My internet is being really slow right now, so sorry if I'm posting a bit late. Also, as an advance warning, I'm in a pretty good mood right now so my arguments might be a bit more jovial than they normally would
Due to my opponent's technical difficulties, I'll be taking arguments from both posts and puttting them into one.
"Was tempted to TL:DR this after a long day at work, but seeing as how you clearly made the effort.. Even if I was trying to watch Scott Pilgrim."
Even though you just posted a large rant post about how this is bad for you or you don't like it, or however you want to phrase it, this is the only bit of your typing that made me feel remotely guilty: That I'm delaying you from watching Scott Pilgrim. Then of course I realized that you willingly didn't watch Scott Pilgrim in order to debate me, so my guiltiness turned to being flattered.
"Well Hitler was a (to the germans) a charismatic man, that only gets you so far."
Actually, he's known as one of the most charismatic men of all time. He had a raging passion, masterful body language (ironically enough taught to him by a Jew) , and a throat that was banged up by WWI poison gas that backfired,which made his voice sound rich and enchanting. He was so charismatic in his native tounge that to Germans, his words were absolutely true... untill he started talking about th emass extinction of teh Jews, that's when people started questioning it on a large scale.
"It'd be easy for us to say that the afghans are all terrible people and deserved to be nuked, I, as a Brit, have never met an afghan, and if I were a little less skeptical, I might believe that they are as evil as everyone makes out. That'd just be plain old propaganda. "
Thank you for confirming my point, I guess?
"But in Germany back in the 1930's, Jews weren't ellusive. They could be the neighbourhood doctor, the friendly old man next door, the shopkeeper, or your coworker. It's all very well saying people you've never met are evil, but people you've known for years? That's how cognitive dissonance build the sneaky, manipulative jew stereotype. After all, if the government ingrained anti-semitism into you, and yet you know them as the people who live peacefuly beside you, to avoid that dissonance, you say both facts are true, because the jews were trying to manipulate the whole time"
I'd like to counter this argument with a quote of my own. "and a history rife with distrust with the Jews" If you notice, throughout European history (Mostly Eastern Europe), Jews are prosecuted... a lot. When this becomes part of your culture, your naturally anti-semitic, like a guy who grows up around racist parents will likely grow up to be racist. WHen you're already anti-semitic, it doesn't take much for you to say the Jews are evil. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that all Germans are anti-semitic, but racism, sexism, and anti-semitism do spring up during economic turmoil, so It's not much to assume that it would be on a larger scale than it is today.
Plus I'd liek to point out that if the government already ingrained anti-semitism into you, you wouldn't have cognitive dissonance.... because it's ingrained :)
"I never specified that it was the reason behind the Holocaust, that was just you reading to much into it. And I wasn't playing the Hitler card, seeing as how Gobbels would be more to blame, my great-grandmother was a jewish refugee, and I researched it for my psychology project in school last year. I didn't even mention Hitler."
That's genuinely my bad, I didn't even think abuot the fact that you might not know what the Hitler card is. Using the Hitler card isn't actually dropping his name, it's saying that your opponent is similar to the Nazis or saying you're different than the Nazis because of an unrelated reason in order to turn the popular support to your side. Things like "He's trying to raise taxes, just like the Nazis." Or "He's trying to have more control of big business, like the Nazis". You used to see that a lot on Fox before Glenn Beck lost his talk show, and they still throw it around every now and again.
"Posting takes a long time on a semi-broken android phone. Even as I type the page seems to be wobbling all over the place trying to follow my typing. So you have to understand a post from me of the previous lengths takes a long time. If shit got mentioned that contradicted the next point I was to make, that'd be because I haven't seen the post. If however you are talking about you and Sindriv saying your villians should have emotional backstories and shit, that's completely different. Don't copy from the dictionary and say that proves a point, so you can hold a minor victory over semantics, that's the applied version of me doing that evil snigger from worms and saying 'you made a spelling mistake, so fuck you'."
Althoughmy heart goes out to your phone, I'm afraid you're just being childish. What you did was defend yourself by saying Vader was an anti-hero, not a villian, and I said that by the DEFINITION OF THE WORD (caps for emphasis, not yelling) he wasn't. That's not calling you wrong for a spelling mistake (although I did do that on a debate round once when I realized I lost, that was fun), it's just proving you're wrong and showing that the character who you think is one of the greatest villains ever is actually what you said made a character shitty.
What you're doing right now, is just seeing your point being a desproven and saying "yeah, well you're a doo-doo head (tee-hee)"
"the fact is, Vader stops being a villian is wholly relevent"
I'm afraid I don't know what you're trying to say there. I've honestly tried, and I just don't know, so I'll move on.
