Author Topic: RR  (Read 112 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dale Eastman

  • Owner of myself and this website
  • Administrator
  • Promiscuous Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,490
  • Reputation 0
  • This space for rent
    • Synaptic Sparks
RR
« on: January 05, 2021, 07:45:50 AM »
Quote
Sit down, impotent non-voter. Your voice is null and void.
Quote
As is yours, statist.

Quote from: Comment Card - Meme where this was written
PROVE ME WRONG

We all know that extortion is when somebody is told "Do what we tell you to do or we will hurt you." We all know that extortion is what a bad person, a criminal, does to a victim.

Organized crime syndicates use a method of extortion called a protection racket. "If you don't pay us to protect you, we won't protect you (from us)." "From us" may be brazenly stated or only implied.

To govern is to control. To extort is to control. To govern is to extort.

Elected politicians write rules. These politician's rules are written demands to be obeyed under threat of being hurt if you don't obey. This part of the politician's rules are called "penalties" or "fines". Thus rules of politicians,  dictators, and monarchs are all extortion. Do what they tell you to do or be hurt.

Ergo, Government is an organized criminal syndicate that can not be defended by logic or by morality.
Quote
lol, yeah. I have an "extorter" on my scooter that keeps my engine from revving up to unsafe RPMs. You don't get to equate words that are not the same. You just don't. Stop.
Quote
I acknowledge your failure to prove me wrong.

I acknowledge your claim that I have equated words that are not the same.

Are these the specific words you are hoping to deny?
To govern is to control.
To extort is to control.
To govern is to extort.
Quote
Crows are black.
Crude oil is black.
Crows are crude oil.
Come on dude, are you even trying?
Quote
Are these the specific words you are hoping to deny?
To govern is to control.
To extort is to control.
To govern is to extort.
It's a simple yes/no question to chart the course to the next question.
To paraphrase Voltaire's Admonition, if you wish to communicate, define your terms.
Quote
you are using faulty logic, of the type used to show Philosophy 101 students how NOT to construct an argument. I'll show you:

To extort is to control.
To drive is to control.
To drive is to extort.

It's just dumb. I'm sorry you can't see it.
Quote from: 1-4 1832
Is to govern to control?
Quote from: 1-5 1744
Is to govern to control?
Quote
dude, that word has several meanings, with dozens of subtle implications.
Go stand in the corner.
Quote
, Refusing to answer a simple question, wrote
➽ dude, that word has several meanings, with dozens of subtle implications. Go stand in the corner.

Dude...
Equivocation – using a term with more than one meaning in a statement without specifying which meaning is intended.

Equivocation is an informal fallacy resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses within an argument.

Repeating: To paraphrase Voltaire's Admonition, if you wish to communicate, define your terms.

I am asking you about a specific meaning because I am challenging your attempt to hide behind your equivocation.

I am asking you about a specific meaning: Is to govern to control? ₃

It's a simple yes/no question.
Quote
B.O. what do you have to say about this embarrassing logical fallacy?

To govern is to control.
To extort is to control.
To govern is to extort.

Speak up, professor. He builds the proof chain inside out.
Quote
My apologies for making my challenge too complicated for you. Cancel that. I am going to give you accolades for your creative method of ignoring the point. Either way, let me simplify the point for you:

Euphemism:
n. A mild, indirect, or vague term for one that is considered harsh, blunt or offensive.

Government:
A euphemism for a criminal syndicate that extorts people for money and control.

Now: PROVE ME WRONG.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2021, 07:24:17 AM by Admin »
Natural Law Matters