EDIT: no, I don’t sympathize with nazis (neither I sympathize with those who call everyone nazi when they’re losing an argument ;)

  • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s different than what I said though, which is that you can’t disagree with me without reading Gramsci. And is also typically how these authors’ names are invoked in arguments which are not about the authors themselves.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      While discussing Gramsci - then they’d be obviously correct that you should be familiar with the subject to disagree or agree or anyhing.

          • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You misread what I wrote three times and it’s my problem? You are a complete idiot.

            • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              You are a complete idiot.

              I was condescending to a person insufficiently intelligent or humble, that is, you.

              Natural languages are ambiguous, so when somebody better than you misreads what you wrote three times, it’s your fault and if you also behave in such a way, then it’s you who is a complete idiot.

              Other than that, I don’t know in which stable you’ve been bred.