@LotusMachine2 I didn't say you were but things like "is X 'democracy'?" is lolbert language and thought patterns. Thinking "democracy" is a meaningful concept, unless you're referring to something formal that happens to be called "democracy", is part of that useless axiomatic thinking
@LotusMachine2 If you seriously ever ask if something is "democratic", you've now snapped the complexity of the world into something dubious, and then the symbol manipulation begins where the symbols take on a life of their own disconnected from the more ambiguous thing they roughly refer to
@LotusMachine2 And as you pile on more and more of these axioms and engage in more symbol manipulation, you seek consistency and "rationality" of these symbols when the world as it is has no obligation to be consistent or rational according to your evaluation. And this leads to lolbertism.
@LotusMachine2 The end point of this symbol-axiom-consistency game basically leads to things like the NAP and that the state is immoral, defined as being in violation of many other axioms.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
