you just quoted back me saying the same thing as if it was some kind of gotcha? I really don’t get what your point is supposed to be, other than barking.
Absolutely stunning that you highlight everything except the most relevant portion and pretend that ignoring that makes it go away.
I specifically said that oligarchs coordinating amongst themselves does not mean it’s a non-hierarchical society.
Which has nothing to do with the subject at hand.
i didn’t say that ’no state can have horizontal practices’, you even quoted me saying that. that’s not at odds with all states having hierarchy.
This you, or did you forget what you said already?
a hierarchical slave state can’t demonstrate non-hierarchical anything.
you’re just making shit up and attacking straw targets at this point.
The projection here is impressive.
there’s no reason to romanticize the roman empire
Me: “Even pre-modern polities which are hierarchical, like the Roman Republic, with an explicit note excluding the Roman Empire in the explanation which you clearly did not read, or could not read because it used too many words, demonstrate that the copaganda claim of policing forces being necessary are bunk.”
You: “Stop romanticizing the Roman Empire!”
i didn’t ask for sexual or gendered comments
I didn’t realize having a murder-boner was gendered. I’m sure plenty of Zionists will be delighted to hear this.
i have no problem with sex, i find you disgusting and i don’t appreciate you making references to my genitals when it’s not relevant and wasn’t invited.
Maybe don’t bootlick for genocidal states and you won’t be accused of getting off on it? Just a thought.
you highlight everything except the most relevant portion and pretend that ignoring that makes it go away.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society. you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
the roman republic was still an oligarchic slave state and you’re still just romanticizing tyranny
I didn’t realize having a murder-boner was gendered. I’m sure plenty of Zionists will be delighted to hear this.
your second sentence makes no sense. i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that. with the way you seem to consider consent i can see why you fetishize the roman slave state.
Maybe don’t bootlick for genocidal states and you won’t be accused of getting off on it? Just a thought.
blaming me for your harassment, classic darvodog.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
‘my sexual harassment was just idiom! anyway you deserved it for disagreeing with me and you’re a prude for not liking it’ - pughitler
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
I’m sorry you find hating a fascist state so offensive, but I understand that fascism is dear to your heart.
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
It’s astounding that you can say shit like this when you were literally quoted
and anarchists are still one of the leftist tendencies present in the DPRK to this day.
but fascists don’t believe that words need to have meaning when it’s inconvenient for them.
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
My argument was that Roman law-enforcement was based on roughly non-hierarchical enforcement of peers, and therefore demonstrates that enforcement of law is not dependent on hierarchical policing forces, yes.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society.
No one fucking said Roman society was non-hierarchical as a whole, dipshit, it’s the third fucking sentence in the explanation which you didn’t read, or couldn’t understand.
An unusual point of unity between an ancient polity noted for its sense of hierarchy, and hierarchy-averse modern anarchist ideology!
you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
You got anything to say about your previous bullshit denial, by the way, or are you trying to ignore that blatant contradiction the way you’ve tried to ignore every other piece of information inconvenient to your bootlicking?
i didn’t say that ’no state can have horizontal practices’, you even quoted me saying that. that’s not at odds with all states having hierarchy.
a hierarchical slave state can’t demonstrate non-hierarchical anything.
i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that.
No, what you said is that it was a sexist comment, and I can quote you on that as well, not that quoting you seems to matter much. Reality is inconvenient, and so discarded by good little fascists like you.
In any case, I’ll do my best to remember to refrain from any comparisons that reference genitalia even in the abstract, if you feel that strongly about it. But fuck your assertion that it’s ‘sexist’.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.
Absolutely stunning that you highlight everything except the most relevant portion and pretend that ignoring that makes it go away.
Which has nothing to do with the subject at hand.
This you, or did you forget what you said already?
The projection here is impressive.
Me: “Even pre-modern polities which are hierarchical, like the Roman Republic, with an explicit note excluding the Roman Empire in the explanation which you clearly did not read, or could not read because it used too many words, demonstrate that the copaganda claim of policing forces being necessary are bunk.”
You: “Stop romanticizing the Roman Empire!”
I didn’t realize having a murder-boner was gendered. I’m sure plenty of Zionists will be delighted to hear this.
Maybe don’t bootlick for genocidal states and you won’t be accused of getting off on it? Just a thought.
bark bark bark goes the nazi dog, he hates america’s enemies
i dont even have much good to say about the dprk. i was just pointing out that the term juche predates the dprk and was used by anarchists. just because i agree with one of its points (and one that was specifically inverted in the dprk) doesn’t mean i agree with all of it
your entire argument was that rome had no formal police, was ‘roughly non-hierarchical’ (among the non-slave/female population) and therefore demonstrates that anarchist solutions ‘work’.
my statement was that slaver oligarchs coordinating is not demonstrating a non-hierarchical society. you’re conflating ‘contains some horizontal elements’ with ‘demonstrates non-hierarchical organizing’ to dodge the point.
the roman republic was still an oligarchic slave state and you’re still just romanticizing tyranny
your second sentence makes no sense. i said that i don’t appreciate sexual comments about my genitals. you could simply not do that. with the way you seem to consider consent i can see why you fetishize the roman slave state.
blaming me for your harassment, classic darvodog.
your (unfounded) accusations about my politics still don’t justify sexual harassment. you accused me of being ‘sex negative’ for finding your comments disgusting. i pity the people who have to deal with you in real life.
‘my sexual harassment was just idiom! anyway you deserved it for disagreeing with me and you’re a prude for not liking it’ - pughitler
I’m sorry you find hating a fascist state so offensive, but I understand that fascism is dear to your heart.
It’s astounding that you can say shit like this when you were literally quoted
but fascists don’t believe that words need to have meaning when it’s inconvenient for them.
My argument was that Roman law-enforcement was based on roughly non-hierarchical enforcement of peers, and therefore demonstrates that enforcement of law is not dependent on hierarchical policing forces, yes.
No one fucking said Roman society was non-hierarchical as a whole, dipshit, it’s the third fucking sentence in the explanation which you didn’t read, or couldn’t understand.
You got anything to say about your previous bullshit denial, by the way, or are you trying to ignore that blatant contradiction the way you’ve tried to ignore every other piece of information inconvenient to your bootlicking?
No, what you said is that it was a sexist comment, and I can quote you on that as well, not that quoting you seems to matter much. Reality is inconvenient, and so discarded by good little fascists like you.
In any case, I’ll do my best to remember to refrain from any comparisons that reference genitalia even in the abstract, if you feel that strongly about it. But fuck your assertion that it’s ‘sexist’.
Sorry that you think that sexual matters are something too repulsive to be referenced in public discussion, and that referencing the human body in idiom is sexual harassment; I hope you recover from your Victorian-era mores someday.