U.S. technology firms such as IBM, Dell and Cisco largely designed and built China’s surveillance state, an AP investigation finds. The tech companies deny wrongdoing.
How? You haven’t added anything of meaning to this conversation other than a lazy attempt to catch me as a tankie or something and worse your responses feel tailored to deflect conversation away from the subject of the article you are commenting on.
The plot can’t thicken when your words have so little substance to work off of.
a lazy attempt to catch me as a tankie or something
All I did was ask your take on a geopolitical issue that’s really not all that complicated. It’s like asking someone “How do you feel about underage prostitution” and their answer is “Stop asking irrelevant questions! It’s a waste of everyone’s time!”
Honestly if you’d said “obviously genocide is horrible whoever is doing it, I was talking about Peter Navarro and friends” then that would have been the end of it. I probably would have apologized about my unfair mischaracterization, because there is a certain definition of “fear mongering” for which I think you’re 100% right in what you’re saying. However… that’s not what you said.
You still have plenty of time to answer, of course.
your responses feel tailored to deflect conversation away from the subject of the article you are commenting on.
You’re the one that changed the subject away from the article topic. I responded on-topic to what you said, you just didn’t like what I had to say.
You established the basis of your argument by strawmanning me, what on earth are you on about?
China is a massive authoritarian empire, stop trying to flatten critique of your positions and pin hyperbolic things to me so you don’t have to respond with your critical thinking skills.
If you can’t tell the difference between my words and the words of an empty minded “leftist” you need to take a break from this website.
I’m on about clarifying what exactly you mean by “fear mongering.” That is literally the crux of the discussion you decided to open, and a good opportunity to expand more on what you’re trying to say.
Like I said before, you might be 100% right that it was a strawman. But the fact that you keep so forcefully refusing to clarify, makes me think that probably it was not. Feel free to prove me wrong if you would like to.
I’ve learned that just asking simple direct questions is pure kryptonite to a particular type of Lemmy poster, and I’m here for it lol.
Like I said before, you might be 100% right that it was a strawman. But the fact that you keep so forcefully refusing to clarify, makes me think that probably it was not. Feel free to prove me wrong if you would like to.
You just openly admitted to utilizing a strawman argument and yet you are still demanding I respond to your strawman framing of this argument?
I didn’t intentionally strawman your argument. I read something into your argument that might or might not have been there. You are really aggressively refusing to clarify whether or not it was there (and also by the by, going back and editing your past statements to say something significantly different from what they said when I responded to them), and deflecting to all kinds of stuff instead no matter how many times I ask.
I think this conversation has run its course. You’re still welcome to clarify “fear mongering,” but it seems unlikely that you’re going to. Best of luck to you in your future endeavors.
How? You haven’t added anything of meaning to this conversation other than a lazy attempt to catch me as a tankie or something and worse your responses feel tailored to deflect conversation away from the subject of the article you are commenting on.
The plot can’t thicken when your words have so little substance to work off of.
All I did was ask your take on a geopolitical issue that’s really not all that complicated. It’s like asking someone “How do you feel about underage prostitution” and their answer is “Stop asking irrelevant questions! It’s a waste of everyone’s time!”
Honestly if you’d said “obviously genocide is horrible whoever is doing it, I was talking about Peter Navarro and friends” then that would have been the end of it. I probably would have apologized about my unfair mischaracterization, because there is a certain definition of “fear mongering” for which I think you’re 100% right in what you’re saying. However… that’s not what you said.
You still have plenty of time to answer, of course.
You’re the one that changed the subject away from the article topic. I responded on-topic to what you said, you just didn’t like what I had to say.
You established the basis of your argument by strawmanning me, what on earth are you on about?
China is a massive authoritarian empire, stop trying to flatten critique of your positions and pin hyperbolic things to me so you don’t have to respond with your critical thinking skills.
If you can’t tell the difference between my words and the words of an empty minded “leftist” you need to take a break from this website.
I’m on about clarifying what exactly you mean by “fear mongering.” That is literally the crux of the discussion you decided to open, and a good opportunity to expand more on what you’re trying to say.
Like I said before, you might be 100% right that it was a strawman. But the fact that you keep so forcefully refusing to clarify, makes me think that probably it was not. Feel free to prove me wrong if you would like to.
I’ve learned that just asking simple direct questions is pure kryptonite to a particular type of Lemmy poster, and I’m here for it lol.
You just openly admitted to utilizing a strawman argument and yet you are still demanding I respond to your strawman framing of this argument?
I didn’t intentionally strawman your argument. I read something into your argument that might or might not have been there. You are really aggressively refusing to clarify whether or not it was there (and also by the by, going back and editing your past statements to say something significantly different from what they said when I responded to them), and deflecting to all kinds of stuff instead no matter how many times I ask.
I think this conversation has run its course. You’re still welcome to clarify “fear mongering,” but it seems unlikely that you’re going to. Best of luck to you in your future endeavors.