this post was submitted on 03 May 2024
118 points (99.2% liked)
chapotraphouse
13473 readers
1 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here
Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think everyone who reveres something written by slave owners who thought black people deserved to be dehumanized should automatically get the wall
You should re-read your sentence there.
Ty comrade
No. Zero agreement witg slave owners on any issue. Politically, aesthetically, epistomologically
...the sentence has an error is what I'm saying
What error tho
The way that the sentence is written, it says that anyone who conceives of the "something written by slave owners who thought black people deserved to be dehumanized" will then "automatically get the wall." As in, anyone who's thinking about that something should get the wall. There clearly should be something following up the first part of the sentence before the second part, like "anyone who thinks (ect) is good should get the wall," but it looks like the poster spent so long describing the constitution that they lost track of what they were saying partway through.
Yes an error which causes them to say that sharing any thought with a slave owner at all is cause for walling. Bringing in epistemology only makes sense with this in mind
constitutions get changed or protested regularly in every part of the world. But in the US, the constitution and the founding fathers are wholly separated from the idea of government. Americans see other citizens as being “given permission” to do something, but American “rights” were handed down to them by God himself orated by the prophets, and as such, may not be modified (except when they are, of course)