• Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    No, I have heard and understand your explanations

    You’ve clearly not understood the definitions. If you don’t engage with the definitions, you can’t seriously engage with the arguments.

    I used to be an anarchist myself

    Obviously, not one with a clear grasp on anarchism, if you think that the only anarchist objection to hierarchy is “moral” in nature.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I do understand the definitions, again, I disagree with your arguments. Simple as that. As for being a former anarchist, I know that anarchists don’t only object to hierarchy on moral grounds, but the way you framed it made it seem as such.

      • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I do understand the definitions, again

        Again: I disagree with your assumption that you do. If you really do, then you refuse to engage with them on purpose, which is worse.

        I don’t see any pointein carrying on this conversation. I’ve stated my point. I expect you to write your final “nuh-uh!” without any signs of will that you actually want to engage in any discussion, but I will not further engage, because I see talking to you pointless.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I tried to have a conversation, and all you did was refuse to respond while insulting me. I doubt I could have done anything to convince you I was willing to have a conversation beyond just lying and saying I agreed with you, so I do agree that us speaking seems to be pointless.