Cool. Can you answer my question then? What opponents?
And more importantly, if you can’t honestly type an answer to this without asking google, why do you think you have enough knowledge on this topic in general? Maybe you could look more into that instead?
Can you answer my question too? Why is Google a bad thing? I know several of the OKB aircraft design bureaus were exiled/killed off the top of my head, but I didn’t want to mix them up and say the wrong one.
No, I can’t reply to your question. Beacuse it gets asked EVERY SINGLE TIME here. It has been replied to ad nauseam, and not only on Lemmy.
I never said Google is bad. But why do you think that’s enough?
Can you imagine how pointless, arrogant and entitled it would be for me, someone who has (as an example) no knowledge about chemistry, to go to a chemistry forum and ask an elementary question on an incredibly divisive topic within the chemistry field?
Why do you think having a surface level knowledge of political science and a quick scan from a google search is enough for such complex topics then?
Can you imagine how pointless, arrogant and entitled it would be for me, someone who has (as an example) no knowledge about chemistry, to go to a chemistry forum and ask an elementary question on an incredibly divisive topic within the chemistry field?
I actually love that. I love explaining engineering topics to friends and family when they have questions, even though they don’t have as much background. Do you not enjoy taking to people about your field?
I do love that (which is why I engage with this type of things).
But now, keep imaging the scene:
It’s still the chemistry forum. The chemistry field has been attacked by western anti-chemistry propaganda for almost a century. The chemists in the audience put up a sign at the entrance with a bunch of FAQs and beginner’s friendly questions.
I ignore all of that and demand an answer that I could have easily gotten answered online. But I’m doing all of this in bad faith. I just want an example of the evil chemists telling me to leave because I couldn’t be bothered to be honest in my request nor I could be humble in my lack of knowledge on the topic.
When yours and my friend ask us about a topic we love, they do it honestly and looking for answers respecting the fact that they don’t know. And yet, for anything communist/socialist, most people don’t
To extend the metaphor, it would be like discussing cold fusion with a fellow chemistry enthusiast. They imply that it works, and was shut down by political motives, but that it’s been discussed to death professionally, so no use discussing it further. I agree that it has been discussed to death, but their conclusion is opposite of the conclusion I have found online, so I would push for further support.
The answers I easily got online were opposite of what you were saying, hence my persistence.
But neither of us are political scientists. We’re both backyard chemistry enthusiasts in this metaphor. So when you claim something that doesn’t make sense with my cursory knowledge and searches, I ask you to back it up.
What are you saying? That people who don’t have political science degrees shouldn’t participate in politics? The whole point of democracy is more people participating.
You seem to be holding yourself up as an authority, but I have no reason to think you are.
Your assertion was you can’t have an authoritarian communist. I gave a counter example of Stalin, an authoritarian communist. You seem unwilling or unable to refute that Stalin was authoritarian.
What are you saying? That people who don’t have political science degrees shouldn’t participate in politics?
That’s not what I’m saying at all. If you argue in such bad faith and put words in my mouth I’ll stop replying.
I’m saying that just because you can google something, that is not the same as being knowledgeable about a topic. Especially when the topic is divisive and nuanced and you yourself admitted that you don’t know enough about the topic to not mix things up.
You seem to be holding yourself up as an authority, but I have no reason to think you are.
Same. I’m just anothet online idiot. But I’m not pretending to know topics I’ve not actually read upon
Your assertion was you can’t have an authoritarian communist. I gave a counter example of Stalin, an authoritarian communist. You seem unwilling or unable to refute that Stalin was authoritarian.
Oof, I see a bunch of misunderstanding here. Re read the thread and I’ll be happy to engage with you (as long as you don’t put more words I didn’t say into my mouth please lol)
Was Stalin authoritarian?
Changing topic when cornered, I see
I was answering that in a different comment. This was my original question to you.
Cool. Can you answer my question then? What opponents?
And more importantly, if you can’t honestly type an answer to this without asking google, why do you think you have enough knowledge on this topic in general? Maybe you could look more into that instead?
Can you answer my question too? Why is Google a bad thing? I know several of the OKB aircraft design bureaus were exiled/killed off the top of my head, but I didn’t want to mix them up and say the wrong one.
No, I can’t reply to your question. Beacuse it gets asked EVERY SINGLE TIME here. It has been replied to ad nauseam, and not only on Lemmy.
I never said Google is bad. But why do you think that’s enough?
Can you imagine how pointless, arrogant and entitled it would be for me, someone who has (as an example) no knowledge about chemistry, to go to a chemistry forum and ask an elementary question on an incredibly divisive topic within the chemistry field?
Why do you think having a surface level knowledge of political science and a quick scan from a google search is enough for such complex topics then?
I actually love that. I love explaining engineering topics to friends and family when they have questions, even though they don’t have as much background. Do you not enjoy taking to people about your field?
I do love that (which is why I engage with this type of things).
But now, keep imaging the scene:
It’s still the chemistry forum. The chemistry field has been attacked by western anti-chemistry propaganda for almost a century. The chemists in the audience put up a sign at the entrance with a bunch of FAQs and beginner’s friendly questions.
I ignore all of that and demand an answer that I could have easily gotten answered online. But I’m doing all of this in bad faith. I just want an example of the evil chemists telling me to leave because I couldn’t be bothered to be honest in my request nor I could be humble in my lack of knowledge on the topic.
When yours and my friend ask us about a topic we love, they do it honestly and looking for answers respecting the fact that they don’t know. And yet, for anything communist/socialist, most people don’t
To extend the metaphor, it would be like discussing cold fusion with a fellow chemistry enthusiast. They imply that it works, and was shut down by political motives, but that it’s been discussed to death professionally, so no use discussing it further. I agree that it has been discussed to death, but their conclusion is opposite of the conclusion I have found online, so I would push for further support.
The answers I easily got online were opposite of what you were saying, hence my persistence.
But neither of us are political scientists. We’re both backyard chemistry enthusiasts in this metaphor. So when you claim something that doesn’t make sense with my cursory knowledge and searches, I ask you to back it up.
What are you saying? That people who don’t have political science degrees shouldn’t participate in politics? The whole point of democracy is more people participating.
You seem to be holding yourself up as an authority, but I have no reason to think you are.
Your assertion was you can’t have an authoritarian communist. I gave a counter example of Stalin, an authoritarian communist. You seem unwilling or unable to refute that Stalin was authoritarian.
That’s not what I’m saying at all. If you argue in such bad faith and put words in my mouth I’ll stop replying.
I’m saying that just because you can google something, that is not the same as being knowledgeable about a topic. Especially when the topic is divisive and nuanced and you yourself admitted that you don’t know enough about the topic to not mix things up.
Same. I’m just anothet online idiot. But I’m not pretending to know topics I’ve not actually read upon
Oof, I see a bunch of misunderstanding here. Re read the thread and I’ll be happy to engage with you (as long as you don’t put more words I didn’t say into my mouth please lol)
I did reread the thread. My summary still stands. Could you summarize your understanding of it?