>You're assuming what I said, Jew! Also you said B because I know you said D and that's what you said according to my screenshot of your response.

<What do you mean by B? You're not making yourself clear.

<Well, you're screaming about how I'm assuming what you say, so I want you to expand - but you won't do that, will you?

<Just like before, B is an abstract vulgarisation of D. A and B are not compatible, but C and D are.

<Nope.

>Nope.

<The 'anarchy' that you're talking about can't exist, but even anarchists disagree. That's why they differentiate between 'states' and 'governments'.

<Nope. If I bring up other pages, then they still talk about how they're not the same thing.

>I support B BTW like I said before

And so on.

***You have fundamentally assumed that I was talking about 'freedom' and 'submission' in the same way that you meant to use terms. You kept bringing up 'authoritative definitions' when it suited you with the whole 'anarchy' business, only to betray your disregard for such definitions when I made the arguments about how different kinds of force are needed for different intensities of disputes.***

That's why I say you're not a Communist to a greater extent than I am: you don't know how to approach these things. You deal with frozen absolute ideas and you're keen to show how absurd things become when one deals with these ideas, but I was never dealing with those frozen ideas in the first place.

I didnt read your arguments mm8

you seem to just babble most of the time ussuming and implying

so i havent read most of it

mainly because you keep skipping around the very comment you made

Again, that supposed skipping doesn't give you any reason to assume that my points aren't worth reading.

If I did skip and I did backpedal, then I still have a new argument which is undefeated here.

If I did not, then not only do I have that argument, but you've also lost your claim to honesty.

Whichever way it crumbles, *you lose*.

And this whole thing was because you assumed what I was talking about.

This is *you* projecting as usual.

write 3 lines about the argument and your victory. not ones makeing a consise argument 😄

make that 5 lines:D

Sorry, but it takes entire books to state arguments.

what argument are you talking about m8

No it doesnt

>when the amnesia kicks in again

not if your not mental

what amnesia

i just havent read your shit considering you deny what you have said yourself

your amnesia about you saying that comusmim is to be free to do whan you want is funny tho

See, you're a good demonstration of why it takes so much text. You keep dodging and asking question after question after question before anyone else can actually construct a response which covers all the bases.

Again, even if I did say that, it doesn't matter, because I would have a new argument.

lol,

Anyway, when you claim that I don't understand your arguments, I have to ask you what you mean and you have to clarify. That might take a lot of text, would it not?

your funny after all your text saying that i dont give ppl the time to respond

Explaining all the assumptions you make...

I am talking about when you're here while they're here too.

*Just like now.*

'give me 5 sentences hurr'