Ministry of Truth?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-12-2022, 10:02 AM)Dill Wrote: My beef is not that you used the word “suggest” when you misrepresented my claim.

My beef is that you misrepresented my claim.

And then continued to do so after I had flagged the problem.

So again—I attribute to Trump charismatic power, which gives him an effective power to label—“little Marco,” “lyin’ Ted,” “crooked Hilary,” the “Chinese virus.”  This power does not somehow emanate from Trump, it is emotionally and symbolically invested in him by his followers, but only them.

Liberal democratic states do not have this power. Their power is bureaucratic, institutional, legal, even when they “label.”

I said that you attribute to government, a charismatic power to label akin to Trump’s.

I did NOT say that Trump is as powerful as the state. Here are my words again:

"YOU are attributing TO GOVERNMENT the power Trump actually has for his followers."

So if we are to “move on,” then you need to stop asking whether Trump can seize assets or arrest people, while claiming I have moved off into “irrelevancies.” Or explain how you get to "Trump has more power than the federal government?" from my statement.

Final point here. People do have blind spots. But you don’t establish that by just claiming they do, and then call it “proof” when they don’t see it. That’s just gaslighting.

PS An argument from semantics arises when at least two people use different terms to describe something which is they agree is the case. Disagreeing WHETHER something is the case does not indicate a "semantic argument." 

I really don't know how to respond to this as your argument keeps morphing as your points get called out.  It's certainly not on par with the level of post I expect from you.  As for your blind spot, it's fine.  We all know you can't see it, we all know you don't want to see it.  We can call it  a day on that subject and move on.