is

i'm an expert

i disagree; stating that he's left-leaning is disgraceful to what 'left' is supposed to be

to late galaxy

it's over

as maddow said

this is our world now

@GalaxyBrainer doesn't matter what words you use, I'm saying he votes for the parties traditionally considered to be the opposite of traditionalist or individualist desires

yim yum

<:BIGBRAIN:501101491428392991>

semantics and derailing have killed debate in the public spaces

bring it back by being unapologetic in your use of language by your own meaning

that's my intention, yes

Yes, argue to meaning of words

we must protect the language as the largest priority

bastardisation must end

even if it means that we can't get something we really want, the language is more important, imo anyway

take back what things mean

rather the opposite - refuse to argue the meaning of words. Present the literal meaning or the commonly understood meaning, and never re-define regardless of what the opposition argues is the meaning. Simply ignore the semantic portion of debate and rightly accuse them of derailing the conversation when they go back to the meaning argument. People understand language without the preamble.

no no, i'd argue that is arguing the meaning

so if someone presents you a word, give them a definition of it

that's defining

and if they give you a different one, tell them that's not what that means

you simply can't get rid of defining. I'm saying that if they define it differently, that's irrelevant. They're arguing with you, they can use your definition or be accused of delrailing debate

without a definition they're able to basterdise it in the school

and in the education system

this is what i'm saying

look at the word racist

but how do we win that conversation?

we threw it around a lot, and now they're redefining it in education

I understand what you're saying, you don't need to explain

oh sorry

i don't mean to be condescending if it came across like that

I'm just asking how can it help to continue down their deconstructivist path, questioning every stone before you step on it

i'm not asking for us to define everything over again

i'm saying when it's presented we must act to kill it

so if the argument comes, the definition of the word is something we must fight on

ignoring it is not helping

Ignoring it is rarely tried

the opposite is true from my estimations

in parliament it is commonly ignored