02/07: Destroyer of Sacred Cows
I've been online for quite a while. I realize that being active online has made a significant impact on who I am and what I'm about. I've seen the volume of knowledge increase online as my favorite obscure topics became expanded on in more depth. Thoughout the time I have challenged everyone from Michael Albert to Wolfi Landstreicher to discuss or debate me. I've been told that I've debated members of the world bank in my early years, the rumor was this objectivist montelglobalinfestors (his mock identity) was involved in the debate and he was really good. I'd say that debating the objectivists extremely heightened my concept of debate and the employment of logical fallacies and other debate tactics, which is probably why I rail against them so hard. You cry foul in a debate when crying foul keeps the debate on the idea, the target. If you can understand the target better than the opponent and can express what the target is better, you succeed. The target in the case of the objectivists is "freedom", "egoism" and "selfishness".
Semantics must be defeated in the first part of a debate, the key is to win as many words as possible or to call it as "semantical" and work past it by understanding the opponents semantics through questioning, depending on the circumstances. If you are dealing with a dogmatic opponent, be sure to note when they are employing dishonest debate tactics, this is so that you can walk away from the debate knowing you attempting an engagement and it was your opponent that decided to destroy the attempt. More people than I know have used this tactic, which works in real life, but on the internet, I can walk right past the applause of sychophants and annihilate the demagogues.
My writings still need work. I like obscure topics and I don't think I'll change that anytime soon. Sometimes I get excited because I had a good idea and publish something that was more in a revisement stage just because I was happy enough with it and hope for a discussion to occur. I never ment to be a writer, I'm more of a self-educator and a long time ago I realized that debate enhances your learning capabilities because of the crisis of losing face. I'll admit to cruelty in some of my early debates once I mastered a debate form and particular theory. People that aimed to "make me cry" got theorectically brutalized. I was not one for sniping, shooting comments from the side, not really adding to debate. My short asshole comments were fightin' words, let's go, let's fight, I wanna debate fuckhead.
At a certain point I realized that I had advanced myself into another arena where leaders, theorists, writers and propagandists were the participants of debate and the crowd had worn thin. People that can actually challenge my ideas have become rare online. Those so similar to me refuse to have me grill them as hard as I can to squeeze the juice of knowledge from their brains, so now I am bored and I sit around giving my knowledge and desire for knowledge to everyone until I get a bite. Sometimes I'll get a few snipers or a few sophmores ready to bite something big, but I've got the world runnin' scared.
I particularly like challenging the polemics of anarchy because it is where advancement past divides matter. Are people I have a current dichotomy with able to overcome it...nope, but I bet I can. A couple years back, someone from out of town recognized me as Wombat said I was the destroyer of sacred cows. This fits me far more than writer, which is often something I do when I can't get enough. Yes, I can be a bit cocky and I stumble forward aimlessly searching for kernels of knowledge that will make me understand something better. If you think I'm such a fucking idiot then challenge me to a duel of ideas. Moo.
Semantics must be defeated in the first part of a debate, the key is to win as many words as possible or to call it as "semantical" and work past it by understanding the opponents semantics through questioning, depending on the circumstances. If you are dealing with a dogmatic opponent, be sure to note when they are employing dishonest debate tactics, this is so that you can walk away from the debate knowing you attempting an engagement and it was your opponent that decided to destroy the attempt. More people than I know have used this tactic, which works in real life, but on the internet, I can walk right past the applause of sychophants and annihilate the demagogues.
My writings still need work. I like obscure topics and I don't think I'll change that anytime soon. Sometimes I get excited because I had a good idea and publish something that was more in a revisement stage just because I was happy enough with it and hope for a discussion to occur. I never ment to be a writer, I'm more of a self-educator and a long time ago I realized that debate enhances your learning capabilities because of the crisis of losing face. I'll admit to cruelty in some of my early debates once I mastered a debate form and particular theory. People that aimed to "make me cry" got theorectically brutalized. I was not one for sniping, shooting comments from the side, not really adding to debate. My short asshole comments were fightin' words, let's go, let's fight, I wanna debate fuckhead.
At a certain point I realized that I had advanced myself into another arena where leaders, theorists, writers and propagandists were the participants of debate and the crowd had worn thin. People that can actually challenge my ideas have become rare online. Those so similar to me refuse to have me grill them as hard as I can to squeeze the juice of knowledge from their brains, so now I am bored and I sit around giving my knowledge and desire for knowledge to everyone until I get a bite. Sometimes I'll get a few snipers or a few sophmores ready to bite something big, but I've got the world runnin' scared.
I particularly like challenging the polemics of anarchy because it is where advancement past divides matter. Are people I have a current dichotomy with able to overcome it...nope, but I bet I can. A couple years back, someone from out of town recognized me as Wombat said I was the destroyer of sacred cows. This fits me far more than writer, which is often something I do when I can't get enough. Yes, I can be a bit cocky and I stumble forward aimlessly searching for kernels of knowledge that will make me understand something better. If you think I'm such a fucking idiot then challenge me to a duel of ideas. Moo.
