As far as I can tell he’s arguing that Russian spy’s turned American academics into dirty pinkos. My counter argument is that Russian spy’s were superfluous because, you know, books and sh!t.
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Seriously considering voting for Trump....
- Thread starter Pescado713
- Start date
More desperation. Yawn.I think the problem is that the idea of reading books is so foreign to you that it doesn’t even cross your mind that academics may read books on economics, philosophy, history, etc., and that’s where they may get *evil* socialist ideas. No sneaky Russian agents required.
Like I said, it's a theory and I never made the argument that it was successful. It could also be a hybrid where they sought out academics who were sympathetic and groomed or pushed them further.As far as I can tell he’s arguing that Russian spy’s turned American academics into dirty pinkos. My counter argument is that Russian spy’s were superfluous because, you know, books and sh!t.
So much strawman desperation from you. It's pathetic.
You don’t believe it’s possible to acquire ideas from books or means other than Russian spy’s? You can’t actually believe that.
By sympathetic I assume you mean academics that studied critical theory prior to the 80’s. Not sure why Russian spies would bother infecting academia with dirty ideas it was already infected with.
Maybe it would begin to make some sense if you explained how they were “pushed further.”
How is pointing out that American academics didn’t need Russian spies to acquire socialist ideas fallacious?
More Strawmanning. Yawn. Of course it's possible. If anything, I think it is more likely that these people found those ideas on their own and were public about their views. This made Russian spies more likely to find them and approach them, likely under the guise as another academic and not as a spy, and encouraged them to push their efforts further. Like I said, both scenarios can be true.
Again- why should I bother? I presented this as a potential theory from the start. It's not something I care to argue at length because it's not my idea in the first place.
Because you are insisting on making up arguments that I'm not even making and arguing against them. You must be a blast at parties.
I’m voting for Trump just to fuck around and not take sh!t too seriously! One vote who cares
Please vote for Latrell Sprewell or Joel O'Steen or Bernie Madoff or Sam Bankman-Fried or Elizabeth Holmes or Ken Lay. Someone less of a fraudulent grifter.
Thanks you.
This is one of the main reasons you're so susceptible to 'ideas' like this, you don't care what the truth is.
You don't realize the difference between acquiring ideas of your own accord and being influenced or "pushed further." The latter suggests that the ideas are not one's own and therefore invalid. Worse, it suggests that they're really the ideas of the enemy that have been unwittingly adopted by fellow countrymen, like so many Manchurian candidates under Putin's control. The theory is propaganda, in other words.
The reason you and MAGA are so susceptible to this propaganda is:
1. You want to believe it's true.
2. You don't care what the truth is.
3. You don't think critically.
4. You are justifiably alienated by the current system or you are led to believe your position is under threat
THe other three are reliant on #4
OK, so there have never been Russian agents of any kind acting in the US who attempt to subvert our institutions. Got it
Yes there are and they paid off the right ex. NRAOK, so there have never been Russian agents of any kind acting in the US who attempt to subvert our institutions. Got it
No one is stoping you from explaining how the Russian agents subverted academia by “pushing further” something; what they pushed or how they went about pushing it.
Oh, that’s right, you openly admitted that you don’t care what the truth is. Apparently you only care to mindlessly parrot propaganda like a well-trained pet.
So you want me to provide a hypothetical example to expand on a theory that isn’t mine in the first place? Got it
Again- there is a video of a KGB defector linked above where he lays out exactly what I summarized and also goes into detail regarding what you are asking above.
Unless the video is a CIA fake and the guy was really a Russian actor who wanted a green card and paycheck, which I admit is entirely possible. Is that what you think? And do you think that there were no Russians trying to influence American institutions of higher learning?
Where did I say that
Why do you constantly fall back on Strawman arguments ?
No, I want an actual example, moron.So you want me to provide a hypothetical example to expand on a theory that isn’t mine in the first place? Got it
If that were true you could easily lay it out for us. The fact that you can’t shows your dishonesty.
Where did I say that
I asked you to explain how academics were “pushed further” by Russian agents and you replied that you didn’t care to. That means you don’t care what the truth is.
The video lays that out quite clearly, moron. And I’ve already summarized it. If you think I got it wrong, feel free to watch it and get back to me.
Again- do you think the video is real or fake?
And are you of the opinion that not a single Russian agent attempted to infiltrate an American academic institution?
Ive already summarized the gist of the video. I’m happy to answer this question once you answer my questions above.
No, it’s because I don’t know what then truth is, so I’m not going to argue on behalf of something if I don’t know whether it’s truthful or not.
You speaky English??? I didn't ask for a summary.
Think hard, what did I ask for? This should be easy because I've asked several times.
Exactly, you don't know what the truth is, you're just parroting propaganda.
Why should I keep answering your questions when you refuse to answer anything I ask you?
So you are saying that the video I posted is a fake and that not a single Russian agent infiltrated a university in the US? Yes or no?