(12-06-2023, 10:44 AM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(12-06-2023, 10:10 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Election Denier is a title, like anti-vaxxer, climate denier, or far right. It's a tactic called label shaming, that is designed to create an ingroup and an outgroup. It can't be reasoned with. You either have the correct opinion or you get the label. It can only be removed if the outgroup changes their opinion and becomes part of the ingroup. The left does this all the time, and it's by design. If you've read Foucault's analysis of power and knowledge, you would understand this phenomenon, but since you're just repeating what you are told, you trot out your LOLs and your labels, confident that you hold the correct "fact" opinion. It's such a neat little tool for manipulating the masses. It removes nuance and accountability in favor of being on the "right side of history." AKA superciliousness.

I'm sure this will be dismissed, though, as some type of conspiracy or illusion, right?

Yeah.

You really are in denial. 

Scrambling for psycho babble bull [BLEEP] to explain why you have no good argument for being an election denier. 

Your haphazard - "you repeat what you're told" is some flimsy garbage since you do the same with whatever YouTube nut jobs you subscribe to with your conspiracy theory nonsense. I've seen it firsthand here several times. 

Define the terminology all you want. Explain why it has some connotation you don't like all you want. It is what you are. 
An election denier. 

I asked what you'd prefer to call an American citizen who denies the proven result of a fair election. No answer. 
Clearly - you consider yourself some sort of special thinker since you read that one book that one time. 
Please stop being so supercilious by defining your deflective argument with a required bibliography. 

I'm not dismissing your post as conspiracy or illusion. It's 100% worthless blathering about terminology and another feeble attempt at attacking the nature of fact versus fiction. 

You've got truth, and you've got lies. One or the other. 
And after all this time you still want to inject "nuance" into an equation where in has no business.

Every time you can't defend your position you attack me and attempt to paint my argument in some negative light without addressing the actual topic. So weak. 

Let me make this clear - I don't give a [BLEEP] what you think about my attitude and I don't care that you read a book about psychology.  You are an election denier and you are unable to produce any good reason besides  "You're sheep and I don't trust the establishment so the election was stolen" 

Herp-derp

Herpy derp is a good way to end that post. I gave specifics. You name call without addressing my points. Supercilious. I point out that you are othering and you offer more smugness. You have no concept of how the world is shaped by others because you have no epistemic humility. I repeat myself because you are consistently, arrogantly asserting your world view as fact. We can keep doing this.

---