What a snide and dismissive way of responding. The meme we are both commenting on is about the relationship between the US and Europe in the context of imperialism. I’m not going to give you a “lecture,” or anything, but immediately dismissing and insulting me as dogmatic is just plain rude.
I’m sorry if I’m dismissive but I gotta tell you, last time we talked felt an awful lot like being lectured. You didn’t really engage with anything I said but rather regurgitated endless theories and facts.
And you are a self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist, is that not true? Subscribing to a particular narrative is IMO exactly what “dogmatic” means. I’m not saying it’s wrong, it’s truer than most dogmas. But still a dogma.
I don’t remember you at all, if I’m being honest. I apologize if I was acting obnoxious, but I talk to many people and don’t remember them all.
Secondly, I am a Marxist-Leninist, yes, but not a dogmatist. Dogma necessarily implies a rigid and inflexible understanding, not simply an agreement with a frame of analysis. Otherwise, nearly everyone would be a “dogmatist” for saying the Earth is round.
What a snide and dismissive way of responding. The meme we are both commenting on is about the relationship between the US and Europe in the context of imperialism. I’m not going to give you a “lecture,” or anything, but immediately dismissing and insulting me as dogmatic is just plain rude.
I’m sorry if I’m dismissive but I gotta tell you, last time we talked felt an awful lot like being lectured. You didn’t really engage with anything I said but rather regurgitated endless theories and facts.
And you are a self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist, is that not true? Subscribing to a particular narrative is IMO exactly what “dogmatic” means. I’m not saying it’s wrong, it’s truer than most dogmas. But still a dogma.
I don’t remember you at all, if I’m being honest. I apologize if I was acting obnoxious, but I talk to many people and don’t remember them all.
Secondly, I am a Marxist-Leninist, yes, but not a dogmatist. Dogma necessarily implies a rigid and inflexible understanding, not simply an agreement with a frame of analysis. Otherwise, nearly everyone would be a “dogmatist” for saying the Earth is round.
Using phrasing such as “necessarily implies” is exactly what makes me call your conversation style “lecturing”.
Is it normal to talk like this in your circles? In my culture it’s a certain way to antagonize anyone who doesn’t already agree with you.
I feel like that’s just nitpicking, though. I’m a statesian, not everyone uses it but some do.