Message from @Hellstorme
Discord ID: 486540516259790848
Oh alright then, then I guess I am not allowed to disagree.
Thanks for showing me the importance of freedom of speech.
You guys are right, I am wrong.
Im saying its a misunderstanding
We're all about freedom of association, 100%.
Nothing else matters.
He disnt mean to say our whole thing is freedom of association
Democracy? Nope. Can do without it.
It's our whole thing.
I read it as him saying its part of our beliefs
Na our whole thing is freedom of association.
Why r u like this
It's right there, first principle written out.
~~True actually fuck democracy~~ im not making a good case for myself here
lol
I mean the first principle is individual rights, does freedom of association not come under that?
If freedom of association is 'our whole thing' then why is the UK banning anyone from their page that is even vaguely identitarian?
If not, I'm happy to be corrected
what page sorry
facebook?
facebook then
because facebook is gay and cancer
'Bullocks' on your FoA.
This argument seems like tone policing to me
Practice what you preach, pastor.
oh right i speak for all the UK i forgot
Freedom of association also means freedom to disassociate
and all the UK liberalists
and all the people in charge of the facebook in the group even though I have no leadership role and am not on facebook
And thus begins another day long argument, many battles shall be fought and countless brain cells shall be lost. Who shall win? Hell if I know...
Well, it is 'our whole thing'.
p e d a n t
You figure if it is 'our whole thing' we would all apply it.
This argument started from a piece of exaggeration being taken as an absolute statement
A piece of incorrect exageration?
Okay, I'll take the "our whole thing" back if it really means that much to you
To rephrase: if the liberalists value free association, I don't think there's any problem with using someone else's video to explain your point, and I don't think anything is going to get anywhere if the group can only ever use the things Legitimate Liberalists ™ make
I've used PragerU to explain some things to some people, such as the Israel issue. I feel it was an adequate explanation of the situation. But looking at opportunities for liberalists to generate content from a liberalist perspective as well. If our goal is to educate people on the principles it might be beneficial generating them from less controversial sources. As I recall PragerU was involved in some sort of lawsuit that got them pretty bad heat?
Otherwise we fall into Kyle Cucklinski territory and we're just mirroring other people's content as our own.
I actually agree with hellstorme on this. Reiterating points from controversial sources woth our own perspective and additions can help put forward ideas we agree with without the baggage of the association. Plus the more content we generate the more "brand recognition" we will have and therefore to a certain degree legitimacy