Michael,
I think that’s unfair
Thescout,
You are an ideologue who prefers talking about consequences over actually understanding and discussing causal relationships. This is fine within your own intellectual circles, but it’s foolish outside of them. You’re using the language and method of a bold revolutionary when you need to be talking like a persuasive scientist. You remind me of a younger me, back before I realized that you inevitably have to use reason over all else.
You’re talking past us, at us, not to us, so I don’t understand what you hope to achieve by being here. No one is going to read through your long paragraphs which talk about things you find important, rather than the actual concerns we have been raising.
Why are you here? Did you come to educate and to learn, or did you just come to lecture at us and practice writing out passages no one will read?
Edit
I had to add this. Like seriously, look at this post of yours
This is one of the few cases you quote someone and presumably attempt to respond to them, yet you fail utterly. You don’t deal with anything he’s talking about in the quoted passage, you go on about capitalist morality and the Marxist explanation of value and labor relations, why, in a forum full of right-libertarians and anarcho-capitalist start of a sentence with:
“Ah, yes, this assumption comes from the logic employed by apologists for capitalism. Behold a right-libertarian egoistic individualist reductionistically dismiss the social-relational nature of human beings and their existence, their social morality, and their capacity for altruism and heroic solidarity as a herd mentality!”
…
Apart from bringing up a whole different line of discussion, proving nothing, adding nothing to the conversation, asserting a whole host of hugely controversial subjects around here, and further alienating/angering everyone on this forum except for yourself, what exactly did you hope to achieve?
Why are you here?