomsky's worldview, it seems you're mostly a pawn of the system of course, how convenient. It's also where the strictly materialistic worldview inevitably leads: you're a speck of dust being moved by the cruel forces of a meaningless universe.

To reply to That Guy, I believe the redemption of the world resides in the individual, and no, Jordan Peterson didn't come up with this idea, Christianity did. A radical idea which is still resisted by a lot of people to this day, and no wonder. That doesn't mean the collective doesn't play a role but you can't put it in the driver's seat, you should not see yourself as a pawn of the system that will only free himself by oppressing and massacring the people you perceive to be his ennemies.
"The common man will be way more interested to hear a Gad Saad than a Noam Chomsky."

I agree with most of what you said, but this is certainly incorrect and is easily proven false by Chomsky's popularity as the most widely cited and revered commentator on the left. The common man prefers to hear that they are in servitude to and a cog in a cold, uncaring system because they don't thrive in a hierarchical society. Or rather they don't feel like they thrive because of wealth inequality relative to those above them, people more psychologically concerned with this inequality than being poorer for example, as virtually the entire population would be in Chomsky's deranged, anarcho-socialist hellhole. Part of the problem with Chomsky is again despite his pseudo-disdain for hierarchical structures and authority he virtually only ever allows himself to be interviewed by or discuss with people who outright eat his asshole, unfortunately it goes much further than simple ass kissing. Similar to Peterson his following is borderline religious.

I've listened to a lot of Chomsky over time and a reasonable amount of Peterson, funny enough they are virtually the perfect antithesis to one another in regards to worldview (although often talk about separate issues and Peterson more from a psychological perspective), however Chomsky is further left than Peterson is to the right. Supposedly Chomsky has been questioned on what his thoughts are on Peterson and his response in classic leftist fashion was that he wasn't even worth addressing. Nice argument bro.

Added in 2 minutes 53 seconds:
nameless wrote:
3 days ago
Thanks for the update. I see your anti-social personality disorder persists.
Says the guy who literally wishes death on conservatives.

"One last thing I want to add is that I think I might actually be starting to hate right-wingers to the point that I wish they would die. "

Your Alzheimer's is showing, unfortunately you'll still die a bald virgin but maybe a cure for Alzheimer's will arrive before that hairloss cure does.

nameless
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 330
Joined: 8 months ago
Reputation: 67
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by nameless » 3 days ago

JLBB wrote:
3 days ago



Says the guy who literally wishes death on conservatives.

"One last thing I want to add is that I think I might actually be starting to hate right-wingers to the point that I wish they would die. "

Your Alzheimer's is showing, unfortunately you'll still die a bald virgin but maybe a cure for Alzheimer's will arrive before that hairloss cure does.
The same repetitive babble over and over and over again.
Hopefully, it makes you feel better to release it.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1362
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3432
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Short guy goes on misogynistic rant in bagel shop

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 3 days ago

JLBB wrote:
3 days ago
Chomsky lacks basic understanding of introductory level philosophy when he argues on a regular basis. He is consistently fallacious in his reasoning, makes constant appeal to authority fallacies in his arguments (climate change, economics, energy policy for example) and ultimately many of his more extreme claims are based on singular sources without broader understanding of the topic, and complete ignorance of the other side. Classic fascistic retort of asking for deference to a man that speaks so often on topics like economics and finance, quite literally espousing the opposite view of the ENTIRE working community in that industry. For a man that speaks so often against heirachy, authority and domination, its utterly hilarious that the only argument from leftists to back him up relates to his authority as an academic. On top of that his disdain and lack of trust for authority particularly the US government, but unquestioning trust in leftist academia, economics and government funded climate change advocacy for no apparent reason or thought.

Of course your response like most leftists will be of his "greatness" and being "widely read" "widely cited" etc, its pointless to argue with a leftist that Chomsky ever says something inaccurate or fallacious because they'll simply fall back on an appeal to authority fallacy.

"“It's not radical Islam that worries the US -- it's independence”"

For real, how the fuck can one argue against an army of pseudo-intellectuals that think a man that says something like this is the premier philosopher and academic of the left? Even if we are to pretend that oil is the issue at play, the US is hardly vying for control of Canada or Saudi Arabia, some of the most oil rich nations in the world. The other idiotic argument I see that his disciples make is that the US didn't want to allow the prosperous socialism of Venezuala because they didn't want the people of the US to see how brilliant it is. As if the US is considering behind close doors invading Denmark because they're afraid of people supporting Democratic socialism. What a joke.

Not to mention his lack of understanding of the practical impossibilities of an anti-hierarchical, non-oxymoronic anarcho-socialism which he's the premier proponent of. Not exactly surprising he has things this backwards, he once described a Serbian concentration camp as a refugee facility. Or compares working for a wage in a capitalist system to slavery. And that the Republican party is the most dangerous organisation IN HUMAN HISTORY because of their lack of a belief in climate change, (spoiler alert, C02 emissions weren't cut under Obama's Democrats and won't be under Biden's) He even said during the GFC that he foresaw a left-wing economic and social revolution in Latin America, another brilliantly moronic prediction. When asked what his biggest mistake as an academic has been in terms of his beliefs and things he has said, he literally can't give a direct answer, saying he wish he acknowledged climate change more, despite already doing this. A fifty year long career and the guy can't acknowledge he's got a single thing wrong. To be expected from the father of the modern left I guess.

Virtually the only thing of intelligence he has said lately is his disdain for the Russia nonsense, it being an excuse for the failing Democrats who can't admit their failings.

Added in 4 minutes 9 seconds:


You're a fucking midget, probably explains the tiny brain of yours too.
You contradicted yourself in your otherwise eloquent rant.

You chastise Chomsky for not showing deference to the "entire field of economics", a false claim, when you yourself do not show the same deference to the field of climatology. The latter discipline is a genuine science, and much more robust. It's got a stronger predictive track record, and it's based on well-founded, fundamental principles of physics and chemistry.

"“It's not radical Islam that worries the US -- it's independence""

That statement is obviously correct. If that were Chomsky's premiere realization, he would be dismissed as superficial.

The historical record speaks for itself. The US has frequently aligned itself with Islamic fundamentalists (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Libya), but it cracks down hard on independent nationalist movements in the area.

Edited to add: your excessive use of hyperbole undermines your points.

Added in 6 minutes 36 seconds:
That Guy wrote:
3 days ago
jobs are taken by either "diverse" individuals or women, and we know that women will not marry men who make less than they do; there's a lot of women making more money than men today.
It looks like your views have changed. You used to argue, with great vigour, that women don't care about men's money.

Added in 29 seconds:
nameless wrote:
3 days ago
The same repetitive babble over and over and over again.
Hopefully, it makes you feel better to release it.
We often repeat ourselves around here.

As for his point, I encourage you not to give into the leftist temptation to "hate" conservatives. It's an obstacle to understanding.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests