Roger Waters victim of Cancel culture???

lusidghost

lusidghost

Well-Known Member
Roger A. Shrubber said:
fuck entertainers with opinions. when they have a degree in a subject they're talking about, i'll listen, no degree, they're just another loud mouthed fuck with an opinion i could not possibly give a fuck less about.
when very popular ones cancel themselves with their mouths and attitudes, i have ZERO sympathy...
And that is the only thing waters is a victim of, his own big mouth.
Click to expand...
Yeah fuck Charlie Chaplin, Woody Guthrie, Bob Dylan, Sam Cooke, John Lennon, Muhammad Ali, Curtis Mayfield, Marvin Gaye, RATM, The Dixie Chicks, Willie Nelson, Public Enemy, Killer Mike, ect ect.
 
lusidghost

lusidghost

Well-Known Member
From that article: "He called for a ceasefire and condemned Russia's "illegal" invasion, but also denounced "provocateurs" in the West who he claimed were responsible."

Geez, what a monster. Accusing the west of allowing itself to wage yet another proxy war with Russia isn't really the argument that any of you were making.
 
HGCC

HGCC

Well-Known Member
lusidghost said:
Have you seen the movie? It's a pretty strong theme.
Click to expand...
My take was that was Pink was wrasslin with his own fascist tendencies, that was part of what was broken in his brain. It did not seem to be for or against it, just that it was there and yet another thing that caused his isolation.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
lusidghost said:
From that article: "He called for a ceasefire and condemned Russia's "illegal" invasion, but also denounced "provocateurs" in the West who he claimed were responsible."

Geez, what a monster. Accusing the west of allowing itself to wage yet another proxy war with Russia isn't really the argument that any of you were making.
Click to expand...
Why are you so upset?
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
lusidghost said:
Great post. I'm not the one basing my argument off of the emotional response that headlines triggered.

"A good tool" is very ironic.
Click to expand...
You are very emotional about this. People have the right to differ with you and Waters. While you and Waters see a benevolent dictator provoked into defending Russia by attacking Ukraine, others see an invasion of Ukraine and war on a people whose only act of "provocation" was to look to the west as a means to improve their lot.

I happen to think the latter is true because the evidence clearly lies in that direction. Some people, especially right wing authoritarian followers prefer to take their beliefs from the words of their leaders rather than base them upon objective facts. When authoritarians are confronted with beliefs that challenge their own, it is well known that they tend to become angry and sometimes violent. Hence your emotional outbursts.
 
lusidghost

lusidghost

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Shouldn’t that assessment be aimed squarely at the one poster who is providing not one referenced fact, but is using bandwidth to express strictly negative sentiment manipulation in a bid to elicit emotional responses?
Click to expand...
I used your own link and his own words. I understand how these things work. I'm defending an artist from being called an antisemite and a fascist, based off of supposed evidence that is at best out of context.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
lusidghost said:
I used your own link and his own words. I understand how these things work. I'm defending an artist from being called an antisemite and a fascist, based off of supposed evidence that is at best out of context.
Click to expand...
False.

I see no citation(s) from an article that convicts him, or from any other source.

I see no specifics.

I see no viable defense, only your emotioneering.

Framing a reasoned defense requires a foundation of listed and referenced fact.
 
lusidghost

lusidghost

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
False.

I see no citation(s) from an article that convicts him, or from any other source.

I see no specifics.

I see no viable defense, only your emotioneering.

Framing a reasoned defense requires a foundation of listed and referenced fact.
Click to expand...
You are making the claims. The burden of proof is on you. If you were arguing that bigfoot is a racist, I'm not going to be able to come up with sources proving that he is not. I can only scrutinize the claims against him.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
lusidghost said:
You are making the claims. The burden of proof is on you. If you were arguing that bigfoot is a racist, I'm not going to be able to come up with sources proving that he is not. I can only scrutinize the claims against him.
Click to expand...
I posted an article that anyone else would read as confirmation. If you have a counterargument, you haven’t made it.

Bigfoot is a classic straw man. You’re undercutting your credibility and nobody else’s.
 
lusidghost

lusidghost

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I posted an article that anyone else would read as confirmation. If you have a counterargument, you haven’t made it.

Bigfoot is a classic straw man. You’re undercutting your credibility and nobody else’s.
Click to expand...
I quoted that article in my counter argument.

Bigfoot is a great example of the burden of proof. My cousin once said, "I'll stop believing in sasquatch when they proof that he doesn't exist." Religious people make the same argument.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
lusidghost said:
I quoted that article in my counter argument.

Bigfoot is a great example of the burden of proof. My cousin once said, "I'll stop believing in sasquatch when they proof that he doesn't exist." Religious people make the same argument.
Click to expand...
You have a freestanding post that contains words in quote marks that could be from anywhere, including your imagination. Are you seriously suggesting that qualifies?

You’re trying to conceal your absence of actual argument behind a wall of fallacy and sentiment.

Since you have nothing, I say good day, sir.
 
lusidghost

lusidghost

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
You have a freestanding post that contains words in quote marks that could be from anywhere, including your imagination. Are you seriously suggesting that qualifies?

You’re trying to conceal your absence of actual argument behind a wall of fallacy and sentiment.

Since you have nothing, I say good day, sir.
Click to expand...
What? You have the same debate strategy of a sovereign citizen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top