Fixed it for yaUnruffled [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.commod to Lefty Memes@lemmy.dbzer0.com – 506 points – 1 months agocross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/12580687 source 83Post a CommentPreviewYou are viewing a single commentView all commentsShow the parent commentSo, amassing of power can't be limited in your opinion?Why are you asking me that?Because that's what you're implying.I'm neither saying nor implying that.Yes you are: "We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot. I see where the confusion lies. Let me rephrase: "We" cannot prevent power or exploitation so the question is moot.No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented? No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
So, amassing of power can't be limited in your opinion?Why are you asking me that?Because that's what you're implying.I'm neither saying nor implying that.Yes you are: "We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot. I see where the confusion lies. Let me rephrase: "We" cannot prevent power or exploitation so the question is moot.No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented? No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Why are you asking me that?Because that's what you're implying.I'm neither saying nor implying that.Yes you are: "We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot. I see where the confusion lies. Let me rephrase: "We" cannot prevent power or exploitation so the question is moot.No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented? No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Because that's what you're implying.I'm neither saying nor implying that.Yes you are: "We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot. I see where the confusion lies. Let me rephrase: "We" cannot prevent power or exploitation so the question is moot.No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented? No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'm neither saying nor implying that.Yes you are: "We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot. I see where the confusion lies. Let me rephrase: "We" cannot prevent power or exploitation so the question is moot.No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented? No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yes you are: "We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot. I see where the confusion lies. Let me rephrase: "We" cannot prevent power or exploitation so the question is moot.No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented? No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I see where the confusion lies. Let me rephrase: "We" cannot prevent power or exploitation so the question is moot.No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented? No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented? No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation. You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Got it, you're refusing to engage.With you only.So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool. admit LOL¯\_(ツ)_/¯
So, amassing of power can't be limited in your opinion?
Why are you asking me that?
Because that's what you're implying.
I'm neither saying nor implying that.
Yes you are:
I see where the confusion lies. Let me rephrase:
"We" cannot prevent power or exploitation so the question is moot.
No one's talking about power itself, but of its' monopolisation.
Why can't that and exploitation be prevented via social structures? Why are you ignoring all the precedents where it was/is already prevented?
You're not making any sense. We're not communicating. Take care.
Got it, you're refusing to engage.
With you only.
So you admit it's personal rather than topical, cool.
LOL
¯\_(ツ)_/¯