We Welcome Our New Chinese Overlords

[Pseudonym]

What argument is left for me to win? You guys stopped addressing the relevant issues a while back, preferring instead to make fun of the Chinese people and language. Anyone's response to this post will probably be another such fallacy or the claim that nothing on the Internet is serious. If the latter be true, why do you enjoy bashing China so seriously?

Furthermore, DrumsofWar, you can stop pretending to love China now. Not only did you tell those who "disapprove of 'hatred' of China" to "shut the fuck up," but you also are predictably silent when everyone who disagrees with me cannot find a real reason to do so and would rather ignore my points on the basis that apparently, I am writing in Wade-Giles, which I do not even know.

I hope that you guys would be less allergic to rational discourse and more receptive to the outside world. If you cannot make a judgment for yourselves after being presented with the facts and would rather accede to the biases that your friends and media feed you, then you are worse than brainwashed because at least brainwashed people do not cause their own intellectual depravity. It will be a sad day when the great Western tradition falls from Sapere aude to Semper ignarus, and I wish to never see it.

Rule 20: Nothing is to be taken seriously.

Disregard that rule, then.

The rules of the internet cannot be disregarded. That's just the way they are. You must obey.

Perhaps you understood my comment and just made an overly insipid retort, but in case you did not comprehend, if nothing is to be taken seriously, then that rule is also not to be taken seriously, so we may disregard it.

[thebrowncloud]

I quit. Clearly, this Pseudonym cannot be reasoned with. It's not that complicated of a notion. The rules of the internet must be obeyed or you simply misunderstand it's purpose. We aren't here to be serious about how awful communist China is or back up our opinions with links (Rule 32: You must have pictures to prove your statements). We are here to do exactly what the internet is intended for: nothing! Rule 11 isn't a rule, it's a fact. I choose to disregard everything you are trying to say because your arguments are out of place. You've mistaken this forum for an open-minded, political chatroom (and such a place does not exist).

The rules are like the electronic version of street-smarts. You wouldn't walk up to someone in the streets of NYC who is talking about how they hate communist China with some of their friends and start saying some of the crap you're saying. Just like a city, this forum is full of total strangers to you that don't value your views in the slightest. You're not teaching us. You are throwing your views on deaf, biased ears. If you were expecting results, you've never had an argument over the internet before.

And, with that, I bid good day to you.

[Mucky]

@Pseudonym:
Most people here don't care that you can "win" an argument on a subject which they know nothing about. Yes, there is racial humor, but the fact is there is racial humor for every race, and one can make fun of a race while at the same time acknowledging what they've accomplished. Racial hatred is a different story, though. I'll leave that to DoW.

Anyway, how does one "win" an argument? Is it by presenting arguments that no one has the ability to refute? Or is it by convincing the other side of their point of view? If it's the former, you'd be committing quite the fallacy yourself because it's basically saying, "No one here can refute what I'm saying, therefore I am right in saying that the earth is triangular." If it's the latter, then while you may not be wrong, you haven't "won" because no one has said, "OK, I agree with Pseudonym and officially step down from the debate." That is not something I predict you'll see any time soon in this thread, and I relate this statement to what I said in my first paragraph.

It's not productive to look at argument from a win/loss point of view. If all it comes down to is a "win", it implies competition, which is totally inappropriate in the house of "rational discourse" because it is not rational. It's a huge part of why people in the US are "allergic to rational discourse."

EDIT:

I quit. Clearly, this Pseudonym cannot be reasoned with.

No offense, but you weren't exactly "reasoning with" Pseudonym before. You were just copypasting stupid shit from 4chan.

[Negi]

Negi is just jealous because when he asked to suck my cock I told him to get a new face first.

I'll murder you twice, you lying cracker-ass cracker.

[IskatuMesk]

I award you an official Internet Argument Award. Congratulations!

And for the record, I hate all people equally.

[thebrowncloud]

I award you an official Internet Argument Award. Congratulations!

And for the record, I hate all people equally.

Even me, Mesk? I thought the bond we shared was special..... *sob* 

[IskatuMesk]

I've got good money on that you're the one eating all of my lawn chairs. You'll rue the day!

[thebrowncloud]

Hey, my pet llama has to eat something! It's either that or human flesh....
                              [imgwh 180x216]http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyc ... _llama.jpg[/imgwh]

[Rocco]

I've got good money on that you're the one eating all of my lawn chairs. You'll rue the day!

Actually that was me, and only because they were made in China. 

[thebrowncloud]

I've got good money on that you're the one eating all of my lawn chairs. You'll rue the day!

Actually that was me, and only because they were made in China. 

Damn Chinese and all their manufacturing jobs for our goods...... Those should be American jobs! RAWR!!!

And yes, I know that making them here is astronomically more expensive because of this thing called minimum wage, but we have the technology. We can make it better.

[Pseudonym]

@Pseudonym:
Most people here don't care that you can "win" an argument on a subject which they know nothing about. Yes, there is racial humor, but the fact is there is racial humor for every race, and one can make fun of a race while at the same time acknowledging what they've accomplished. Racial hatred is a different story, though. I'll leave that to DoW.

I do not object to racial humor in general; the point I was trying to make was that people were using it in an effort to derail and divert attention away from my actual arguments because they could not adequately address them.

Anyway, how does one "win" an argument? Is it by presenting arguments that no one has the ability to refute? Or is it by convincing the other side of their point of view? If it's the former, you'd be committing quite the fallacy yourself because it's basically saying, "No one here can refute what I'm saying, therefore I am right in saying that the earth is triangular."

That is not a fallacy. Ample evidence shows that the Earth is not triangular. If no such evidence existed but rather the facts suggested the contrary, then I would believe that the Earth is triangular. If that were a fallacy, then the statement that 1 and 1 make 2 in base 3 or greater, which is supported by evidence and logic, would also be a fallacy because "[n]o one here can refute" it. This, however, is clearly not so.

If it's the latter, then while you may not be wrong, you haven't "won" because no one has said, "OK, I agree with Pseudonym and officially step down from the debate." That is not something I predict you'll see any time soon in this thread, and I relate this statement to what I said in my first paragraph.

I thank you for informing me that people on the Internet are generally less susceptible to the advances of reason than they would be in another forum of communication. This will save me much time in the future, I believe.

It's not productive to look at argument from a win/loss point of view. If all it comes down to is a "win", it implies competition, which is totally inappropriate in the house of "rational discourse" because it is not rational. It's a huge part of why people in the US are "allergic to rational discourse."

You are correct, of course. I was going to ask "What else is left for me to say" but then realized that I was proceeding to say a lot, not regarding the issues at hand, granted, but rather about people's responses to them. I thought such a question would have been too ironic and so backed down and picked one that addressed the irony less directly, although it has in turn conjured its own semantic demons.

[Zilla-]

GUYS CHINA IS AWESOME

[wibod]

GUYS CHINA IS FULL OF LEAD PAINT COVERED PRODUCTS

[thebrowncloud]

GUYS PSEUDONYM IS FULL OF LEAD PAINT COVERED PRODUCTS

My apologies. I couldn't resist.

[Negi]

GUYS PSEUDONYM IS FULL OF LEAD PAINT COVERED PRODUCTS

My apologies. I couldn't resist.

What? Being a fucking unfunny idiot?