Southern Border Crossing for FY2021 Set Record

[Watchmen]

Nope.. Loaded. It had a false assumption built into it. As a result it can't be legit.

Nope. Legit. It was an invitation to start a discussion. One I’m still willing to have.





Just not with you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope. Legit. It was an invitation to start a discussion. One I’m still willing to have.





Just not with you.

LOL! Do you need your post quoted and how you used a loaded question explained to you?

You are not going to get much of a discussion if you ask the people that you disagree with:

Have you quit beating your wife yet?

 

[Watchmen]

LOL! Do you need your post quoted and how you used a loaded question explained to you?

You are not going to get much of a discussion if you ask the people that you disagree with:

Have you quit beating your wife yet?

I already quoted it.

And you’ve been reported.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I already quoted it.

And you’ve been reported.

Oh my! Shaking in my boots. What on Earth was your reason?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Look who’s talking. All I said was, “So you don’t believe countries should have borders,” then y’all went ballistic. So easily triggered. Lol

Ah you did quote it. Sadly you do not see the false assumption.

Your question is the same as asking:

Have you quit beating your wife yet.

Your question has a false assumption just as the example that I gave to you. It was a loaded question.

My question was never asked seriously.. It only illustrated what you did wrong. If you reported me for that question then you are only reporting on yourself. You were serious with your false accusation, mine was only used to demonstrate your error.

I wonder if false claims about others being "triggered" is a reportable offense? It was a clear attempt to insult others when you were clearly in the wrong.

 

[Revoltingest]

Let's cool things down, lest the moderators
arrive with their rulers seeking bare knuckles.

 

[Kooky]

Look who’s talking. All I said was, “So you don’t believe countries should have borders,” then y’all went ballistic. So easily triggered. Lol

For what it's worth, I don't think countries should have borders. They are an oppressive concept centered around the idea that it is okay to do violence to certain classes of people for no reason other than the accident of their birth, and therefore intrinsically unjust.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let's cool things down, lest the moderators
arrive with their rulers seeking bare knuckles.

Oddly enough he go mad at my question that was never asked seriously that was the same sort of question that he asked of others. He called us "triggered" when he was the one that got mad at what he in essence did.

 

[Revoltingest]

Oddly enough he go mad at my question that was never asked seriously that was the same sort of question that he asked of others. He called us "triggered" when he was the one that got mad at what he in essence did.

It happens.

 

[Watchmen]

For what it's worth, I don't think countries should have borders. They are an oppressive concept centered around the idea that it is okay to do violence to certain classes of people for no reason other than the accident of their birth, and therefore intrinsically unjust.

Other than violence to certain classes, do you see any other negatives? Any pros?

 

[Watchmen]

Oddly enough he go mad at my question that was never asked seriously that was the same sort of question that he asked of others. He called us "triggered" when he was the one that got mad at what he in essence did.

It wasn’t the same at all, and to suggest otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It wasn’t the same at all, and to suggest otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

The both implied something false about the people that were being addressed. There was only a difference of degree. I used a gross example since you did not appear to understand how you were guilty of the same.

 

[Watchmen]

The both implied something false about the people that were being addressed. There was only a difference of degree. I used a gross example since you did not appear to understand how you were guilty of the same.

You keep telling yourself that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You keep telling yourself that.

I can show that is the case, assuming that you never did beat your wife.

I am correct when I assume that you have not beaten your wife, right?

 

[Watchmen]

I can show that is the case, assuming that you never did beat your wife.

I am correct when I assume that you have not beaten your wife, right?

So you don’t believe countries should have borders?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you don’t believe countries should have borders?

Oh my! You still are using loaded questions that are no different from:

So you are still beating your wife?

If you want a polite discourse do not use loaded questions.

 

[Watchmen]

Oh my! You still are using loaded questions that are no different from:

So you are still beating your wife?

If you want a polite discourse do not use loaded questions.

Look at the two questions. Even assuming mine is loaded, the difference/degree of these two questions is so divergent it renders the two not analogous at all. My question absolutely leaves room for polite discourse (of which a couple posters have legitimately engaged in) whereas yours does not.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Look at the two questions. Even assuming mine is loaded, the difference/degree of these two questions is so divergent it renders the two not analogous at all. My question absolutely leaves room for polite discourse (of which a couple posters have legitimately engaged in) whereas yours does not.

There is no if about it. You asked a loaded question. And the difference is only a matter of degree of how insulting the person asking the question is trying to be. You apparently are blind to how you were trying to insult others. Everyone else saw right through it.

By the way, you were the only one that was triggered here. I hope you realize that.

 

[Kooky]

Other than violence to certain classes, do you see any other negatives? Any pros?

The pros are, of course a government's (and by extension, its capitalist class's) ability to survey, restrict and control the flow of goods and people. Those are pros for the government and the capitalists, mind you; I see little benefit for a worker in this instance, since the government serves primarily the needs of the capitalist class here.

The negatives are manifold, of course: First of all, they restrict the human right to freedom of movement; they provide an excuse for governments everywhere to arbitrarily restrict where a person is allowed to go.

Second of all, they create legal distinctions among human beings: One person has access to certain rights and privileges according to an accident of their birth, while the other does not; one person is allowed to work in certain areas of the planet, while another is not; one person is allowed to go to a certain place, while another is not; one is subjected to harassment by police, while the other is not.

Third of all, they are directly responsible for one of the greatest mental diseases of modern mankind, Nationalism: Without borders, a nation would simply be a vague collection of individuals created by free association. You could say that this would have existed without borders, but borders give the notion of a Nation power it would not otherwise have: They allow a Nation to create a territory within it has power, and within it is dominant over people. With borders, the Nation becomes a legal and political construct - a real, tangible force that can exert real, tangible power over the physical world - human individuals and groups of people. Humans have always been xenophobic, but in a Nation with borders, that xenophobia runs rampant and afflicts everything within a territory; vague nonsense notions of purity become concrete policies of "national health", vague ideas over those other people become real policies of jingoism, paranoia or imperialism.

Those are my two euro cents, legally distinct from two US cents due to the miracle of borders.

 

[Watchmen]

The pros are, of course a government's (and by extension, its capitalist class's) ability to survey, restrict and control the flow of goods and people. Those are pros for the government and the capitalists, mind you; I see little benefit for a worker in this instance, since the government serves primarily the needs of the capitalist class here.

The negatives are manifold, of course: First of all, they restrict the human right to freedom of movement; they provide an excuse for governments everywhere to arbitrarily restrict where a person is allowed to go.

Second of all, they create legal distinctions among human beings: One person has access to certain rights and privileges according to an accident of their birth, while the other does not; one person is allowed to work in certain areas of the planet, while another is not; one person is allowed to go to a certain place, while another is not; one is subjected to harassment by police, while the other is not.

Third of all, they are directly responsible for one of the greatest mental diseases of modern mankind, Nationalism: Without borders, a nation would simply be a vague collection of individuals created by free association. You could say that this would have existed without borders, but borders give the notion of a Nation power it would not otherwise have: They allow a Nation to create a territory within it has power, and within it is dominant over people. With borders, the Nation becomes a legal and political construct - a real, tangible force that can exert real, tangible power over the physical world - human individuals and groups of people. Humans have always been xenophobic, but in a Nation with borders, that xenophobia runs rampant and afflicts everything within a territory; vague nonsense notions of purity become concrete policies of "national health", vague ideas over those other people become real policies of jingoism, paranoia or imperialism.

Those are my two euro cents, legally distinct from two US cents due to the miracle of borders.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Just a random thought: Can you have government without borders? If so, what does that look like?