Ah, yes, I guess if we had debated the "good parts" of Nazism then the invasion of Ukraine wouldn't have happened.
> Despite your best effort, you still learned something today.
Do you really think that's an honest debate tactic? Do you think that, when reading your last line, I will think "gee, this guy truly taught me something!" or rather dismiss your remark entirely? And do you feel your way of debating is in line with what TFA proposes, or is it possible that you are trying to "win" here, therefore rejecting the whole article?
I guess I learned this conversation is futile?
Kind of. If more time was spent deconstructing Nazism/Fascism, instead of simply repeating "Nazism bad" it would be much easier to notice it right under our (their) nose.
> I guess I learned this conversation is futile?
I'd suggest you to re-read your messages in this thread. Analyze their tone. You never attempted to have a conversation.
If you do want to switch topic to debate tactics, you should first re-read your own comments: they are full of strawman arguments, deflections, condescension and are quite demeaning in general. Hopefully acting like a butthurt teenager is a debate tactic too, not your personality.
"Despite your best effort, you still learned something today."
How would you say the above line ranks in the goal of "I hope to lose every debate" and "just listen" mindset?
Again, re-read your own comments. I've matched a fraction of your insults and you're already getting upset.
> How would you say the above line ranks in the goal of "I hope to lose every debate" and "just listen" mindset?
It doesn't rank well at all. Good thing I never claimed to have a "just listen" mindset. In fact, I said I disagree with it.
Am I upset? You sound upset yourself.
> Good thing I never claimed to have a "just listen" mindset. In fact, I said I disagree with it.
It raises the question of what you were trying to debate with me then.
Could you summarize what you think my initial comment was arguing?
In a lame "gotcha" attempt you took author's words extremely literally: "Let's see how you lose a debate against 2 x 2 = 5 believer. Haha, I'm so smart."
Now, which one do you think is more likely:
- Author meant to say that literally every debate is worth losing
- You (likely on purpose) misunderstood the point author is trying to make
What do you really think is the point author was trying to make? Can you explain in your own words?
Have you read HN guidelines?
> You (likely on purpose) misunderstood
Ah, we have a mind reader!
> Can you explain in your own words?
I can, but I won't for you, because it would be fruitless.
No need to reply: you won. You won big time. Have a cookie.
Evidently, simply denouncing and rejecting does nothing to prevent it from emerging again. All the raping and murdering in Ukraine is currently done in the name of denouncing Nazism.
> you also misunderstood my prompt, which was to debate with people who believe what I listed, not debate with me
Turns out debates don't always happen on your terms. Despite your best effort, you still learned something today.