"He's not a morally grey antagonist, or a marionette. He tries to kill his own son. And then we suddenly empathise with him because he gets angry when someone else tries to do it? He's still a complete cunt, and the fact that he rejoins the light side at the end is ridiculous. I don't even like t o think about that part. 'Oh, you murdered billions of people for some old douchebag? Tried to kill your own son after he refused to suck that old man's cock too? This old man transpiring to be the one who purged the Jedi order in the first place.. Oh, but you saw sense at the end? We are as brothers..' "
Umm... a few things
1.) You're obviously angry, when you can tell this is happening, take a step back from the keyboard, take a brake, and, I dunno, play frisbee with the dog or something untill you calm down. It'll save you some embarrasment
2.) Vulgarity asside, the fact that you don't want to think about somethign doesn't mean it's not happening. I'm not saying that I cried when Vader died, I'm saying that moment where you see he has some good in him makes the audience think, well, that he has some good in him. That moment where you see he has the same values, even for a short while, as the people you're rooting for would make him relatable to the watchers, and so he would then - using your own requirements - become a horrible villain.
3.) When did he try to kill his son, again? Sure he cut his hand off, but his motivation was convert, not kill.
"The fact of the matter is, if up until that point, and the part where he wants Luke to join him, he shows no mercy, and that according to you, would make him dull. Don't think your eloquence can make that dissappear.. He is throughout the old trilogy, a mass-murdering team-killing, asshole. Granted, at the end, there's some retrospective guilt and he somehow becomes a jedi again"
1.) You're argument here is 'Well, except for the parts where he's not, he's the perfect person!', which is rediculous
2.) You still don't even know what my argument is about. I'm not saying that villains shouldn't be evil, I'm saying they require a certain depth that your description utterly lacks. That's where the argument comes from.
3.) Oh no, my eloquence doesn't make that "dissapear" at all, (thanks for the compliment, though). However, my sound arguments, logic you can't refute, and use of examples do actually counter that argument.
"I was actually about to create a concise version of what I thought I had already put across, then I saw the part where you were being an asshat."
Haha, right, nobody buys it dude. From the comments ont he thread, I'm gonna guess that they see you didn't have a miracle argument that completely disproved everything I said, and youa ctually just realized you were wrong.
"a debate and there's being a cunt."
I agree with you completely. And I believe that point is where you stop actually debating and where you use entire posts to insult your opponent using rampant vulgarity.
"You're more eloquent than me, congratulations. That doesn't mean you're right. Spare me your psychoanalysis. I don't presume to know anything about you, and you're probably going sit there reading this as 'BAWW HE GUESSED ME TO T'."
Once again, thank you for the compliment, but I don't use my writing itself to prove I'm write, I use my logic, which you're not able to refute. The "eloquent" writing, if I even write that way, simply comes from experience. I'd also like to paraphrase Killa when I tell you not to guess what your opponent is thinking (even though I can only guess what your point is in that, it wasn't exactly written well) because it ultimately makes you look like a douche. This also links to what I told you when I said to just walk away from the keyboard when you feel angry because it makes you look like - to use your own words - an "asshat"
"Do what you like mate, you're known for exactly this thing on this forums. Like the scourge of anyone who disagrees with you on the forums. I salute you sir."
I'll use the public opinion that's being posted in reply to this as my argument against it.
"But to be honest, I couldn't give n>1 number of shits about all this. You proved to be the winner of a debate by boring your opponent and nitpicking. A great day. And yet, you haven't actually persuaded me on any matter other than I was using words in the wrong context"
1.) Ahh, the classic 'I started this debate and spent so much time on it [especially the fact taht you were on a broken phone to do it] but I don't actually care' argument, I was wondering when I would see that pop up. You see, this happens whenever an immature opponent realizes he/she lost and gets angry, and then gets the urge to make people think they don't care to save their own dignity. The people here have seen it enough times to see through it.
2.) My goal wasn't to persuade you at all, it was to defend my own beliefs. If you look at the actual thread, You gave your opinion, Endmaster and I gave our opinions, and then you posted two long posts saying we were wrong for thinking that way, that's what started the debate. I've long given up on debating people online simply from the point of persuasion simply because if that person believes in something enough to talk about it, it will take a lot more than black letters on a white background in a faceless environment to persuade them otherwise.
In short, you started this, so stop whining after you lost. You brought it on yourself.
" A great victory no less though, you can masturbate at the thought of destroying another man.
TLDR I'm nearly on the scene with the lesbian evil ex. And am in no mood to comment on this. Just chalk it up as an even more resounding Bo win than it was already turning out to be."
1.) I don't need you to tell me I won this debate. Your arguments and attitude already confirmed that for me.
2.) What does TLDR mean? If I know that abbvreviation, I forgot it.
3.) If you weren't in the mood for this, you wouldn't spend all this time over it.
4.) I'm a bit disturbed that your mind went immediately from thinking about me to masturbating....
