Relevant.

ten years too late a reply

but yes

grains of salt are too much for pjw

his only point is that people get touchy when you are being an asshole

which should be 'duh' as a response

but he just gets equally touchy at being called an asshole

the reactionary circle jerk is the best

ALSO.

Just came here to lol at the time when i thought radfeminism was just women wanting men dead cos i was taught that at A levels.

if sociology is going to be taught at high school, i wish it were more honest instead of giving you pjw levels of subtance.

'Marxism is about stealing from rich people' stuff.

ufh

All depends.

Hate is a good motivator. Which in turn can lead to more love depending on the goal and situation.

I agree love is stronger and more important but don't count hate out yo.
Two sides of the same coin sort of thing sometimes. Context matters.

And to answer the question. Yes it is worth it to hate someone that deserves it. Just as it's worth it to love someone that deserves it. The world goes on and will always have both so it's best to find the good balance for you.

This is me playing a Total War game.

Hate breeds more hate.

I've known people from both sides and I've seen how both sides act. It's come full circle the right act like left and the left act like right.

You don't take a side, both sides will start hating you.

If you think you're helping anything by being adversarial you're not. You're giving the other side more ammo.

Think during the SSM debacle I wanted someone to "defend" me against the people that disagreed? No. It's incredibly ironic. LGBT+ "allies" bring just as much hate than the other side, hurting our cause because of self-righteousness.

You're no ally of ours when you bring hate into a cause about love and acceptance.

And that's not getting into how "the left" pretty much popularised the alt-right by acknowledging them.

Tl;Dr if you're gunna hate for a cause that's important to me your as bad as the other side

I think that's more a matter of current strategy and the general language of politics that has become diluted/overcrowded with the popularity of social media. This will sort itself out soon, I hope.

I see 'intent' though, or at least, ideological and long term goals. LGBT/BLM hate I can sympathise with, because generally their existence is always under threat by very real reasons. I can't sympathise with alt-right hatred because their existence becoming under threat from things like 'white genocide/the great replacement' (lol political correctness for people who hate political correctness) are myths and have been disproven time and time again.

Besides, reactionary populism is on the rise, made evident not only by Trump, but by Brexit (its campaign based not on liberty from EU bureaucracy but soley on white british nationalism), Germany's Nazis actually getting seats, this wave of anti-feminist/anti-SJW rubbish that is both morally repugnant and intellectually dishonest (Hitler loved marixsm lol111).

This, of course, is due to the economic failings of our times. But reactionaries have always sought to scapegoat their problems (which are real btw) on people that have nothing to do with them.

So yeah. I can be critical of stragety and language, these are things that need reformation for progressives with a platform. Even stuff like posting 'ironic' gulag memes is very hurtful and damaging to the image of socialism. I try to be critical of these things always. But as for the general intolerance to intolerance? You might say 'but which is the real intolerance?' I think this is easy when even the softest reactionary think brown people are the problem. The weird college student with a tumblr blog who thinks consensual sex is still rape and has like 100 followers isn't enough of a problem at the moment to care about in any way or form.

Anyway

Time to churn out contrapoints again because i love her and she is my dark mother

Oh I'm sure they don't want to kill *all* males. Just enough to ensure the remainder are fully subservient to them. I'd place them next to eco-terrorists on the crazy scale.

Yeah schools should teach that stealing rich people's stuff is only one of the many wonderful parts of Marxism. Personally my favorite part is sending people off to the gulag or a mass grave, all for the greater good of course, and waiting in lines for hours for food and household commodities.

At least the real communists had good style, unlike their modern descendants, who deserve an ice pick to the back of the skull for all of their stupidity.

Anyway hate is a good thing. "My armour is contempt. My shield is disgust. My sword is hatred." And the great thing is that there is always more and more reasons to be absolutely disgusted at humanity.

Who the heck is Germaine Greer and why should any college student actually going to college for the sake of having a career someday know their name? So much wasted effort in universities on gender studies and race studies and every other bastion of the diversity industry. I wonder how much universities in China for example focus on such matters.

 What manner of "hate" are we talking about, 'Demon?

I am not for hate of the individual. I am for hate of bad ideas, bad intentions, and bad conduct.

To that end, there should be social (as opposed to: legal) consequences for all three of those things. They already exist in some capacity; I do not see a problem with that.

Compassion is vastly preferable to hate, yes, but it can be taken theoretically to an extreme/too far. It usually is a strength, but it can be a weakness.

*edit*

What brought this on, anyway -- the disdain shown for PJ Watson? To use him as an example: I do not hate him for any aspect of his self that exists by no fault of his own. I do hate that he propagates objectively wrong ideas, knowingly spreads misinformation, and does so to push a toxic agenda/ideology (the trifecta).

I do not want the guy, like, condemned for life to public-humiliation and -rejection or anything like that, but I'm acting well within my rights by arguing against his bullshit ideas and calling his credibility/motives/etc. into question.

I'll give you one thing: my tone is rather abrasive, and I do a lot of name-calling. *shrugs.* That has long been my e-persona, even when discussing apolitical topics. Truth told, it's not accurate to who I am IRL (make of that what you will). It has its uses, but you are not wrong to tell me that I probably ought to rein it in a trifle.