AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND

879 readers

569 users here now

This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

♦ ♦ ♦

RULES

① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.

② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.

④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.

⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.

Please also abide by the instance rules.

♦ ♦ ♦

Can't get enough? Visit my blog.

♦ ♦ ♦

Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.

$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

DougHolland@lemmy.world

682

Arguments after dinner (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 week ago by DougHolland@lemmy.world to c/aiop@lemmy.world

64 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] chloroken@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

liberal

trying to rein in the 1%

Choose only one. Liberals are those that subscribe to capitalism. You cannot be against the bourgeois while being for capitalism. It is contradictory.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

You cannot ever get folks on our side using words like 'bourgeois'.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

This, what you say is not as important as "How you say it"

See the idiots going "I hate Obamacare, but I love ACA!"

[–] chloroken@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Baffling statement. "Bourgeois" is one of two words that define the way my 'side' views the world. I don't think you and I are on the same side.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's a question I've wondered for decades: Why do so many socialists speak in code-words — Bolsheviks, bourgeoisie, Engels, Marx, proletaritat, etc — which only push people away? Socialism is a grand concept; why not translate it into English?

[–] chloroken@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago

Is this satire?

[–] dragonfucker -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

How about "owning class"?

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's a good start, but I'd go with 'owners' and occasionally stress, 'all owners.'

People respect plain speaking, and suspect convoluted speaking. If we want to win folks over, plain speaking is the way.

[–] dragonfucker 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Drag owns a toothbrush. Drag isn't a member of the owning class, but drag is in the most literal sense an "owner". Drag recognises you're using a technical definition of a common term, but drag doesn't think liberals will understand. They'll see your language as convoluted.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago

Drag, good to see you again buddy

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I needed this & I love Drag.