• huey_m@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Then you should probably reconsider if maybe your assumptions about my background were probably a bit too hasty and reconsider how you approach people going forward? I never said I studied it in America, and I do not live in America.

    • 秦始皇帝@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Not really the wild assumption you’re attempting to make it out to be.

      we have specific Constitutional rights

      You’re clearly Amerikan the vast majority of which have never left Amerika. My doubt in the proper study of Marxism-Leninism in academic settings also extends to every US client state (all of Europe including the UK, Japan etc.).

      • huey_m@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I didn’t say it’s a wild assumption, just pointing out this is why it’s probably a better idea to just… not make such an assumption in the first place. 4 million Americans live abroad, it isn’t exactly unheard of. But with this clarification, it is now clear the point is just to personally find justification to dismiss dissenting opinion. Which I’m not particularly interested in engaging with, so I’m going to just put an end to it here. Have a good one, though.

        • 秦始皇帝@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 hours ago

          4 million Americans live abroad

          1%. 99% odds is really good for such low stakes assumptions.

          But with this clarification, it is now clear the point is just to personally find justification to dismiss dissenting opinion.

          No I just don’t like westerners diluting what it actually means to have received a true academic education in Marxism by parading around a nonsense credential from the core of anti-communism. And again I simply said I found it doubtful it was studied properly, as in with full context without some sort of at a bare minimum compatible left twist to at worst some capitalist bootlicking and NED tier nonsense added in “to give both sides” or such.

          Which I’m not particularly interested in engaging with

          Would hit harder if you had any engagement to speak of rather than stating vague generalities. You could have given some depth to what you studied and how etc show some bonafides yknow instead of dancing around the point so that you could run away feigning offense at someone making an assumption that is 99% precise.