[QUOTE=Sobotnik;36828872]Well this time Sanius got a new title.[/QUOTE]
Which isn't new because he gets a new title every few threads he shits in.
This thread...
:suicide:
I saw the post. This wasn't to further any goal, some guy just released the login details and everyone just trolled around with it. I think you're giving them too much credit, there's no more "cause" in this than there is in pissing on an ant hill.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/BtR3V.png[/img]
always has been
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;36826881]oh hey ignore all the posts which called you out[/QUOTE]
It's sanius dude.
This is the same guy who used to run around threads rating people dumb the moment his terrible arguments got shot down.
[QUOTE=Drsalvador;36823173]did some scrobbling about in /g/, apparantely it was some sort of stunt by 9gag and/or reddit to make /g/ users look bad.[/QUOTE]
This actually makes sense, considering how much Reddit hates feminism
[QUOTE=Carnage2323;36827803]Threads like these really bring out the worst in Facepunch[/QUOTE]
I find them amusing
[editline]19th July 2012[/editline]
You can panic and fear for your life when asteroids starts bombarding the earth, or you can just sit back and try to enjoy the the fireworks.
[QUOTE=Dori;36825226]wow you're so progressive
[editline]1[/editline]
it's really easy to tell who has white male privilege by the way they post[/QUOTE]
I remember that one time you called someone a straight white male they ended up responding that they were bi and Filipino (IIRC)
[QUOTE=The Baconator;36831432]I remember that one time you called someone a straight white male they ended up responding that they were bi and Filipino (IIRC)[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;36825401]Ok, I just find this funny so I'm going to take a quick moment to reply. First of all, I'm a transgender woman. Second of all, I am a progressive and a socialist. Third of all, I prefer the term geek.[/QUOTE]
Even worse
[QUOTE=Carnage2323;36827803]Threads like these really bring out the worst in Facepunch[/QUOTE]
I disagree. I've yet to see a single fast threads poster here.
[QUOTE=mobrockers2;36829660]Which isn't new because he gets a new title every few threads he shits in.[/QUOTE]Yeah, but he went and removed his a few days ago and nobody gave it back to him.
[editline]18th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;36831641]I disagree. I've yet to see a single fast threads poster here.[/QUOTE]The OIFY is still under lock and key, so we're fine.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;36831761]Yeah, but he went and removed his a few days ago and nobody gave it back to him.
[editline]18th July 2012[/editline]
The OIFY is still under lock and key, so we're fine.[/QUOTE]
True, couldn't come up with anything fitting.
[QUOTE=Matthew0505;36831841]Seems kind of a dick move to vandalise a site for those who are "interested in teaching, research, or practice in the psychology of women", now those batshit insane fringe groups that want to kill all men are going to use this to get more support. Whoever got the password should've just framed one of those batshit groups and vandalised the feminist.org with accusations of not being "real feminists" and "female traitors" to further alienate the fringe misandrists from the feminists instead of blindly attacking innocents and uniting them.[/QUOTE]
Blame reddit/9gag. It's all over their website, they did it.
[QUOTE=Chief343;36831913]Blame reddit/9gag. It's all over their website, they did it.[/QUOTE]
do you honestly give a fuck about 4chan's reputation?
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;36831761]The OIFY is still under lock and key, so we're fine.[/QUOTE]
I'd argue the meme-spouting shithole that is LMAO pics is much, much worse- and less civilized- than anything OIFY contains.
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;36831992]I'd argue the meme-spouting shithole that is LMAO pics is much, much worse- and less civilized- than anything OIFY contains.[/QUOTE]
LMAO pics is OIFY with memes and people actually posting.
It was very lonely in the brassmustache days :saddowns:
[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;36830953]It's sanius dude.
This is the same guy who used to run around threads rating people dumb the moment his terrible arguments got shot down.[/QUOTE]
what do you mean "used to"
so I'm guessing Sanius is one of those people who refer to any white male as CIS scum
I missed all the fun.
reading this thread makes me embarrassed to be a marxist in anyway.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36832804]reading this thread makes me embarrassed to be a marxist in anyway.[/QUOTE]
Marxists are generally very embarrassing, moreso as its now 2012.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;36832869]Marxists are generally very embarrassing, moreso as its now 2012.[/QUOTE]
Marx was only wrong about capitalism. he didn't know how revolutionary capitalism could be.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36832879]Marx was only wrong about capitalism. he didn't know how revolutionary capitalism could be.[/QUOTE]
Marx was wrong about his theory of history for one thing.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;36832926]Marx was wrong about his theory of history for one thing.[/QUOTE]
in what way?
yes i am genuinely interested.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36832934]in what way?[/QUOTE]
The Fuedal system as one example, which was horribly generalised and did not take into account the many different varieties it came in throughout different locations, and that he saw it as a system where the ruling class controlled arable land and exploited the peasantry in that system.
The peasantry much of the time (The peasantry being a catch all term for the large differing numbers of people who weren't nobles or the such) were actually able to run much of their own matters and affairs, often because their local lord was away most of the time in other places (Or crusading and the such). Very often, a local freeman would be made to manage the affairs of the manor, and some lords simply rented out all of their land to this chap, so they had a source of income whilst they had a chap looking after things for them.
The peasantry also shared many communal things, the tithes from the church (Of crops) were very often used in time of famine, and the lord often had an obligation to hold a feast for his tenants once or twice a year. (Such as at harvest or at christmas)
With those examples, I am looking at England, and do not accurately reflect all of Europe.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;36832962]The Fuedal system as one example, which was horribly generalised and did not take into account the many different varieties it came in throughout different locations, and that he saw it as a system where the ruling class controlled arable land and exploited the peasantry in that system.[/QUOTE]
well first of all you said he was wrong, that's different from generalisation.
second of all the different varieties was of no consequence to his theory, he considered it only as a precursor to capitalism, and i don't see why he'd be incorrect in his assumption that all feudalism involved a ruling class.
[editline]18th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;36832962]The peasantry much of the time (The peasantry being a catch all term for the large differing numbers of people who weren't nobles or the such) were actually able to run much of their own matters and affairs, often because their local lord was away most of the time in other places (Or crusading and the such).[/QUOTE]
that's not really relevant though, the idea was the notion of a class struggle. whether they were able to run their own matters or affairs or not doesn't really change the fact that there was a strong caste.
[editline]18th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;36832962]
With those examples, I am looking at England, and do not accurately reflect all of Europe.[/QUOTE]
yeah but it sounds more like you're saying that marx was simply not deep enough in his characterization of feudalism.
that's fair, but i don't see how you can say that means the whole theory is wrong.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36832994]well first of all you said he was wrong, that's different from generalisation.
second of all the different varieties was of no consequence to his theory, he considered it only as a precursor to capitalism, and i don't see why he'd be incorrect in his assumption that all feudalism involved a ruling class.
[editline]18th July 2012[/editline]
that's not really relevant though, the idea was the notion of a class struggle. whether they were able to run their own matters or affairs or not doesn't really change the fact that there was a strong caste.[/QUOTE]
There wasn't a class struggle though, many people were quite happy within the system and only revolted when a lord was acting like a dick.
The large scale revolts of the peasantry only really kicked off in the late 14th century, and that was when the Fuedal system was already declining.
The 1381 peasants revolt itself began because of hatred of various nobles like John of Gaunt who was suspected of trying to make himself King and had thwarted the commons impeachments of the unpopular members of court
