if you refuse to debate the nature of organicism in fascism because "semantics", then you may as well refuse to debate any sort of theory

no

<:virgin:591451689853255690>

like this is clearly just an excuse cause you are incapable of providing a coherent argument

There's a clear difference between debating the validity of a certain theory by agreeing upon what it contains, and debating what the theory contains and what it doesn't

<:bruh:591181809493082113>

The latter is what i stay away from as that's semantics, the former isn't semantics

<:absoluteretardation:591182455885660178>

"haha pp brain bcs he dont want to debate definitions for 2 hrs haha got him guys"

Go back to uploading videos to your dead channel, maybe one day it will gain attraction

I’m not arguing definitions guy

you should actually check out zorans channel, you might learn something and a situation like this wont happen again

you're arguing what the theory contains and what it doesnt, and the theory is defined as what it contains and what it doesnt

so yes you are

How is this a semantical definition

I just explained

read again

>Situation like this
Situation like what? A zealous idiot not knowing what "I dont wanna debate semantics" means while acting as if he has some arbitrary authority while acting as if i always leave debates in general after a while, despite CONSTANTLY repeating i only stop debates if it gets into semantics

I’m not even summarizing your position or anything your not making an argument you’re just screeching about organicism bad and semantical fallacy

This is more autistic than arguing with an anarchist

I never claimed semantical fallacy, and I never claimed whether organicism is a valid doctrine or not

and yes im not making an argument as ive stated 10 times that i refuse to engage in semantical debates lmao can you read

or are you illiterate

this is the 20th time i say this

Why do both of you completely ignore the fact I've stated I refuse to engage semantical debates, despite the fact that I've stated this 30 times already. You're acting as if this is a disucssion whether some theory is valid or not. Its not. Its a discussion whether a certain theory contains X or if it doesnt contain X. Thats semantics. And ive stated 30 times I refuse to engage in semantical debates

That simple

This is the 31st time I say this, maybe this time it will get into your head

you can provide excuses about semantics all you want but the nature of organicism in fascist ontology is pretty fucking important when discussing fascism. a fascist rejecting organicism would be like if a liberal rejected individualism, and then said "theres different variants bro"

Monarchist and Fascism

Social Republic would roll in its grave

>excuses

yeah im done, ur a disingenuous little loser

All monarchist deserve to be lobbed in a revolution like Russia or France

Alright edgy teen

Go be edgy elsewhere please

Id curb stomp u irl

``Id curb stomp u irl``

this sentence proves you cant be older than 15

Lmao

He just said he would basically have me killed if he got to power

^

Is that somehow not worse than me saying id curb stomp him in return?

What’s your max bench bro?