#depsidase

...Weren't the organizers the people who wanted her portrayed as a grassroots activist?

Wouldn't that mean they downplayed their own role to get better press and look more "organic"?

I remember this post but can't find it on my blog and now that I think about it I'm pretty sure that I didn't post it on here because someone else had already done some metrical analysis of it:

Newsflash: many poor people are responsible for their own situation.

Ignoring that fact is, ironically, classism.

Dressing your position up in fancy words doesn't actually disprove the claim that you're acting out of envy.

Envious people are well known for making up reasons why their targets don't "deserve" what they have, often claiming it needs to be taken away for the greater good.

And people who hate "the rich" consistently show they have no idea where wealth comes from or how it's maintained. No one is automatically worse off because someone else can buy a yacht.

The obvious questions are “who determines who’s ‘powerless’?“ 

And “if someone has the power to convince you to do something, don’t they have power over you?”

And “how did you determine this moral principle, and how did you test it? Wouldn’t a more objective, uninvolved view be less biased?”

And “if there are two or more groups involved, why are you only checking with one side?”

And “isn’t assuming all of the ‘powerless’ share one opinion kind of prejudiced?”

For example, dep has blocked me, and I’m a non-American black dude from a developing country who regularly disagrees with mainstream US progressives.

And dep supports terrorism against rich people as “self-defense”.

Translation: “All power dynamics have one group of Innocent Victims and one group of Evil Oppressors, at all times, in all contexts. Any apparent evidence to the contrary is actually an illusion.

This is not a good retort.

It's point-scoring strawmanning against gay marriage opponents, aimed at other gay marriage supporters, for internet points.

To provide an analogy for someone to laser focus on while ignoring my overall point;

"You think leaving frying pans unattended will lead to deadly fires. This just means you think ALL fire will kill people."

Inherent in the original position is the logic that gay marriage, pedophilia, and bestiality are all different from "normal" (straight) marriage.

A better argument; "Consenting adult humans are not treated the same as animals and pets."

Or "Plenty of places have legalized gay marriage. How many of them also legalized bestiality or PDFs?"

Or "So you're saying you don't have a problem with gay marriage itself, you just think it will lead to something else that's bad?"

But nope, they just went for the most ridiculous strawman imaginable.

"Here's two cherry picked, unsourced charts from a single city, which proves my claim about everyone in America. Also, having an AirBnb is the same as being a landlord. Nobody ever signs up to Airbnb to make a little extra dosh while they're on vacay, or when their kid is in college."

For Pete's sake, the two pictures visibly aren't even the same scale.

The fact that y'all have to broaded the definition of "landlord" and then had to lie some more is, uh, quite telling.