Comment

Comment on Lemmy is the best social media

How many times do I have to repeat myself?

I’m going to start from here because this is how you show how disingenuous you are. I straight up said I don’t agree with the genocide deniers and what do you do? You still lump me in with them. Your entire mindset here is “If they don’t agree with me they must be genocide deniers”. Fuck off with that shit.

You don’t even try to understand what I’m saying, all you see is that I don’t agree with you and so you mental gymnastic yourself into believing I’m doing genocide denial. Once again, fuck off with that shit.

Go on man, shut me up. Retell my point back to me.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Excrubulent@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
I told you multiple times how it was genocide denial. I explained the how of it. You have failed to even acknowledge that let alone respond to it.

I guess it’s hard to face the fact that you’re doing genocide denial, so the only thing you can do is pretend I’m being disingenuous. Funny thing is, even if I’m being disingenuous that doesn’t make you not a genocide denier.

source
- GoodEye8@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  As if to prove my point… All you had to do was tell me the argument I made and all you did was “This is how it’s genocide denial”. It’s exactly what I said you do.
  
  source
  - Excrubulent@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    I honestly have no idea what you’re saying here. Is this what 'retell my point back to me" was about? You want me to explain how you’re doing genocide denial? I’ll copy-paste the three different ways I’ve tried to explain it and which you have ignored, and then we’re done here if you keep ignoring it.
    
    I explained how you were doing genocide denial. You said that complaining about Biden is only “sowing division”. So that means that we shouldn’t criticise him for his genocide. Denying that a genocide should be criticised on its own merits is a form of genocide denial. Not all genocide denial is “this genocide didn’t happen”. In fact most of it isn’t. Most of it is politically motivated muddying of the waters, like what you did.
    
    Pretending that the entire value in discussing genocide starts and ends with who will be elected president is pretty minimising to the importance of the, you know, genocide. Seems like a kind of genocide denial to me.
    
    Edit 3: The other person arguing is also doing genocide denial, but the oblique kind where you pretend that the only reason to criticise a sitting US president engaging in genocide is because you want him to lose an election. Almost like they’re denying that we should hold people accountable for genocide on its own merits. That is, and I cannot stress this enough, genocide denial.
    
    source