I’ve been trying to find a good Marxist instance, but Lemmygrad and Hexbear are widely hated. Why is that?

  • thundercoc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    @[email protected] your assessment of @TheAnоnymоuseJо[email protected] is spot-on, highlighting behaviors indicative of a fragile ego and a need for superiority. This individual frequently deflects from central topics, especially when their views are challenged, revealing an inability to handle opposing viewpoints. It’s normal to have differences in opinion, but for TheAnоnymоuseJоker this seems to be an act of war, a mindset that is immature and counterproductive for meaningful online interactions.

    Psychologically, it’s a common fallacy for some individuals to oversimplify complex social interactions, reducing them to mere players in the game of their subjective perception. This viewpoint often ignores the nuanced realities of human behavior and interaction.

    Recognizing these behaviors — deflecting, causing dismay, dismissing, denying, deceiving — is essential in understanding the underlying motivations and responding appropriately to maintain the integrity of the discussion.

      • thundercoc@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Analyzing me psychologically? That’s an interesting deflection, TheAnonymouseJoker. You claim I’m engaging in deflective and ignorant behavior, yet here you are, quickly labeling and dismissing my points without addressing their substance. It’s quite telling that instead of engaging with the critique, you resort to calling out my account’s age and my supposed affiliations. This tactic of yours, focusing on personal attacks rather than the discussion at hand, really highlights the earlier point about your tendency to dismiss and belittle differing opinions. It seems like any perspective that doesn’t align with yours is automatically considered ‘contextless liberal rants and libel.’ Isn’t that, in itself, a form of intellectual compromise? Let’s stick to the actual content of the discussion, shall we?